comment #1

Dixon Steele says ...

Just came back from the Sat. matinee of FLAGS in Santa Monica, and it's true. At 40, I was the youngest person in the theater.

It's a good solid film, quite powerful at times, but gotta say, had a slight been-there, done-that feel to it. I'm comparing it to Saving Private Ryan, which is a better film. Still a solid B for Clint, it's well done.

comment #2

Larry says ...

People look at this film and figure it's about guys posing for a picture while putting up a flag. What could be more boring?

comment #3

austin111 says ...

But in part Flags plays like a film that will skew much older as well, doesn't it? It's slower paced and not as exciting as even Saving Private Ryan was in spurts. But for me it wasn't even as moving or interesting as the almost slower Thin Red Line, unfortunately. I appreciate that Eastwood is trying to show us a side of the war (and all wars by extension) that is seamy and disheartening, how heroes are manufactured and exploited, but the film is just sloppy.

comment #4

Devin Faraci says ...

Wait, the crowd at a Saturday matinee was old? That's shocking and must be only the case for this film, since matinees usually attract the young, hip crowd.

comment #5

Spacelamb says ...

I reckon that guy has a bit of a point. I don't mind a good movie in any genre, but when I hear about ANOTHER serious war movie I just think "again?", and I'm 31. No doubt it's going to be well-made and sensitive etc, but movies in general need a shake-up because it's either boring popcorn or boring Oscar-bait, there just doesn't seem to be much in between anymore.

comment #6

Nate West says ...

"People look at this film and figure it's about guys posing for a picture while putting up a flag. What could be more boring?"

-----

By "people," I take it you mean young, uneducated idiots. Yes, such people are easily bored, which is why I favor the reinstatement of the draft. After service in the military, movies about war and foreign entanglements will offer more than "boring Oscar-bait" to those who survive to see them.

comment #7

f.bush says ...

Did anybody read the story in the Guardian about the lack of black faces in this film? The lead story in the film section. Stupid fucking limey assholes. Okay the film is about the soldiers who raided the flag at Iwo Jima. Last time I checked none of them were black. The story said that there were 900 black marines at Iwo Jima and none of them were shown in the film. Maybe I missed something but the film I saw showed a group of black marines on the boat going to Iwo Jima. Perhaps my arithmatic is wrong but wasn't there like 70,000 US marines so that would mean less than 1/70 th of them were actually black. This is an example of politically correct bullshit that is running amok in the world today. By the way I agree about reinstating the draft. Would Bush have gotten reelected if we had a draft. I think not.

comment #8

Circumvrent says ...

Why's no one addressing the elephant in the room?

Fact of the matter is, people may not be too eager to head into a war film whey they are - especially the country's youth - confronted with on a daily (hourly?) basis.

comment #9

Larry says ...

Maybe they don't like the harsh, even negative tone of war films. (People don't like harsh, negative tones in general, and it does no good to lecture them that the film is important.)

War films have often been popular, and perhaps never more so than during World War II. Sure, they showed how war could get you killed, but they were still inspirational, and positive about fighting for your country.

comment #10

D.Z. says ...

'At the same time Howell's letter came in, an e-mail from a younger guy named Peter Rogers declares that Flags "did so-so business this weekend for the same reason Hollywoodland and The Black Dahlia bombed, and why The Good German, The Good Shepherd and Catch a Fire will fall. The paradigm has shifted and no one under 30 wants to see bygone-era movies anymore on the big screen.'

I think it's more like no one under 30 wants to see ANOTHER bygone-era movie anymore. As I said a while back, WW2 movies are tired. Detective movies are tired too. The last few films of those genres which were successful were Memento and Saving Private Ryan, both of which offered new takes on old concepts, thus making them seem "fresh" and "now" to younger audiences. (It's also basically why Titanic did better than, say, Gangs of New York, and Cold Mountain.)If you're just going to summarize what already happened, shoot a documentary instead. It's cheaper, and more profitable.

f.bush: The black soldiers were in segregated platoons which did the dirty work, so that white soldiers could claim the glory.

comment #11

Gabriel says ...

"By "people," I take it you mean young, uneducated idiots. Yes, such people are easily bored, which is why I favor the reinstatement of the draft. After service in the military, movies about war and foreign entanglements will offer more than "boring Oscar-bait" to those who survive to see them."

