It interludes nicely with the heroes as they begin to collapse mentally. Flags of our Fathers manages a wonderful story arc between the war and exploitation, making the modern day sequences stand out horribly. There’s still enough here to make this a near classic, and a necessary piece of the companion film, Letters from Iwo Jima. 
On DVD, this film looks incredible. Some slight noise in the backgrounds hardly mars the superb details. Aliasing can be an issue, though generally negated to long distance shots. The film is nearly void of color leaving behind no compression artifacts when it comes to reds or blues. Black levels are flawless.
Audio is likewise an achievement, certainly more so than the video. Positional audio is subtle and immersive. Bass is as powerful as it comes on DVD. In non-war scenes, large crowds fill the sound field with their cheers, and the echo of the speakers marvelously translates to the format. 
Fathers is devoid of extras. The studio will more than likely release a special edition with Letters, or cram both into a box set. Either way, you’ll likely be purchasing this movie twice at minimum. (No stars)
With the occasionally muted characterization, the book (same title) can easily clear up any confusion. Many details of soldiers are described in-depth, far more than a two-hour runtime could. It’s not a necessity to enjoy the film, though it easily clarifies any questions.
Article comments
1 - Rob
'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.