Clint Eastwood Forums

General Information => Eastwood News => Topic started by: AKA23 on July 08, 2004, 10:40:27 PM

Title: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: AKA23 on July 08, 2004, 10:40:27 PM
Quote
Eastwood, Spielberg Raise 'Flags'

By Borys Kit and Chris Gardner

LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - Clint Eastwood (news) and Steven Spielberg are teaming up to bring the story of the Battle of Iwo Jima to the big screen.

Eastwood will direct an adaptation of "Flags of Our Fathers: Heroes of Iwo Jima" for DreamWorks, the studio co-founded by Spielberg.

The battle, which took place in winter 1945, was a turning point in the Pacific theater. In one month, 22,000 Japanese and 26,000 Americans died, and the battle produced one of World War II's most enduring images: a photograph of six soldiers raising an American flag on the flank of Mount Suribachi, the island's commanding high point.

One of the six was Navy corpsman John Bradley. Bradley never mentioned his experiences to his family, and it was only after his death in 1994 that his son James discovered his father's heroism. James Bradley wrote the "Flags of Our Fathers" book, which was published in 2000, with Ron Powers.

The project is the second collaboration between Spielberg and Eastwood, following 1995's "The Bridges of Madison County," which Eastwood directed and starred in and Spielberg produced through his own Amblin Entertainment banner.

The script for "Flags of Our Fathers" will be written by Paul Haggis, who is co-writing with Eastwood "The Million Dollar Baby," which Eastwood is also directing; Hilary Swank stars.

Eastwood most recently directed the Oscar-winning crime saga "Mystic River." He won Academy Awards (news - web sites) for directing and producing "Unforgiven." Spielberg is not unfamiliar with World War II, having won Oscars (news - web sites) for "Schindler's List" and "Saving Private Ryan," as well as served as an executive producer of HBO's Emmy-winning miniseries "Band of Brothers."


This is another unexpected move for Clint Eastwood. I didn't expect Million Dollar Baby and I certainly didn't expect this. For some reason, Clint seems to be very interested in historical pictures at this point in his career, if the Neil Armstrong picture and the Billie Strayhorn biography is any indication. I don't really know what to make of this film. I'm saddened that it looks as if Clint Eastwood will not be starring. It certainly will be challenging material, which could be the reason that Clint Eastwood was attracted to it. It gives him an opportunity to return to the war scene, but this time directing a real historical drama, which is something that he has never done in his career. It also looks to mark the first time Clint Eastwood will team up wtih another production company, Dreamworks, since Clint Eastwood made Absolute Power at Castlerock in 1997. I wonder why Steven Spielberg didn't want to direct this film himself, given that he has shown an interest in World War II and the historical record in the past. I really would have liked to see Clint starring again with a different kind of subject matter, so I'm not really sure what to make of this news. It will be interesting to see how this all comes together.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/040709/11/ptvd.html
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Brendan on July 08, 2004, 11:02:53 PM
Eastwood and Speilberg? Wow that is completley un-expected. AKA the reason why Speilberg might not be directing this is because, maybe, his plate his full right now with a crap load of producing gigs and he's also working on his 1972 Olympics movie and the re-make for War of the Worlds. So maybe he and Clint were at some benefiet or something recently and got to talking about this and it caught Clint's eye. It's sounds interesting though, good luck to Clint.  8)
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: KC on July 09, 2004, 06:10:17 AM
According to Variety.com's subscription-only website, Eastwood is "in talks" to direct this project:

Quote
Posted: Thurs., Jul. 8, 2004, 10:00pm PT
 
Iwo Jima 'Flags' fly at D'Works
Eastwood eyes WWII project; Haggis penning script
 
By NICOLE LAPORTE
Clint Eastwood is in talks to direct an adaptation of the book "Flags of Our Fathers," by James Bradley and Ron Powers, for DreamWorks.
Paul Haggis is writing the script.

Since the story AKA posted is from The Hollywood Reporter, it will be interesting to see which of these "Show Biz Bibles" has more accurate information in this case.

Here is the direct link to the story in The Hollywood Reporter.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000566850

Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: philamopolis on July 09, 2004, 07:33:27 AM
Here's another link:

www.comingsoon.net/news.php?id=5481
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: philamopolis on July 09, 2004, 07:40:28 AM
Obviously Eastwood's directing and co-producing. But does anyone know or think Clint will be starring in this one? My guess is it will be a 2006 release (minimum) with production next year anyone know this for sure or have there own take on it?

Darn, I hope to see Eastwood starring in this one.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: hoorah on July 09, 2004, 07:51:32 AM
The return of Gunny Highway! I really don't see how a 76 (2006) year old Clint can "star" in this one I'm afraid.  :(
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Agent on July 09, 2004, 08:39:37 AM
This ought to be good. I've got the book, but haven't read it yet.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: vik on July 09, 2004, 09:06:27 AM
hopefully he will do the western first

then direct

as would rather see him in front of the camera
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Adam S. on July 09, 2004, 09:28:42 AM
This will be great!!!!!
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: AKA23 on July 09, 2004, 09:50:29 AM
Philamopolis, I don't think there's any chance of Clint starring in this one. There's no mention of him starring and the film does seem largely centered around Iwo Jima which necessitates that the main characters be fighters in the war. There won't be any large roles for a person well into his 70's. Producing duties don't appear to have been worked out yet so it isn't yet obvious that Eastwood would produce, but he may. It will also be interesting to see how Eastwood handles this project financially, if he is in fact given producing duties, as his films tend to be made for relatively low budgets while most war films have very large budgets.    

Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: AKA23 on July 09, 2004, 09:57:38 AM
Just for an interesting little piece of information, Maureen Dowd of The New York Times had this to say on April 29, 2001:

Quote
Spielberg, who says human experience trumps human imagination, just won out in bidding over ClintEastwood to make “Flags of OurFathers,” the best seller by a son ofone of the six Marines who raised the flag on Iwo Jima.  

So, apparently, Eastwood's interest in this project goes back a few years. It seems likely that Spielberg had the original option for the project and was planning to do it, but, as Brendad said, he has a lot of projects in development right now and felt like he probably didn't have the time. He knew Eastwood was interested in it from before and handed it over for him to direct.

I don't happen to have a link. The article was cached and in PDF form. The original title of the article was "We've Made our Parents into the Gabbiest Generation." The above statements were the only statements related to this project.  
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: KC on July 09, 2004, 12:14:49 PM
This was the featured story in my local all-news radio station's "Entertainment News" segment this afternoon. It's always nice to hear Clint's name on the radio.