Good point, Nate West. We should absolutely send young people to the slaughter so that they can realize that "Flags of Our Fathers" is a masterpiece.

You're just as ignorant and uncivilized as the people you're berating. Same sheep, different shepherd.

comment #12

Nate West says ...

//Gabriel: Good point, Nate West. We should absolutely send young people to the slaughter so that they can realize that "Flags of Our Fathers" is a masterpiece.//

Thanks, Gabriel. But young people need not recognize "Flags" as a masterpiece; I'd be content if they just understood that the battle for Iwo Jima was a historical event, in which many (non-computer generated) people died. To the young, death may not seem "fresh" and "now" and war a "tired" genre, but give both time. They grow on you.

comment #13

D.Z. says ...

Nate: "But young people need not recognize "Flags" as a masterpiece; I'd be content if they just understood that the battle for Iwo Jima was a historical event, in which many (non-computer generated) people died. To the young, death may not seem "fresh" and "now" and war a "tired" genre, but give both time."

I think it's more like they're tired of war movies which don't reflect the current reality of the times, which is an illegal war started by draft dodgers in which people they personally know are dying, because no one really cares about them. It's sort of like Hollywood back in the 60's, when they ignored and downplayed 'Nam.

comment #14

Joseph says ...

I think there is some accuracy to the statement that young people aren't interested in period films--because they're ignorant of history in general. I realize this is a blanket statement, and there are, thankfully, young people who do have a thing for history. I majored in history, so it's all very important to me, and film--despite its occasional inaccuracies--can be an informative and exciting resource for discovering history.

As it happened, I saw two historical films today, Flags and Marie Antoinette. Flags certainly takes a more conventional approach to history than does Marie, but both films have a distinct point of view about the events they portray.

The Eastwood film, marred somewhat by a disjointed narrative and some clumsy scenes that bear the mark of Paul Haggis, nevertheless builds to a real emotional wallop at the end--like Howell's audience, mine stayed through the credits, partly to see the pictures from the era and partly to let it all sink in--and, yes, there were audience members wiping tears from their eyes.

I know Jeff hated Marie Antoinette, but I loved it. True, having studied the French Revolution, I missed the politics, and especially the post-Bastille part of Marie's life, but thoroughly enjoyed what Sofia did here, it was a daring, original attempt, and it worked. This audience, which was considerably younger than the audience for Flags, lapped it up--everybody seemed to be in the groove of the film.

comment #15

Larry says ...

Most of Hollywood believes the same nonsese that D.Z. believes. Why bother to learn anything when trendy cynicism is all you need? However, this does prevent most people in Tinseltown from making decent movies about war, or, for that matter, profitable ones. (Biggest war drama during Vietnam? Patton.)

comment #16

jeffmcm says ...

Patton was outgrossed by MASH, by the way, and they both did better than the most purely pro-war film of the era, John Wayne's The Green Berets.

comment #17

D.Z. says ...

Joseph: "I think there is some accuracy to the statement that young people aren't interested in period films--because they're ignorant of history in general."

Yes, why can't they be like Bill O' Reilly, who had the audacity to label Americans massacred by Germans at Malmedy war criminals? Anyway, it's not that today's youth don't care about history as much as they don't care about a history which emphasizes white conquests over dark-skinned peoples, not to mention which despotic ruler fucked someone in the family to birth an heir who was as equally as tyrannical as the last one.

Larry: "Most of Hollywood believes the same nonsese that D.Z. believes. "

Most of Hollywood not owned by five corporations...

"Why bother to learn anything when trendy cynicism is all you need?"

Why bother to be brain-washed is more like it.

comment #18

jeffmcm says ...

I think you're both right in different ways - Americans are ignorant of history _and_ recognize that classic historical narratives don't apply to them.

comment #19

MilkMan says ...

