Anybody else hear about this?

[ToughOmbre]

Your description of the events on Iwo is accurate RA.

And as I said before, Clint nailed the historical facts perfectly in the film.

Spike, do us a favor and stick to watching the Knicks play badly.

TO

[A4K]

Yep, that's what I was talking about. Thanks for those pictures and additional information RA !

[RabidAlien]

No prob, A4K!


Now....to find FULL SIZE pics of those thumbnails....*g*

[seamist]

I just see it as a typical scenario,where a person wants to cause trouble,and imply some kind of predudice is involved.spike lee does it all the time for the * black cause *,as peter tatchell,the uk gay activist does it for the * gay cause *.It is all so one individual can steal the glory of another,and have their faces on t.v and magazines,being glorified as a new media * hero *.

[timshatz]

[QUOTE=A4K;363158]the original picture of the flag raising on Iwo Jima was a fairly mundane scene with only one soldier sitting idly on the ground keeping watch, while a number of soldiers quietly raise the flag behind him, on a mast already in place. It is obvious the battle is over, and they're not expecting enemy fire.
QUOTE]

Actually there is more to the first raising as well. The unit that went up left early in the morning when Suribachi wasn't secure with orders to put a flag on top. They hiked to the top, expecting to be ambushed all the way but it never happened. They got to the top, looked around and found a bit of pipe from a water collection system that had been destroyed, tied the flag to it and put it up. Pretty mundane event. But what is not said is right after the flag went up, the Japanese realized:

A. There were a bunch of US Marines on the top of Suribachi
B. They just put a -------- US FLAG UP!

That pretty much did it. Japanese started popping up and blasting away from all over the place. It took the Marines several hours to clear out the top of the mountain.

The second flag raising was done to replace the flag from the first one that was too small to be seen farther up the island. Have heard the staged stories before and Rosenthal addressed it later. He said he was asked if the picture was staged. He said "Yes", thinking the question pertaiined to the second, "Gung Ho" (as Rabid appropriately calls it) shot. He did not know he'd shot a world class photo with the first shot and thought he was being asked about the second shot.

Hence the reason for the legend. The first shot (of the second flag raising) wasn't staged anymore than the first one was.

[A4K]

After seeing RA's extra pics, and reading his and your info, I agree with you there, Tim.
(Thanks to you too for the extra info! )

[Messy1]

I agree. That's a cool bit of info I had not heard before! Thanks!

[RabidAlien]

Read "Flags of Our Fathers", by James Bradley. Its about the three surviving men from The Photograph, about their lives and how they went on after the war (but, as you may expect, in much greater detail than the movie was able to portray). There is at least one chapter in there dedicated to Joe Rosenthal and all the crap he went through with people accusing him of staging that shot, and accusing him of claiming it was the original flag raising, etc. Alot of that info was new to me, too, so I did some more research online, and found out that yes, its true. So, I recommend that book to anyone!

[JugBR]

like brazil, united states is a multi-cultural and young country and also like brazil, usa does have problems with racism. i believe spike lee is wrong and right in part. he is right to make a film about the black american comunity at ww2, wich is an very unknow history for many people. but hes wrong issuing a movie made by another person, instead just analize it or make a critic without compare with yours movie.

[RabidAlien]

Yep. Nobody has denied the black community's input in WW2. Its just kind of hard to make a movie about stevedores or cooks, which, unfortunately, was about the only roles they were allowed during the War. I know there was a combat outfit in the Marines, and at least one artillery unit in Europe (wanting to say I recall an infantry unit, as well?)...maybe someone should research and write a script about them. Nowadays, the average Joe on the street wants to see a war movie with lots of planes, guns, explosions, and nekkid wimmin. So anything else, other than the "experimental" combat units, would have to be more of a documentary than an actual Hollywood blockbuster.

I will still, to this day, shake the hand of any man or woman who has served their country, during war or during peace, at any time....black, white, Asian, Hispanic, etc. You served. You get my respect. End o story.

And yet again...Spike Lee is an idiot.

[JugBR]

Originally Posted by RabidAlien

Nowadays, the average Joe on the street wants to see a war movie with lots of planes, guns, explosions, and nekkid wimmin.

thats why i believe the old movies are better than the new ones. movies like apocalypse now, full metal jacket, tora tora tora!, you could feel some reality, you could feel some energy, some intensity. today its all about computer graphis, noting real, just like you see in ps2, it sucks. i still believe the average joe would like some quality and some realism, the problem is that everything now is about computer graphics, comics, explosions, ninjas... it just isnt the real world...

i like that movie about battle of britain, its a great movie, you can feel the bf-109 really authentic, theres a clip in youtube of this movie and some scenes of pearl harbor(aces high - iron maiden plaiyng), the new one about pearl harbor(tora tora tora! is much better), you can really see the diference between the shots of battle of britain and the newer movie. it lost intensity instead of some close shots, some impossible shots and some inacurated action. also ben assfleck dumb face !

YouTube - Iron Maiden- Aces High , Battle of Britain

[Njaco]

That was the point in "Pearl harbor" when I started to get dissgusted, Jug. The shaking camera was awful. Couldn't see any action or the planes!