Also, I picked up a copy of the paper edition of Daily Variety, and the story is on the front page. So, it's big news in Hollywood.  8)
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: AKA23 on July 09, 2004, 05:28:27 PM
I agree with KC, but I think big news is to be expected when not only Clint Eastwood but Steven Spielberg are involved. I think that the enormous success of Mystic River increased Eastwood's cache in Hollywood and that now people that may have allowed Unforgiven's success to fade from their memory have now put a lot of trust in Eastwood. He probably has more respect from the hollywood community now than ever before, which may have been why Spielberg felt comfortable handing this project over for Eastwood to direct. I'm not really sure I want to see a war film from Eastwood, but it looks like that's what we're going to get. Other directors can do these war movies while Eastwood does something else. There isn't really anything about this project that screams "Clint Eastwood" to me. We'll have to wait and see. It will probably be a very good film, but a very different film than we have seen before from Eastwood. I do look forward to see the cast that will be assembled for this film. I hope Clint is able to get some big name stars to commit to the project. That being said, this may be a bit premature at this stage in the game, but I woudln't be surprised if Eastwood got yet another Oscar nomination, if now a win, from this picture. The Hollywood community loves sobering war pictures and with Spielberg's involvement in the project, that can only bode well for the perception of the film within the film community.  
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: shawnmcq on July 09, 2004, 10:27:08 PM
This sounds like a winner!  I would love to see Clint also act in this movie, but nevertheless I am very excited indeed!
By the way...there has been a big rumor floating around Hollywood that Clint is interest in doing a remake of "The Shootist" for his last western If that is even remotely true...that would be fantastic!
Has anyone also heard this?
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: KC on July 09, 2004, 10:56:53 PM
By the way...there has been a big rumor floating around Hollywood that Clint is interest in doing a remake of "The Shootist" for his last western If that is even remotely true...that would be fantastic!
Has anyone also heard this?
Floating around where ... specifically? See my answer to your post in the topic you started about this.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Gant on July 10, 2004, 01:19:20 AM
This new project sounds very exciting to me cos it sounds very different from anything Clint has tackled before.. and at this stage in his career thats exactly what I want and expect.... Surprises  ;D
 
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Adam S. on July 11, 2004, 06:25:43 PM
I wonder if there's a place for Johnny Depp in this film. ??? ??? ??? That would kick ass!!!!!!
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: allycat on July 12, 2004, 03:16:58 AM
And that rumour mill just keeps on churning... ;)

This one is pretty interesting though, and seems to be more than just hearsay. An Eastwood-Spielberg collaboration sounds pretty exciting to me, particularly if Clint's directing! It's always good to see Clint in front of the camera but I'm sure he won't appear in this film unless a suitable role comes up. A brief cameo would be nice, however.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: vik on July 12, 2004, 03:24:59 AM
johnny depp in a serious role are u kidding

and as long as the film doesn't end up like saving private ryan - 20 minutes of great cinema then the rest tom hanks sounding off  >:(
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Adam S. on July 12, 2004, 05:29:08 AM
johnny depp in a serious role are u kidding
No, but maybe they were kidding last year when he was nominated for the best actor Oscar. And what was the last Depp film you saw???? Benny & Joon???? Obviously not Ed Wood, Edward Scissorhands, Sleepy Hollow, Secret Window, Pirates Of The Carribean, Blow, etc.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: vik on July 12, 2004, 05:34:01 AM
yeh i've seen johnny depp films and his roles are wierd and pirates of the carribean was kids stuff - when he is going to do adult roles? - its not that i don't like him - its just his roles - hardly serious stuff

presumably this new film is going to be serious stuff - and i just wondered if johnny depp was suitable

i wouldn't have nominated him for pirates but then i wouldn't have nominated ringy thingy either

both have been forgotten

now mystic river there's class
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Adam S. on July 12, 2004, 05:37:11 AM
yeh i've seen johnny depp films and his roles are wierd and pirates of the carribean was kids stuff - when he is going to do adult roles?
Watch Blow.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: vik on July 12, 2004, 05:39:20 AM
ok i will and then i will report back thanks adam.s

no on second thoughts i have just read what it's about i don't call those roles very classic stuff
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: KC on July 12, 2004, 05:51:08 AM
Until and unless Depp is actually named as a member of the cast of this film, discussions about him belong in the Off Topic forum, please.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Adam S. on July 12, 2004, 05:56:11 AM
That's pretty much the problem with Hollywood today. People follow formulas too much, that's how careers are ruined. Just because it's not expected doesn't mean it's not great, it's just not going to be a box-office hit and
cover up it's bad elements with overused special effects.

Quote
no on second thoughts i have just read what it's about i don't call those roles very classic stuff
Yeah, and in my opinion, a San Fransisco cop doesn't sound too interesting, unless you've seen Dirty Harry.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Adam S. on July 12, 2004, 05:58:26 AM
Until and unless Depp is actually named as a member of the cast of this film, discussions about him belong in the Off Topic forum, please.
Thanks KC, I was just saying that he would be a good choice for a film like this.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Perry on July 14, 2004, 08:04:09 AM
Hi guys;
                   Don't laugh, but If Eastwood did this WW2 epic a guy I think clint should consider giving a chance in a movie is Mickey Rourke. Despite the absurdity of what he did to his private life and the boxing, etc, the guy is a brilliant actor. ask Penn, Depp.. I think the unpredicability of Eastwood and his diredcting prowess and Rourke's brilliance would be astounding...any thoughts???

                                Perry
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: vik on July 14, 2004, 11:35:43 AM
he would be better doing the acting himself

and no jeff daniels please
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Broadsword on July 14, 2004, 01:09:52 PM
Guys, I think we gotta accept that Clint is going to do most of his work behind the camera now, and I don't see that as necessarily a bad thing. He's what, 74 now? His age dictates that the roles are going to be drying up and be more limited. That's just the way it is and it is something we should get used to.
As for this project, it sounds good. Clint should be able to bring to it the realism and the humanity this story deserves. He is not a sentimental film maker and I doubt if he'll fall into the trap of shallow patriotic flag-waving other directors succumb to. See Heartbreak Ridge to see what I mean. In fact, there are fewer more 'subversive' directors around than Eastwood. And I mean that in the most positive way imaginable.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: gunnyg on July 18, 2004, 08:02:52 AM
See also my post regarding this topic and Eastwood's soon to be iwo Jima film--An Open Letter To Clint Eastwood...By Gunny G!--at the following messageboard URL...

http://www.clinteastwood.org/forums/index.php?board=2;action=display;threadid=2742&start=0
http://www.clinteastwood.org/forums/index.php?board=2;action=display;threadid=2742&start=0

Thank you,
Dick Gaines
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Agent on July 19, 2004, 12:12:31 PM
Hopefully Eastwood will get a chance to view your letter. By the way - was the original flag raised by the same six(?) Marines that raised the 2nd one?
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Adam S. on July 19, 2004, 12:14:52 PM
Hopefully Eastwood will get a chance to view your letter.
I agree. It's a very good letter, and I think Clint will appreciate it.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Agent on July 19, 2004, 12:17:10 PM
BTY - great site you got there, gunnyg. Lots of great info on there....
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Agent on July 19, 2004, 12:22:50 PM
But as far as the flick, I'm really intriqued on how this is going to turn out. Eastwood directing a war flick....wow. This ought to be good. To be quite frank, I hope it doesn't contain any silly comedic elements like Heartbreak Ridge, as that turned me off big time. I've got high hopes for this one....
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: gunnyg on July 19, 2004, 12:24:46 PM
No, three other Marines raised the "first" flag--but they also were from Easy company, 2d Battallion, 28th Marines...