I watched Edmond tonight. Edmond walks out on his wife. He wants to get laid but he doesn't have enough money. He gets mugged. It's either New York or Los Angeles. It's hard to tell. He pawns a ring for a brass knuckle bayonet. There is a beating. Edmond pounds a fake pimp into the ground. He fucks a blonde waitress and then cuts her head off. He asks an old black woman if she wants him to lick her pussy. He goes to jail. He's sodomized by his cellmate. He falls in love. This movie is directed by Stuart Gordon. It's Mamet at his nastiest. Has anyone seen this movie? It'll put you in a bad mood. Is there anyone else who likes to be in a bad mood? I like to be in a bad mood. You know why I'm in a bad mood? Because I wanted to talk about this movie with my friend. But he doesn't want to talk about this with me. You know what he wants to do? He wants to sleep. Because he's so tired. He has to get up in the morning and go to work. You know what. I don't want to talk to you guys anymore. Because no one ever listens to me. I'm trying to connect. Isn't that what I'm trying to do? But now I don't want to connect with any of you. I'm not going to say this again. If you don't listen to me I'm going to have to raise my voice. And I don't want to raise my voice. I'm saying Edmond was a good movie. With no geographic integrity. Edmond walks from dowtown Los Angeles to West Hollywood and back in two hours. But there's lots of blood. And a real huge moustache. But none of you seem that interested. So I don't think I want to talk to any of you anymore. I have other things to do right now. Things that make me feel good. Because I like to feel good about myself. I don't need you guys to sit there and tell me how great I am all the time. I'm a confident person. Some people don't like that. It irritates them. And I know it irritates them. But what do you want from me. Just tell me what you want and I'll give it to. I promise. I'll give it to you exactly like you asked me to. And I'll never stop. You can count on me to do it right. I like to take orders. I can't think for myself. This is the truth I swear. All right. That's it. Thank you. Goodnight. I will never ever come back here. You will never see me here ever again and I mean it.

comment #20

D.Z. says ...

...

comment #21

Sweetbubba says ...

Jeff, Toronto is both very anti-war and frankly pretty anti-American these days, so there's very little interest in an American war movie (especially among the under 30s), even though it has a nuanced "Haggisangle" and is supposed to be a quality flick. The subject matter is more than dead, it's toxic, in Toronto.

I went to a couple of movies at the Paramount this weekend, and it was very apparent that the managers underestimated the demand for the Prestige (which was jam packed for every showing, to the point where we switched our tickets for another showing because the theatre was full 20 minutes prior to the show), while Flags of our Fathers was almost empty.

I actually preferred the Prestige as well - I'll take Nolan over Haggis (even a clint-curtailed one) any day.

comment #22

MilkMan says ...

The exact same thing to you. I hope your wife gives birth to a crippled baby. You're so stupid that I don't even know how stupid you are. You don't even know what I just said. Because if you know what I just said then you read what I just said and that's all I wanted. You just gave me exactly what I wanted. That's why I'm never coming here again. Because of that. You think you're so smart. But you don't know anything. I know everything. That's why I'm sitting here and you're sitting there. That's why I'm eating at a hotel buffet tomorrow morning and you're eating a little bowl of nothing and milk. Good luck with your life. I hope you can sleep tonight because I'm going to be up all night thinking about this. What I said and how I said it and if should have said it all. But that's what I'm an artist and you're not.

comment #23

Sweetbubba says ...

Time to leave the milk bar, dude - you're going to miss your bus home.

comment #24

jeffmcm says ...

He's doing an impression of Mamet, right? With the faux-macho bravado and the meaningless repetition.

comment #25

R. Hunt says ...

For the first half of "Flags" I sat in the theatre thinking that the film wasn't really going anywhere and wondering if my bias against war movies was keeping me from getting involved, but by the time it was over I was in tears and completely swept in. If audiences aren't quite embracing the film, it may be because they're getting the impression that it's a conventional gung-ho, salute Old Glory kind of war movie, when in fact it's a pretty severe work at tearing down the mythology of such attitudes. Myth-busting is rarely big box office.

comment #26

Joseph says ...

"Anyway, it's not that today's youth don't care about history as much as they don't care about a history which emphasizes white conquests over dark-skinned peoples, not to mention which despotic ruler fucked someone in the family to birth an heir who was as equally as tyrannical as the last one."

Well, if that's the case, then they're just lazy, because any casual perusal of the history section at Barnes & Noble will allow somebody to discover books that explore these experiences from the bottom up. History isn't the classical narrative anymore, and, really, hasn't been for a long, long time.

comment #27

thatmovieguy says ...

