Jeffrey Hunter is Guy Gabaldon, a real person, in this "based on a true story" film. Gabaldon was an orphan in the Great Depression, adopted as a child into a Japanese family in California. He comes to love his adoptive family, learns to speak Japanese, and values Japanese customs.
Then -- Pearl Harbor. His brothers enlist in the Army and are sent to Italy to be part of the highly decorated 442nd. Hunter enlists, with Mama-san's permission, in the Marine Corps as a translator. The movie demonstrates, without making the point overtly, that in the Marines, everyone is a rifleman first, and a cook, a clerk, or a translator second.
After a long stop in Honolulu, Hunter finds himself in combat on Saipan where two of his buddies (David Janssen and Vic Damone) are killed by the Japanese. Thereafter he turns into a one-man firing squad -- blowing everybody and everything up, or shooting them indiscriminately.
Saipan was a Japanese home territory, not a conquered island. The civilian population had been told that there would be no surrender on the part of anybody, and that captives would be tortured and then killed. This led to some famous footage of Japanese civilians throwing their babies off cliffs and then jumping down to join the heap of bodies on the rocky ocean shore. One of the civilians reminds Hunter of his Mama-san and brings him to his senses, so that he's able to use his skills to negotiate surrenders and save untold lives.
Good story. Crummy screenplay, acting, and directing. Nobody gives a particularly good performance. When the direction isn't simply functional it seems almost insanely unbalanced. Phil Karlson, who has done some good nasty work elsewhere, is to directing what Grandma Moses is to painting. And the writing should have been shelved until something half-way decent came along. I'll give one example to illustrate the point. The Japanese general, Sesue Hayakawa, has ordered an all-out, self-sacrificial attack on the Americans. As the men and civilians assemble, Hunter captures Hayakawa and orders him at gunpoint to address this rag-tag army and call off the suicidal charge. Hunter and Hayakawa argue before an anguished Hayakawa complies, telling Hunter, "This is not an easy thing to see." Hunter replies bitterly, "Neither was Pearl Harbor." Hunter's line is right out of a World War II flag waver. He's familiar with Japanese customs and the concept of honor. A more appropriate response would have been a compassionate, "I know."
Mama-san and Papa-san are sent to an isolated detention camp along with other Japanese families. It's hardly commented on, though everyone looks a little sad. Hunter seems to forget about them for a long time after their forced move, and we see nothing of the camp itself, just a brief, corny meeting between Mama-san and Hunter. A disgraceful chapter in American history, and it's taken for granted as a matter-of-fact part of war-time life. Angry at a savage attack against our forces at Pearl Harbor, the US, led by Earl Warren, took their rage out on a population that was innocent but readily available. The Japanese detainees later received reparations but as a nation we seemed to have learned nothing from the experience, given that we displaced our aggression all over again a few years ago.
Well, that's an ethical issue which I won't bother with further. Getting back to the movie, there is a loooooooong middle section that takes place in a hot apartment in Honolulu with some girls around for recreational purposes. Our boys (except Hunter) get wildly drunk, as boys are want to do, and everyone dances around to discordant 1960s jazz -- not 1940s pop tunes or Hawaiian music. It goes on pointlessly for about twenty minutes of screen time that might have been spent valuably getting a little bit into Hunter's conflicted head. But, no. If there's any reason for the inclusion of this lengthy scene, it's only to give Patricia Owens (a beautiful woman with pale skin and anthracite irises) a chance to get drunk and do an incomplete strip tease. Maybe it gave David Janssen and Vic Damone a chance to endear themselves to the audience too. If that was one of its goals, it failed.
Well, it's not worth carrying on about. I saw this many years ago and was positively impressed with it. Must have been very young, because now that I know a little more about human nature I found it a little banal.
Then -- Pearl Harbor. His brothers enlist in the Army and are sent to Italy to be part of the highly decorated 442nd. Hunter enlists, with Mama-san's permission, in the Marine Corps as a translator. The movie demonstrates, without making the point overtly, that in the Marines, everyone is a rifleman first, and a cook, a clerk, or a translator second.
After a long stop in Honolulu, Hunter finds himself in combat on Saipan where two of his buddies (David Janssen and Vic Damone) are killed by the Japanese. Thereafter he turns into a one-man firing squad -- blowing everybody and everything up, or shooting them indiscriminately.
Saipan was a Japanese home territory, not a conquered island. The civilian population had been told that there would be no surrender on the part of anybody, and that captives would be tortured and then killed. This led to some famous footage of Japanese civilians throwing their babies off cliffs and then jumping down to join the heap of bodies on the rocky ocean shore. One of the civilians reminds Hunter of his Mama-san and brings him to his senses, so that he's able to use his skills to negotiate surrenders and save untold lives.
Good story. Crummy screenplay, acting, and directing. Nobody gives a particularly good performance. When the direction isn't simply functional it seems almost insanely unbalanced. Phil Karlson, who has done some good nasty work elsewhere, is to directing what Grandma Moses is to painting. And the writing should have been shelved until something half-way decent came along. I'll give one example to illustrate the point. The Japanese general, Sesue Hayakawa, has ordered an all-out, self-sacrificial attack on the Americans. As the men and civilians assemble, Hunter captures Hayakawa and orders him at gunpoint to address this rag-tag army and call off the suicidal charge. Hunter and Hayakawa argue before an anguished Hayakawa complies, telling Hunter, "This is not an easy thing to see." Hunter replies bitterly, "Neither was Pearl Harbor." Hunter's line is right out of a World War II flag waver. He's familiar with Japanese customs and the concept of honor. A more appropriate response would have been a compassionate, "I know."
Mama-san and Papa-san are sent to an isolated detention camp along with other Japanese families. It's hardly commented on, though everyone looks a little sad. Hunter seems to forget about them for a long time after their forced move, and we see nothing of the camp itself, just a brief, corny meeting between Mama-san and Hunter. A disgraceful chapter in American history, and it's taken for granted as a matter-of-fact part of war-time life. Angry at a savage attack against our forces at Pearl Harbor, the US, led by Earl Warren, took their rage out on a population that was innocent but readily available. The Japanese detainees later received reparations but as a nation we seemed to have learned nothing from the experience, given that we displaced our aggression all over again a few years ago.
Well, that's an ethical issue which I won't bother with further. Getting back to the movie, there is a loooooooong middle section that takes place in a hot apartment in Honolulu with some girls around for recreational purposes. Our boys (except Hunter) get wildly drunk, as boys are want to do, and everyone dances around to discordant 1960s jazz -- not 1940s pop tunes or Hawaiian music. It goes on pointlessly for about twenty minutes of screen time that might have been spent valuably getting a little bit into Hunter's conflicted head. But, no. If there's any reason for the inclusion of this lengthy scene, it's only to give Patricia Owens (a beautiful woman with pale skin and anthracite irises) a chance to get drunk and do an incomplete strip tease. Maybe it gave David Janssen and Vic Damone a chance to endear themselves to the audience too. If that was one of its goals, it failed.
Well, it's not worth carrying on about. I saw this many years ago and was positively impressed with it. Must have been very young, because now that I know a little more about human nature I found it a little banal.