See below...
http://www.freerepublic.com/~gunnyg/
http://www.freerepublic.com/~gunnyg/

Thank you,
Dick G
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: vik on July 19, 2004, 01:46:47 PM
yeh great site and really interesting thanks gunnyg

great that their are folks around to give us the facts and very brave folks at that
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Perry on July 20, 2004, 03:53:37 AM
Hi GUYS:
                   To begin with, I had read Flags For Our Fathers a few months back and was very shocked and happy to hear Eastwood is going to direct it. For those of you who have not read the book I urge you to . It was without a doubt the most moving and absorbing book I have read in a very long time. It's full of emotion, sadness and deals with the personal lives of ordinary men who were doing what they felt was thier duty, but it also explores the deep humanity and the suffering of what many people went through after they survived. The book will make you weep, but it will also inspire you and anger you. Eastwood has a big chore here in delivering the emotional impact of this book and I'm sure he will prevail. Mystic River was a emotionally disturbing subject and Eastwood was brilliant in his delivery, but after reading Flags I feel this will be even more of a ambitous project because the book has the emotional wallop of Mystic and the sheer agony and brutality of war and what happened there. It's not a pretty book to read but War never is and the aftermath of human lives is not always understood unless u put a mile in someones shoes...and this book certainly conveys that.

                                    Perry
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: gunnyg on July 20, 2004, 04:30:45 AM
My own choices for references to the Iwo Jima Flag Raising are:  

1. Immortal Images, A Personal History Of Two Photographers And The Flag Raising On Iwo Jima, Tedd Thomey, Naval Institute Press, 1996

2. Iwo Jima, Monuments, Memories, and the American Hero, Marling/Wetenhall, Harvard University Press, 1991

3. Shadow Of Suribachi, Raising The Flags On Iwo Jima, Albee/Freeman, Praeger, 1995

Dick G
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: philamopolis on July 25, 2004, 07:49:48 AM
www.imdb.com/title/tt0418689

Updated info and title info of Eastwood's war epic.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: skunker on July 27, 2004, 08:32:28 AM
Anyone got more info about this flick? Very interested! Flags of our Fathers was a good book. I am also interested in the film because one of the main characters will be Harlon Block, one of the guys who raised the flag...and he's from my hometown and buried only a couple of miles away from here.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: mgk on July 27, 2004, 08:44:07 AM
Welcome to the Clint Eastwood Web Board, skunker.

Any news that any of our members discover will be posted right here in this thread.  So, check back from time to time to see if there are any updates.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: skunker on July 27, 2004, 10:56:19 AM
Thank you, glad to be here.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Philo Beddoe Jr on July 28, 2004, 08:19:28 AM
Hi guys;
                   Don't laugh, but If Eastwood did this WW2 epic a guy I think clint should consider giving a chance in a movie is Mickey Rourke. Despite the absurdity of what he did to his private life and the boxing, etc, the guy is a brilliant actor. ask Penn, Depp.. I think the unpredicability of Eastwood and his diredcting prowess and Rourke's brilliance would be astounding...any thoughts???

                                Perry

Rourke is a very interesting actor, and it would be great to see him in an Eastwood production.  I imagine Clint would admire several of his past performances.

WKC.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: allycat on July 29, 2004, 05:21:44 AM
But as far as the flick, I'm really intriqued on how this is going to turn out. Eastwood directing a war flick....wow. This ought to be good. To be quite frank, I hope it doesn't contain any silly comedic elements like Heartbreak Ridge, as that turned me off big time. I've got high hopes for this one....

I thought the comedic elements in Heartbreak Ridge worked pretty well overall, though I know not everyone agrees with me. I do think, however, that Heartbreak Ridge may have benefitted from being a little more serious, and, as we've discussed previously on the relevant thread(s), a more accurate depiction of the Marines would have pleased many.

I don't think that this film is going to be anything like Heartbreak Ridge though. I think that the odd light-hearted moment is often essential to a film, otherwise it could be too serious, unless Clint was making this film in the style of a documentary. Anyway, I trust Clint to do a good job on this film :)

As for Mickey Rourke, I haven't really seen him in anything so I can't say whether or not he might be a good choice for a role, but in any case, that's not news, that's speculation ;)
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: jjgonski on August 02, 2004, 11:16:08 AM
What about Clint in a small role, some high ranking officer in the WWII era?  I would have to imagine that there would be some cameo that Clint could find for himself.  Also, if this movie does come to light, I will be very pleased with Clint's choice as he is continuing to challenge himself with his choices.  I think that Heartbreak Ridge is an inspiring film, even with the comedic elements thrown in.  I guess we'll just have to wait and see. ;) ;)
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: philamopolis on August 04, 2004, 06:19:36 PM
60 Minutes revealed that Eastwood and Speilberg will be doing the WWII drama.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: KC on August 04, 2004, 06:28:59 PM
Actually, 60 Minutes didn't reveal anything. They said "Next up: Directing a Steven Spielberg-produced World War II epic about the Battle of Iwo Jima."  That much we knew. ;)
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: skunker on August 07, 2004, 12:46:05 AM
Hey guys check out this website I found about the movie: http://www.flagsofourfathers.net

Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Wombat on August 07, 2004, 05:13:06 AM
Hmmm Clint to direct - OK.  But I ask why is Spielberg usurping the classic 'The Sands of Iwo Jima' starring John Wayne as SGT John M. Striker.

They gunna jazz up the special effects.  I have a problem with this classic of John Wayne's being over-run by a modern, no doubt, PTE Ryan style, graphic storming of the beaches with helmets floating around in the blood stained water. And I dread to think how they will tackle the heights of Suri Bachi !!!

Leave it alone Spielberg - I say.  And Clint (The Man) don't do it !!!

Regards,

Wombat
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: KC on August 07, 2004, 06:09:09 AM
Let's wait until we see the film to judge. I'm sure it will be anything but an attempt to "usurp" the John Wayne film. At any rate, anything that is good enough to stand the test of time can't be "usurped" by another work on the same themes, but will continue to be enjoyed and appreciated as a classic work in its own right. (See: The Iliad and Troy.)
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: skunker on August 07, 2004, 09:31:55 AM
If you read the book that the movie is going to be adapted from, you'll see that the story is entirely different than SPR or even Wayne's film. If Clint can stay true to the power of the characters as explored in the book, I think we'll have a wonderful film...especially if they show the journey of Ira Hayes from New England to South Texas just to tell his dead friend's mother that it was her son that helped plant that flag on the hill.

We'll see.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Wombat on August 07, 2004, 07:40:49 PM
KC and Skunker,

I still say hmmmmm.  OK - appreciate the ability of a story to be re-told.  And I admit (as Skunker mentions) I haven't read the book in question and perhaps I am going off on a tangent.

And I agree new life in an old story can bring the facts of the Operation to modern audiences who would be less likely to dig out an OLD John Wayne movie and view same.  Unless of course they are movie and/or military historical buffs.

As long as the producers don't lose the real life importance of the Operation concerned and swamp it in special effects and Political Correctness (PC).  Here I allude to the latest version of 'Pearl Harbour'.  The film was historically incorrect, and a PC fantasy to appease the PC populous of today.  Winners are grinners and they write the history books BUT that never changes what really happened and who was actually involved and what they did.

I trust Clint to be as honest as time and money permits in producing any film but Mr Spielberg - in my opinion - is another kettle of fish.