I saw FLAGS at an early screening a few weeks ago and it was exactly the same experience Howell described: A spacious theater had been booked, hundreds of passes had been sent out, and there were, maybe, 40 people there. The screening rep was in a panic: "I thought this would be a mob scene!" And yes, most of the people who had come out were over 50. They did seem to appreciate the film, although I heard a few murmurs about how long it was. Most of my friends have expressed zero interest in seeing it because they thought the ads made it look like a rah-rah war film. They've mentioned that they saw SAVING PRIVATE RYAN and other WWII films and they feel like they know the story. When I've told them it's actually about the government's misrepresentation of the Iwo Jima photo to get the public to support the war again, they've been surprised. There was a large group of WWII vets who were scheduled to attend opening night shows Friday. I have a feeling they might be a bit startled by the film, too. At any rate, I don't envy the Paramount/DreamWorks marketing people in having to come up with a way to sell this one.

comment #28

MovieBob says ...

""Moviegoing these days is all about events and genre films (Departed, Saw 3, Spiderman, etc.). TV and cable are the primary outlet for adult dramas. The sooner you accept this, the sooner you will write about stuff people actually care about.""

How exactly is "Flags" NOT a 'genre' film? Last time I checked war movies were more-or-less a genre, ditto biopics.

Joseph:
"I think there is some accuracy to the statement that young people aren't interested in period films--because they're ignorant of history in general."

Go out and take a poll of guys 15-25 as to how many of them call "Braveheart," "Gladiator," "Saving Private Ryan," etc. one of their "favorite movies" and then we can talk about the interest in "period" films among the young

comment #29

Joseph says ...

MovieBob: Well, duh! Take heroic characters and mix in a lot of violence and "inspiring" stories and of course young guys are going to drool all over it.

comment #30

cd says ...

I think it's true that younger audiences may not respond to the film, but not because they are ignorant of, or unmoved by, historical subject matter. I took a group of college students to see "Flags," and while it was a harder sell than other films, including "The Departed," everyone who did attend was decently well-versed in the historical context, aware that Clint was prepared to do some de-mythologizing, and enthusiastic about the film's shot at greatness.

However, none of them liked the film at all, largely on grounds of quality--they thought the script was muddled, the performances uncompelling, the battle scenes weaker than Spielberg's, Clint's score gratingly monotonous, and key moments (such as the "performance" at Soldier Field) overwrought (some laughter there).

They stayed through the credits (everyone did in the theatre), not because they were overwhelmed by emotion, but because it was interesting to compare the photographs to the corresponding scenes and judge Clint and company's historical accuracy.

comment #31

adorian says ...

I wanted to see "Flags" this weekend and foolishly assumed that it would come to my small town's tiny 5-screen stickyfloor. Unfortunately, they brought "The Prestige" instead. I didn't go to a movie.

I'm wondering if "Flags" will be expanded in the weeks to come or if 1800 screens is the limit. I want to see it, but I might have to wait for the DVD.

comment #32

Walter Sobchak says ...

"Omigod! Why would I want to see Flags of Our Fathers? It's about old people, like fathers. It looks totally boring. It's about history and stuff...yuck. And it takes place in olden times. I can't stand movies that take place in olden times, except maybe Lord of the Rings."
- Young Filmgoer

comment #33

bipedalist says ...

It's really irritating that people are writing off this film because they think incorrectly, "Saving Private Ryan did it better." Most people forget that Ryan craps out big time in its last act - like Munich, in fact, but worse. It's Spielberg at his best (the first 40 mins) and Spielberg at his absolute WORST - sappy, overly sentimental melodrama with TERRIBLE performances by great actors in the end. I watch any Spielberg film (even Always!) whenever it's on TV but I have only seen Ryan once and I will never watch it again because of the sappy, cornball third act. But one thing that movie had going for it was that it was sold well - it had a "thing" about it - it was there to appreciate a bloody battle and those who fought in WWII - Flags is more about the world today than it is about the world back then.

Or maybe there just wasn't enough bloody action to get people in - or maybe the publicists bungled it - either way, it didn't have that must-see thing about it so no wonder no one showed. It needed much more publicity going in because of its lack of star power, etc.

Was seeing a movie last night and a frantic patron walked up to the ticket window and said "We want to see Flags of Our Fathers! Is it sold out?!!" And the ticket seller shook her head like, "are you kiddin' me? Sold out? There are only three people in there."

I'm frankly shocked The Prestige took the number one spot. Not that I thought Flags would but still...

comment #34

jeffmcm says ...

