DVD Review: Flags of our Fathers
Published February 17, 2007
Flags of our Fathers is more than a war film. While filled with open wounds, decapitated heads, and other gruesome realities of the battle, it's a film about political exploitation at its worst. The sometimes-jarring story changes to tell multiple levels of a complicated tale, each leading in the same direction as the film progresses.
Fathers gets off to a rough start. The viewer is immediately pushed into three separate plot threads in a matter of minutes, then pushed into flashback, then to the war, and finally to modern times. While difficult to follow, the narrative pulls itself together into a coherent piece that truly covers all aspects of war.
The trademark here is undoubtedly the epic and sustained landing of American troops on Iwo Jima. It's filled with visual effects, brutal death, explosions, and loads of gunfire. This nearly 20-minute long sequence could be enough to carry the film on its own.
That's not the focus here though. The film focuses on events which take place after this struggle pertaining to three survivors who were unfortunately photographed in an inspiring picture hoisting the American flag. Paraded around almost like circus animals, the government barely lets them sleep in an effort to sell war bonds.
The three actors used to portray the men in the picture (Ryan Phillippe, Jesse Bradford, Adam Beach) are wonderfully developed and unique. The film falters when the story falls back onto the Iwo Jima battle, losing these three men to a host of others who barely have their names spoken in the film, let alone any history or background information.
It gets worse when the film shifts to modern times as a soldiers son interviews the surviving members of the "Heroes of Iwo Jima." This entire storyline is unnecessary and convolutes the film with a third unnecessary arc. Fathers is actually told from this perspective, yet without it, this would be a far tighter film as a whole and still work as a narrative.
Still, this is a true masterpiece of war films. It has few moments of happiness, and those brief flashes rapidly come to an end as a man is accidentally sent overboard to his death. The troops brief flashes of laughter at the soldiers misfortune signals the end of any joking around when they realize he won't be saved. It's completely focused on the sheer loss of life from that moment on when on the island.
- DVD Review: Flags of our Fathers
- Published: February 17, 2007
- Type: Review
- Section: Video
- Filed Under: Video: Action, Video: Drama, Video: Historical, Video: Military
- Writer: Matt Paprocki
- Matt Paprocki's BC Writer page
- Matt Paprocki's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us








'It gets worse when the film shifts to modern times as a soldiers son interviews the surviving members of the "Heroes of Iwo Jima." This entire storyline is unnecessary and convolutes the film with a third unnecessary arc. Fathers is actually told from this perspective, yet without it, this would be a far tighter film as a whole and still work as a narrative.'
Agreed that a film just about the bond tour and the flag-raising might work as narrative but it certainly wouldn't have the same theme and shorn of the personal connection between father and son would be unbearably didactic and preachy. As much as Flags is an examination of heroism it is also about why veterans are so notoriously reluctant to talk about their experiences. Strip the father/son strand out of Flags and you lose not only that theme but also the underlying reason for the film's deliberately disjointed structure (I'm always amused when I read comments along the lines of 'the editing sucks!' As if Eastwood and his editor Joel Cox didn't know what they were doing. I think they knew exactly what they were doing). And I said 'deliberately' because the non-linear editing clearly attempts to reflect the disorientation and shock felt by the survivors as they campaign on the bond tour. If the film suffers at all it's that the father/son story - whilst moving - is not as powerful as the other two. But then maybe that's only because the other two are so good.
I also find your comments about the other flag-raisers being hard to identify, well, untrue. I saw the film and I had no real difficulty following who was who. Harlon, Franklin and Mike Strank are sketched in just enough in the pre-invasion camp scenes to avoid any confusion, even to the extent of being identified by name during their death scenes. Still, if you were confused I guess that's what DVD replay is for.
As for book vs film well of course the book contains more detailed characterizations. How could it not? But on the other the film captures the emotional essence of the book and that's by far the most important thing of all.
'Still, this is a true masterpiece of war films.'
Agreed.