I am a Military Historian and what happened in the film "Pearl Harbour' is NOT what happened.  And all such a film does is give a distorted version of events to a modern populace (world wide).  And unfortunately many people in the world see a film such as Pearl Harbour and believe it to be true and accurate.  'Black Hawk Down' is another 'modern' film where poetic license was rampant.

The John Wayne version of Iwo Jima may not be 100 % historically accurate either but there is no PC fantasy in that movie. And war has a tendency to be like that - real - not PC fantasy.

Regards,

Wombat
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: KC on August 07, 2004, 08:01:35 PM
Once again, Wombat, I would ask you to reserve judgment until we have some idea how this project may turn out. It is still in the very early planning stages.  Also, there's no point in bringing up other, unrelated projects here. Neither Eastwood nor Spielberg had anything to do with Pearl Harbor or Black Hawk Down, as far as I know. (Both were Jerry Bruckheimer productions.)

Anyone who, like skunker, has read the book, or anyone who has heard some concrete news about this production, is welcome to add to this thread, but I don't see the necessity for extensive speculation, one way or another, at this stage of events.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Brendan on August 07, 2004, 08:03:26 PM
but Mr Spielberg - in my opinion - is another kettle of fish.

I am a Military Historian and what happened in the film "Pearl Harbour' is NOT what happened.  And all such a film does is give a distorted version of events to a modern populace (world wide).  And unfortunately many people in the world see a film such as Pearl Harbour and believe it to be true and accurate.  'Black Hawk Down' is another 'modern' film where poetic license was rampant.


Frist of all Michael Bay directed Pearl Harbor (not Speilberg, who had nothing to do with it), so it was going to a piece of crap anyways, and not even have one ounce of truth in it. He'd sacrifice that just for explosions... which he succeeded in doing.

Second, any movies that depicts a real life event almost always says "Based on a True Story" the keyword there is based. It's doesn't have to depict it 100% as happened, it just takes most the events and tries to tell an interesting story with it.

It's just like the cop shows on TV. They solve a crime in like two days, when really it can take months to solve crimes. The reason is dramatic effect.

With this movie in the hands of Clint Eastwood and Steven Speilberg I feel it will be handled well and they'll do their best to ensure the story is told as close to the real thing as possible, but ultimately the studio can can have the final word and say, "We want more explosions." And who knows, they might have to do it, but then they might not. I say let's give this one sometime to come together.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Wombat on August 07, 2004, 09:05:29 PM
Brendan and KC,

Thanks for the replies.  But let it be said I never meant to imply that Clint or Spielberg had anything to do with PH or BHD.  I was merely using both those films as an indicator of how low some will go for the mightly dollar.

And yes Brendan, I am well aware that many movies are based on 'a true story'.  And poetic licence in the interpretation goes on at the studio level. And if 'bangs for the buck' is the name of the game then the movie thus produced will reflect that aspect.

What I have a problem with is the interpretation of an historically significant event that had a direct impact on thousands and thousands of lives, on the battlefield and off it.  My Father fought at the Battle of the Bulge in Europe (WW II).  The films produced in Holloywood re that event are trite to say the least and very historically inaccurate.  Neither Clint nor Spielberg where even around when those films were made - so they can't be implicated.

So, maybe I have an axe to grind in regards to military history.

The other aspect I was trying to highlight was and is the fact that many of the members of society in 2004 get there knowledge from movies and the Net.  Book reading and historical book reading is, in my opinion, a dying art.

I concede I cannot stop anyone doing anything in Hollywood.  And as previously stated I have faith in Clint.  And Spielberg has made some amazing movies.  Credit where credit is due.

If they (Clint & Spielberg) want to make the film they will.  And I take the advice of KC and I will wait until the movie is out before I take up the cudgel of 'historical military accuracy' again.

Enjoy the discussion though and look forward to more of the same.

Regards,

Wombat
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: skunker on August 07, 2004, 10:21:04 PM
There's also a new BAND OF BROTHERS mini-series in development called THE PACIFIC WAR. That one should be good, as well: http://www.flagsofourfathers.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=7
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Walt on August 13, 2004, 08:52:59 AM
Personally i think this is a terrific idea .
The combination of Eastwood , Spielberg  and a ww2 tale gives me goosebumps .
As for a cameo from the great man ........... well it would be nice but , as long as the film's good , I can live without it .
Oh and I know it's off topic but Johnny Depp just happens to be one of the greatest actors of his generation . Just check out his back catalogue . No one has such a diverse portfolio .
Anyway , back to the point . I'm not aware of the book but the premise certainly sounds more than interesting . I'm certainly looking forward to it .
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: amanwitha45 on September 10, 2004, 12:23:34 PM
well, ww2 stuff is getting a bit too popular nowadays..but i'm sure this will be a hit
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: skunker on September 10, 2004, 02:39:01 PM
Is there ANY update about this? I haven't heard sh*t in the past month or so.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Brendan on September 10, 2004, 08:43:50 PM
Is there ANY update about this? I haven't heard sh*t in the past month or so.

Well since Eastwood is busy doing post-production work on Million Dollar Baby and Speilberg is off producing a gizzillion projects, there probably won't be too much in the news area until well after Million Dollar Baby is released.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Kiwi Cowboy on September 11, 2004, 12:20:50 AM
Looks interesting this project
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: bigdai on November 03, 2004, 04:06:27 PM
I think that wombat makes some good points on the historical accuracy that directors show towards films based on history.  I know that this is a discussion that has been partially covered before on the old and this board. However, as a historian and obviously a film fan myself I think it is worth discussing again and believe that diectors have a certain responsibilty to recreate an interpretation of the truth rather than a 'movie' based on the truth.  How many kids today think that Pearl Harbor was a stalemate if not an American victory due to two pilots played by Josh Hartnett and Ben Affleck.

I also think that we can pre-judge directors/procuders (i'm not confusing the terms by the way) based on their previous work.  In this instance not Clint due to his portfolio but certainly Spielberg due to his.  He may have had nothing to do with Pearl Harbor but he was key in the production of films such as Private Ryan and Schindler's List.  Both films came under fire from certain groups  for their accuracy.  I'm not saying we should judge Flags of Our Fathers before we see it but there is nothing wrong with expecting a certain kind of film from some personalities whether good or bad.   Eg - we all look forward to a Clint film on this site because we have some expectation based on previous experience.  Those of a reasonable outlook are often very pleased with his procuct or disappointed.  There is nothing wrong with having an expectation of a Spielberg influenced film and being pleasantly suprised, which I hope I will be and judging by Clint's previous work in other genre, I look forward to being.