Saving Private Ryan's final scenes are what elevate it to masterpiece status, to say that those scenes are 'Spielberg at his worst' isn't paying attention to what's happening on screen. It's only superficially a movie about 'appreciating those who fought in WWII', but it's primarily a movie about the harsh, mathematic costs of any war. The final scenes are the final blows of the nails into Spielberg's construction.

comment #35

bipedalist says ...

I couldn't disagree more - The last part of it just was too much. I guess, though, I ought to suffer through one more viewing of it to be sure; I haven't seen it since that one time. Certainly Titanic got better after the first viewing so maybe Ryan would too but I think Spielberg often ruins his own work with his own need to color it sappy. That movie didn't need so much sentimentality; the story on its own was enough.

comment #36

jeffmcm says ...

The ending is only superficially sappy, and people stop there because that's what they expect from Spielberg. Dig a little deeper and you'll find a cold steel core to that movie which is punctuated by the final cemetery scene.

comment #37

giantman says ...

How surprising that "young"people won't go see a two and a half hour unemotional, uninteresting movie? I'm shocked. I wanted to like Flags, but honestly I think it kinda sucked. It was all over the place, the editing was weird and the characters introduced so quickly that at the end of the film several people around me (all over 50 btw) asked who "Iggy" was!? We had to wait until the end credit photos to find out who one of the characters was!?!

Young people will go to see a good movie, but a slow, confusing, beat you over the head with a message film, no thanks.

comment #38

outsider says ...

m 901.
m 902.
m 903.
m 904.
m 905.
m 906.
m 907.
m 908.
m 909.
m 910.
m 911.
m 912.
m 913.
m 914.
m 915.
m 916.
m 917.
m 918.
m 919.
m 920.
m 921.
m 922.
m 923.
m 924.
m 925.
m 926.
m 927.
m 928.
m 929.
m 930.
m 931.
m 932.
m 933.
m 934.
m 935.
m 936.
m 937.
m 938.
m 939.
m 940.
m 941.
m 942.
m 943.
m 944.
m 945.
m 946.
m 947.
m 948.
m 949.
m 950.
m 951.
m 952.
m 953.
m 954.
m 955.
m 956.
m 957.
m 958.
m 959.
m 960.
m 961.
m 962.
m 963.
m 964.
m 965.
m 966.
m 967.
m 968.
m 969.
m 970.
m 971.
m 972.
m 973.
m 974.
m 975.
m 976.
m 977.
m 978.
m 979.
m 980.
m 981.
m 982.
m 983.
m 984.
m 985.
m 986.
m 987.
m 988.
m 989.
m 990.
m 991.
m 992.
m 993.
m 994.
m 995.
m 996.
m 997.
m 998.
m 999.
m 1000.
m 1001.
m 1002.
m 1003.
m 1004.
m 1005.
m 1006.
m 1007.
m 1008.
m 1009.
m 1010.
m 1011.
m 1012.
m 1013.
m 1014.
m 1015.
m 1016.
m 1017.
m 1018.
m 1019.
m 1020.
m 1021.
m 1022.
m 1023.
m 1024.
m 1025.
m 1026.
m 1027.
m 1028.
m 1029.
m 1030.
m 1031.
m 1032.
m 1033.
m 1034.
m 1035.
m 1036.
m 1037.
m 1038.
m 1039.
m 1040.
m 1041.
m 1042.
m 1043.
m 1044.
m 1045.
m 1046.
m 1047.
m 1048.
m 1049.
m 1050.
m 1051.
m 1052.
m 1053.
m 1054.
m 1055.
m 1056.
m 1057.
m 1058.
m 1059.
m 1060.
m 1061.
m 1062.
m 1063.
m 1064.
m 1065.
m 1066.
m 1067.
m 1068.
m 1069.
m 1070.
m 1071.
m 1072.
m 1073.
m 1074.
m 1075.
m 1076.
m 1077.
m 1078.
m 1079.
m 1080.
m 1081.
m 1082.
m 1083.
m 1084.
m 1085.
m 1086.
m 1087.
m 1088.
m 1089.
m 1090.
m 1091.
m 1092.
m 1093.
m 1094.
m 1095.
m 1096.
m 1097.
m 1098.
m 1099.
m 1100.