I just hope that Flags of our Fathers will be a film that does not  live in infamy which the non-Spielberg influenced Pearl Harbor clearly is.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: vik on November 04, 2004, 02:08:27 AM
good point bigdai - pearl harbour - yuk
pearl harbour was such a big event in history and to be treated like that was a disgrace

i think memphis belle was an incredible film - i think its about capturing authenticity and trying to put peope in that place at that time

saving private ryan - started off that way but ended up with tom hanks well sounding like tom hanks (in other words it got lost somewhere) by the end i was just saying find him and lets finish

i think alot of films today start off all ok and up in a mess i think its almost like the script writers or something say well if we give 20 minutes what the hell - but a film is for the whole whatever minutes

and if its going to be factual then make it  factual and don't waffle about it - its like the patriot or pearl harbour half the people who might have seen it won't bother

more and more directors put in stuff that is controversial to make a movie sell - thats not a problem but like pearl harbour i think it should have been given another name because what it was trying to do was fool people into going to a movie about pearl harbour - the people who died at pearl harbour deserve more
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: GBU on November 04, 2004, 07:53:45 AM
good point bigdai - pearl harbour - yuk
i think memphis belle was an incredible film - i think its about capturing authenticity and trying to put peope in that place at that time

I agree with you on this one.

 Another very accurate movie is Band of Brothers (It was a mini series but still as good as a movie). It was 100% accurate. They interviewed the 101st Airbourne members and just retold their stories through the series. I HIGHLY recommend it to anybody.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: vik on November 04, 2004, 09:25:05 AM
only trouble with band of brothers was it became a bit repetitive

its not really a critism - rather an observation - because of its length  - sometimes it was on 2 times a week

probably be better getting them on dvd
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: GBU on November 04, 2004, 02:17:58 PM
Oh ya. I agree with you on that.

The only problem is that the box set is $80. It has 6 dvds, 5 for episodes, and 1 for bonus stuff. Took me a while to save up for it, but the money was well spent. ;)
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: vik on November 04, 2004, 02:28:01 PM
how many hours is that then in all ?


still as you say i expect good viewing

i liked the episode at the eagles nest quite funny
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: GBU on November 04, 2004, 08:24:35 PM
All the episodes combined, it comes out to about 12.5 hours. With the bonus features it is 15+. So you get your money's worth.

The funniest part, in my opinion is on the bonus features, when they "train" the actors to act like soldiers. It is just funny to see and hear them whine and grumble throughout the whole ordeal.  :P
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: vik on November 05, 2004, 02:20:02 AM
why you a soldier then ??

were thay all actors?

of course can you call david swimmer an actor  ;D
actually that bit was a bit odd
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: bigdai on November 05, 2004, 06:03:06 AM
only trouble with band of brothers was it became a bit repetitive

its not really a critism - rather an observation - because of its length  - sometimes it was on 2 times a week

probably be better getting them on dvd

This is the problem directors have.  It is difficult to include all information that historians would like to see in a two hour film.   They often do not have the time to include historically important but to a film complimentary information.  They have to concentrate more of their efforts on story, pace and characters.  

I have not seen Band of Brothers but as a mini-series I am guessing that there was more time to dedicate to this accuracy and relevance.  This makes the film less interesting to a historically passive viewer who is more interested in the spectacle.  Imagine if Private Ryan had been 2 and 1/2 hours of the battle at the beginning without the story that was the spine of the film.  People would soon become bored of the film if they didn't know the characters or cared whether they lived or died.  It seems to be a question of balance to me.  I'm not sure that people would have minded Pearl Harbor if it had had a different name.  The fact that it was called Pearl Harbor led people to believe it was about the attack.  If it was called something else to do with the romantic triangle, i'm sure there wouldn't have been such a critical attack.  Due to it's name however, it should have been based far more on history.

There aren't just viewer concerns though there are other dimensions such as financial backers, audience projections, intended rating (Pearl Harbor was a 12) etc etc.  These all determine what the content of a film will be, historical or not.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: vik on November 05, 2004, 06:35:22 AM
about private ryan nobody expected a 2 and half hour battle - and it would porbably have been too much anyway to bear

but after the hype etc. you would have expected the film not to get into such boredom - which eventually did - and went on and on about tom hank's character which it did

tha same with pearl harbour all the hype etc. - nothin like pearl harbour - it was a complete travesty
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Americanbeauty on November 24, 2004, 03:34:46 PM
Personally, I found that Saving Private Ryan was WAY too long ...
Let's hope this one will be different ... well, actually it WILL be different because Clint will be directing ... that will be a first for him, directing a historical movie ... he's up to it ... he's up to anything, if you ask me.

 I'm looking forward to seeing it ...

So is it already in pre production ?
Any clue concerning the actors ? or the release date ?
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Brendan on November 24, 2004, 03:36:36 PM
well, actually it WILL be different because Clint will be directing ... that will be a first for him, directing a historical movie ... he's up to it ... he's up to anything, if you ask me.

Bird. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0094747/)
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Americanbeauty on December 02, 2004, 12:10:45 PM
Yeah ...

oops  ;D
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Americanbeauty on December 02, 2004, 12:14:26 PM
BUT when I said "historical" I meant World Wars and stuffs ... he never directed such a movie, did he ?
He acted in this kind of movies, but never directed one ... if my memory serves me well ....
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: KC on December 03, 2004, 12:38:51 AM
The Outlaw Josey Wales. ;)
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Americanbeauty on December 03, 2004, 11:48:52 AM
YUP (again) ... OOPS  ;D ... I know Josey Wales / Civil War ... but still, this war was not a world war ...

Anyway it will be the first time ever he will direct a movie about world war 2, right ?

 ... it sounds great ... I'm really looking forward to seeing it.

So is it already in pre production ?
Any clue concerning the actors ? = Brad Pitt maybe  ;D ?!  I'd love to see him with Clint ... just once ... !
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: AKA23 on December 03, 2004, 03:29:22 PM
AmericanBeauty, I think it will be quite awhile before we hear anything substantive about Flags of Our Fathers. We don't even know whether it will be Clint's next film, or whether he'll do somethng else first. I suspect it will probably be his next film, especially because Spielberg is so busy and has a lot of projects planned, but he might want to do that music-themed project he was talking about, or the Niel Armstrong biopic, or something else entirely. I think it's pretty useless to be speculating about it this early because we just don't know anything at all about it yet and as we don't know anything about the characters, most of us can't pick actors for the various roles because it wouldn't be an informed decision. I'm sure that when things begin moving, it will be posted here, and we'll all know about it :)
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: GBHermosa on December 03, 2004, 03:34:53 PM
Before MDB was going into production, the rumor was that Clint's next movie would star Russell Crowe(sp?).  I am not sure that this is still the case.  But, one reason that MDB was put into production so quickly was so that Clint could get out and do that next movie.  MDB was a very short pre-production, shoot, and post production.  So, this had something to do with why Clint took MDB as his next role.  I am not sure if Russell Crowe would be in "Flags."  But, he is a great actor.  So, you never know.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: AKA23 on December 03, 2004, 04:14:17 PM
That's interesting. Thanks for the information, GBH. Any more possible starring roles for Clint on the horizon? :)
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: BGanzo on December 03, 2004, 07:53:41 PM
That's what the world needs another WWII film... ::)
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Americanbeauty on December 05, 2004, 08:04:27 AM
AmericanBeauty, I think it will be quite awhile before we hear anything substantive about Flags of Our Fathers. We don't even know whether it will be Clint's next film, or whether he'll do somethng else first. I suspect it will probably be his next film, especially because Spielberg is so busy and has a lot of projects planned, but he might want to do that music-themed project he was talking about, or the Niel Armstrong biopic, or something else entirely. I think it's pretty useless to be speculating about it this early because we just don't know anything at all about it yet and as we don't know anything about the characters, most of us can't pick actors for the various roles because it wouldn't be an informed decision. I'm sure that when things begin moving, it will be posted here, and we'll all know about it :)

Good morning !

I know, I know ... it was a little bit premature from my part  ;D ... but I thought you guys might know something ... you always seem to know the latest news, so ... I just gave it a shot ;D.
But to tell you the truth I kind of expected you'd answer that  ;) !!
I know people have been speculating about the movie since June/July, so maybe we'll get some real, good news soon. Well, I hope we will  ;)

And yeah I heard about the Neil Armstrong biopic ... sounds great ...
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: KC on December 13, 2004, 07:17:20 AM
There's a tidbit about this project in today's New York Daily News ...
Quote
[Eastwood's] next movie, "Flags of Our ­Fathers," may be the most ambitious he has ever made. The film, which will be produced by Steven Spielberg, is being adapted from the best seller about the World War II Battle of Iwo Jima and the men who famously raised the American flag on Mount Suribachi.

Eastwood said it hasn't been cast yet and that he probably won't start shooting before late summer.

"It's going to [be] difficult," he said. "It's very different from the last few pictures. But if we do our jobs, it could be special."

http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/261518p-223857c.html

Thanks to Ben Shockley for posting this story in the Million Dollar Baby thread.  :)
Title: Eastwood next movie
Post by: Perry on December 13, 2004, 02:21:45 PM
Hi Guys:
                   Very nice article today in the Daily News and it basically confirmed 'Flags For Our Fathers' will be  his next movie. Eastwood actually acknowledged that Flags will be a very tough movie to do. Considering how great the book was it certainly will be a major challenge. What is interesting is casting for the movie. Does he go for unknowns or major casting?

                     p
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: mgk on December 13, 2004, 03:07:27 PM
Hi Perry -

I merged your last post about this subject into this thread where this movie is being discussed.

Thanks.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: AKA23 on December 14, 2004, 09:03:22 PM
I think it's a bit sad that this is going to be Eastwood's next film. I was hoping he might do another one in between that he may have acted in. I guess GBH's suggestion of Clint teaming with Russell Crowe for his next film didn't come to fruition after all, unless Clint is going to cast Crowe in this one, but I would somehow doubt it.
Title: Re:Eastwood... Former Marine gives opinion
Post by: movie_guy on December 23, 2004, 10:45:56 PM
I really think that Clint Eastwood's talent is in picking people who act well - and avoiding the hyped-up folks.  Thankfully (VERY thankfully!!!), we'll SURELY not see Leonardo DiCaprio (VERY shallow acting skills), Alec Baldwin (unfitting of a Marine, I'd be offended to see the Eagle, Globe, and Anchor on him), or some of the overpriced (and over-hyped) actors in it.  My guess is that (given Steven Spielberg's style with Band of Brothers and Saving Private Ryan) we'll see a real-live movie about honor, sacrifice, and the bond of Marines that battle doesn't break.

As a former Marine, myself, I am very glad to see this news, after being SO let down by Windtalkers and confused by The Thin Red Line.  If everyone knew the history those stories were based on, the movies would make sense.  Windtalkers left out some of the best parts of the stories (but still managed to throw in so much gore and BAD ACTING (I never knew Nicholas Cage was SUCH a BAD ACTOR!) it was distracting from the historical and heroic marks the true story deserved).  The Thin Red Line was long and well-shot, but it seemed to have been cut up so bad to fit in a movie theater that it became hard to comprehend - and that was a shame; it was well-acted, and the cinematography was SUPERB.

Then there's the whole Pearl Harbor movie debacle - I watched it, found the love story entertaining, but, historically, it was SO far from the truth that it was really a cheap shot to those who were there.  For great TRUE stories, all you gotta do is read Gordon Prange's Dec 7, 1941: The Day the Japanese Attacked Pearl Harbor.  All of the TRUE stories in there were more fascinating than the rather silly love affairs that were in the movie; and I would have rather seen some of those richer tales told.

But, hey, I'm into history and avoid reality shows like the plague.  Maybe I'm just out of step with the rest of the world.

If Mr Eastwood reads this, I hope he drops me a line.  I know a couple people he can contact to get some GOOD info on that battle, and a couple of books he's just GOT to read.  Best to prepare, Utmost Savagery: The Three Days of Tarawa by Joseph H Alexander.

Regardless, I'll watch it; but since Mr Eastwood and Mr Spielberg are on it, I will have NO reservations about its quality; I'm sure I will enjoy it, and I'm sure you will, too.

Semper Fi,
R Graham
Corporal, USMC
1981-1985
Title: Re:Eastwood... Former Marine gives opinion
Post by: Brendan on December 23, 2004, 10:53:04 PM
Thankfully (VERY thankfully!!!), we'll SURELY not see... Alec Baldwin (unfitting of a Marine, I'd be offended to see the Eagle, Globe, and Anchor on him),

This goes with my theory that Alec Baldwin is very under-appreciated.

Quote
As a former Marine, myself, I am very glad to see this news, after being SO let down by Windtalkers and confused by The Thin Red Line.  If everyone knew the history those stories were based on, the movies would make sense.  Windtalkers left out some of the best parts of the stories (but still managed to throw in so much gore and BAD ACTING (I never knew Nicholas Cage was SUCH a BAD ACTOR!) it was distracting from the historical and heroic marks the true story deserved).

Nicolas Cage is a hit and miss actor. And the film was directed by John Woo, enough said.

Quote
Then there's the whole Pearl Harbor movie debacle -

It was directed by Michael Bay, enough said.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: KC on December 23, 2004, 11:02:00 PM
Thanks for your opinion, movie_guy. Please don't change the topic title.  :)

Oh, and welcome to the Eastwood Web Board!  8)
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: movie_guy on December 24, 2004, 08:11:21 AM
Thanks!

Sorry for drifting from the topic title by comparing to other WWII movies - which I know some people don't like.  I guess I was trying to point out that Mr Eastwood and Mr Spielberg would do an excellent job on such a movie and wandered a little from there.

My apologies for going off-topic.
Title: Re:Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: movie_guy on December 24, 2004, 11:14:53 AM
This goes with my theory that Alec Baldwin is very under-appreciated. Nicolas Cage is a hit and miss actor. And the film was directed by John Woo, enough said.It was directed by Michael Bay, enough said.

Brendan: I agree a lot with what you say about Nicholas Cage - he's done some great work, and some really poor work. Hit-or-miss is hitting the nail on the head.

That Mr Eastwood will be directing this movie instead of someone whose style is that of John Woo or Michael Bay is really very good news, and I think Mr Eastwood will bring some hope to the war-movie genre.  I think he will film a war story without showing the explicit red gore and blue language, while keeping the story on-track and on-budget.  I'm sure Mr Eastwood will deliver on substance and rely only on judicious use of digital SFX.

Again, I do think we'll all like it, and it would be very, VERY good if Mr Eastwood could at least make a cameo appearance - if not a major role.

Best wishes!
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: skunker on December 28, 2004, 06:52:02 PM
Hey folks,
 Clint Eastwood was in today's paper and is getting ready to cast his next film (Flags of our Fathers). For more info: http://www.upcomingepics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=137
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Matt on December 28, 2004, 06:54:43 PM
Skunker, your link at the bottom of that forum page doesn't bring us to an article. As you were posting it, I was just typing up this post. (There's a new feature on our board software that tells you when you go to post your message that someone else has posted while you were typing. Pretty cool.)

There was a paragraph about this in the IMDb news for today:

Quote
Eastwood: "Only Young Actors Need Apply"

Million Dollar Baby star and director Clint Eastwood has dashed the hopes of thousands of twenty-something actors, after announcing he won't be casting anyone over the age of 26 in his new movie. The Oscar-winning director is determined to maintain historical authenticity when he casts World War Two epic Flags Of Our Fathers, about the men who raised the flag at Iwo Jima, early next year. Eastwood, 75, explains, "The average age of most of these fellows at that stage was 19, so in casting, I'll try to be very accurate about that. The oldest amongst them was 26, in fact, they call him the old man, so if he's old at 26, well..."

http://www.imdb.com/news/wenn/#1
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Brendan on December 28, 2004, 07:51:23 PM
Clint.. I'm all ready, just give me a call and I'll be there!  8)
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: KC on December 28, 2004, 08:05:37 PM
The site Skunker is attempting to link to, by way of a post of his on a forum on the "War of the Worlds Movie" webpage, does not provide sources for the "news" it offers. When quoting material here or making statements about items in the news, please make sure you have a source that credits the originator of the material. For instance, at the bottom of the page on the IMDb that Matt is quoting, it says "Articles Copyright World Entertainment News Network." A link isn't enough if it only takes you to an unattributed quote.

Also, please provide direct links to the material, not a link to another post of yours somewhere else.

Here is the link Skunker posted on the other site, corrected so it will work. It appears to be the same item Matt quoted, but without any credit for the World Entertainment News Network.
http://www.contactmusic.com/new/xmlfeed.nsf/mndwebpages/eastwood.%20.only%20young%20actors%20need%20apply.
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: AKA23 on December 30, 2004, 11:53:29 AM
It's interesting to read that Eastwood will only be casting people 26 and younger in this new film. I guess that puts to rest the idea of Clint doing a film with Russell Crowe, since he's way over 26. That's too bad. I would have liked to have seen that. I just don't see that many good actors under the age of 26 working today, so I suppose that may mean that Clint is going to have to cast this film with largely unknowns. I wonder how that is going to turn out. 
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: movie_guy on January 01, 2005, 09:36:07 PM
Hmmm...  I hadn't read the book, but bought it a few days ago and have been reading it.  It's a pretty well-written book that is obviously WELL researched and tells the story of the flag raisers, almost exclusively (well, so far, anyway - I'm into it only a couple chapters).  It seems it is less of a war book and more of a story of some regular guys who ended up in that situation, on Mount Suribachi. It delves into these guys' lives when they were children, what it was like for them as young men, and how they ended up in the USMC, and follows all 6 of them through their lives - so it's like a biography of six guys and the circumstances that brought them together on Iwo Jima, and how they all ended up raising the flag in the photo with which people around the world are familiar:

http://www.goodolddogs.com/lwojimaflag3.JPG

Please see the page at http://www.goodolddogs.com/raisedflag2.html for more info on the events at Iwo Jima.

Anyhow, the book is definitely worth reading, and points out how REALLY young these guys were when they were there.  I do highly recommend it!

Hope everyone has a great 2005.
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: AKA23 on January 01, 2005, 10:59:12 PM
Thanks for your thoughts, movieguy. It doesn't surprise me that the book seems to focus more on human relationships than the war itself, as that has seemed to be a running theme in Eastwood's work. The real story centers around the characters in the film, and the setting and the details surrounding it are important and help to set the context within which these characters are developed, but they're in the periphery. Please come on back and update us when you've read more of the book, and when you've finished it.
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: movie_guy on January 02, 2005, 09:14:40 PM
AKA23:

Thanks - I'm now about halfway through the book, and I am really enjoying it so far, but am a bit puzzled by the third chapter, which outlines some of the historical aspects of pre-WWII and the first year or 2 of the war, and there are a few things Mr Bradley has written in that are SLIGHTLY on the controversial side of debatable.  There are a couple of faltering moments, where he refers to the song, "The Marine Corps Hymn," but it's actually "The Marines' Hymn," and some other more esoteric details that don't match up with several other things I know or have read - but it's still a good read.  One thing he seems to have omitted is the USMC at Wake Island - a really unmistakeably bad chapter for the US in the war, and I can't help but think (don't know, just speculating) that event was probably cited by USMC brass to the USN as a good reason for keeping ships close by when executing an amphibious assault (the Navy didn't want to risk losing more ships after the attack on Pearl Harbor, so they didn't want to evacuate the Marines on Wake).  As the book DOES point out, though, the Navy's biggest assets were ships, the Army's were tanks, the Army Air Corps's were airplanes, and the Marines' biggest asset was men.  I think by the time the battle for Iwo Jima came around, the Navy recognized Marine manpower to be as vital as any ship in their armada.

The book does go into very good detail how these six men ended up on top of Mt Suribachi, and it looks to me like it could end up being a story with a lot of hope - where average guys were trained to work together and rely on one another as a team, and these 6 men (one Navy Corpsman and 5 Marines) who raised the flag were pretty much EVERYMAN.  The difference is mostly that they were the guys in the photo, and that month of fighting had a lot of heroes we will never get to hear about.  But I feel these 6 men make a fine representation of what can be accomplished by a team of very different people who shed their differences and work together as a team that refuses to give up.

So, folks, this movie could end up being a story as much about YOU AND I and what WE can accomplish TOGETHER as it is a war movie.  If we all look at what makes us all the same instead of what makes us different; together, we will be strong.  Step one: Shave their heads and have them all wear green. :)  Ha, ha... But you get my drift.

I'll keep reading, and it looks like a fine surprise of a book - I was not expecting it to be like this at all.  And given Mr Eastwood's skill of drama and character study in movies, I can't think of a better subject for him.  I'm all the more convinced this could be one of his best works as a director, as long as he can stay true to the book.  I guess you could say that each guy was no more special than you or I...  And that's what makes it so compelling.  Imagine your order is to get up there and neutralize as meny enemy positions as possible; and it's HARD to climb, bullets zinging around you... but when you get up there, you're feeling tired and exhilarated, and here comes the flag - someone says to put it up, so you help your buddies who survived the climb. 

Oh, and they'll definitely need to keep the actors young.  If they choose the actors correctly, you'll see a little bit of someone you know in all of them, but you won't see yourself as any one of them.  That'll be part of what makes the movie special, if they can capture the real essence of the history - and that these were normal, everyday guys (didn't like war, didn't want to kill, etc., but knew their duty might require it) who just wanted to get through the battle; but when the time came early in the battle, they just wanted to see a big ol' American flag on top of that mountain.  They all had strengths, weaknesses, fears, and families back home who loved them. 

Semper Fi,
--R Graham
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Lin Sunderland on January 05, 2005, 01:33:29 AM
I found this interview with Clint in the UK Daily Express newspaper Friday December 31. 2004, in the SHOW BITZ column.

' Clint Eastwood has revealed details of the Second World War film that he is making his big project for 2005.'
"It's called Flags Of Our Fathers and is based on a wonderful book that was a bestseller a few yearsback," he tells me."It's a very ambitious project. I'm directing only - not acting in it - and we'll see if I have the stamina to get it done."
"We have a very good script, written by Paul Haggis, the same screenwriter who did my latest film, Million Dollar Baby."
That film, in which Eastwood played a boxing trainer and also directed, is now wowing the critics in America, bringing some of the best reviews of his career and might well earn him another Oscar.
But we shouldn't be surprised that there's life in the old dog yet, he says "I learn something new on each film rather than relying on old tricks that I used 30 years ago.  So until I slip into senility, I hope to continue making films."

 :)
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: movie_guy on January 05, 2005, 10:15:27 PM
Lin:

Thanks - and it does seem like great news!
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Doug on January 06, 2005, 06:10:34 AM
It's interesting to read that Eastwood will only be casting people 26 and younger in this new film. I guess that puts to rest the idea of Clint doing a film with Russell Crowe, since he's way over 26. That's too bad. I would have liked to have seen that. I just don't see that many good actors under the age of 26 working today, so I suppose that may mean that Clint is going to have to cast this film with largely unknowns. I wonder how that is going to turn out. 

I imagine it will turn out fine.  There are thousands of great actors waiting to be discovered, many of them 26 years of age and younger.  And thank goodness, Russell Crowe will have no involvement in this project --and hopefully none in any future projects of Clint Eastwood's! 
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Americanbeauty on January 06, 2005, 11:21:33 AM
And thank goodness, Russell Crowe will have no involvement in this project --and hopefully none in any future projects of Clint Eastwood's! 
Yeah I totally agree with you Doug ... Thank God ... fingers crossed, we're knocking on wood  ;)
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: skunker on January 08, 2005, 09:57:29 PM
When I attended college back in 2001, I remember hearing about a little obscure book called "Flags of our Fathers" and how it was generating a lot of positive press by the media and the critics. A few weeks later, I heard that Spielberg and Co. bought the movie rights...and the rest is history.

Having been an avid reader of history, especially WWII history, I finally picked up the book and gave it a whirl last summer. To be honest, I found it sub-par in the "battle descriptions", but this is not a war book. A battle book is what you get an Ambrose book for (Band of Brothers, Citizen Soldiers, etc). What made "Flags" Stand out from the rest was the amount of heart that James Bradley gave the characters. The picture of the flag-raising on Iwo Jima in 1945 may be the most famous photograph of the twentieth century. Its fame was immediate, and immediately hitched to the wagon of publicity. The president summoned home the soldiers pictured to promote the government's final bond drive of World War II. After some confusion, the men were identified, but only three of the six flag-raisers survived the Battle of Iwo Jima. The survivors became celebrities. Bradley, the son of corpsman John Bradley, probes the nature of heroism--its appearance versus the reality. The reality was what happened on Iwo Jima: an 84 percent casualty rate inflicted on the flag-raisers' unit, Company E of the Second Battalion of the Twenty-eighth Regiment of the Fifth Division of the U.S. Marine Corps.

I remember a line in the book about one of the characters and how young he was...how he promised his high school football team that if they won the district championship that year, he would join the military and make his school proud. Well, the football team went undefeated and the very next day he and his teammates proudly joined the Marine Corps. Try finding that pride in today's society.

Something I will never forget, though, was a passage that the book's author wrote about this character:

"But it is doubtful in his short life that Harlon ever kissed a girl."

To me, that shows how young these boys were....17...18...younger than what you'd find in Iraq.

It is true that the book is more about the lives of 6 ordinary men tasked with extraordinary circumstances. As a matter of fact, very little is mentioned about the "flags" and that's a good thing because despite all of the glory and publicity, they were not the first ones to hoist that tattered flag on Iwo Jima....another platoon did it. But that's not the essence of the book.  I will warn you....there will be many groups that will boycott the film because of this.

btw...www.flagsofourfathers.net
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: ben shockley on January 13, 2005, 02:56:58 AM
Jeffrey Wells:

Quote
Clint's Furlough

After directing films for no other studio but Warner Bros. for 28 years straight (i.e., except for Columbvia's Absolute Power), Clint Eastwood will briefly jump ship when he makes his next movie -- a time-shifting father-son World War II flick called Flags of Our Fathers -- for DreamWorks this summer.

The film will be based on James Bradley and Ron Powers' book of the same name, which was published in 2000. It recounts the sometimes tragic tales of the six Marines who raised the American flag on Mount Suribachi (*) on February 23, 1945, during the American forces' battle for Iwo Jima against Japanese occupiers.

In less than a month's time (from 2.19.45 to 3.10.45), more than 22,000 Japanese soldiers and 5,391 U.S. Marines were killed, with an additional 17,400 Americans suffering wounds.

One of the six flag-raisers was Bradley's father John, a Navy corpsman who later received the Navy Cross for bravery under fire. The senior Bradley, who died in 1994, never told his family about his heroism, and only after his death did James Bradley begin to piece together the facts.
 
As I understand it, the film will portray the younger Bradley's investigation of his dad's experience in a narrative, non-documentary, actors-speaking-lines fashion, as well as the back-stories of the other five flag-raisers, presumably with the use of frequent flashbacks and whatnot.

Eastwood couldn't be hotter right now with the nominations and coming Oscar noms for Million Dollar Baby, etc., and it does seem as if directing a film without Warner Bros. funding for the first time in nearly three decades would be a milestone of some kind. But making Flags of Our Fathers for DreamWorks doesn't mean he's pulling up stakes.

That would be a significant story, but a guy who's close to the situation is saying "nope."

Eastwood is not acting, he says, on an alleged long-simmering frustration with Warner Bros. execs, including president Alan Horn, over their purported lack of enthusiasm for his making Mystic River and Million Dollar Baby ...although WB execs were naturally delighted with both after they caught on.

Eastwood's frustration was very real last spring when the Million Dollar Baby negotations were hanging in the balance and Warner Bros. execs were exuding, I've heard, half-hearted enthusiasm over the boxing film.

Nor is Eastwood venting, I'm told, over Warner Bros.' reported lack of faith in both Baby and the earlier Mystic River as indicated by the Burbank-based studio having allegedly sold off foreign rights to both films at a lower price than their U.S. receptions would indicate.

That's all water under the bridge, my guy tells me. Relations between Eastwood and Horn these days are pleasant and amicable, he says.

Eastwood, I'm told, will simply direct the Iwo Jima film, working from a script that was completed last August or thereabouts by Million Dollar Baby screenwriter Paul Haggis. He'll then return to Warner Bros. after Fathers is wrapped and promoted to make another Haggis-scripted film, the details about which my source was unwilling to confide.

The DreamWorks deal, which had its first stirrings when DreamWorks partner Steven Spielberg, who'd worked with Eastwood on The Bridges of Madison County in '95, sent the "Flags of Our Fathers" book to Eastwood last year, with urgings that he consider directing a film version.

Eastwood read it, liked it and approached Haggis to adapt it in January '04. The intention to shoot the film for DreamWorks was more or less decided upon, I'm told, before the Million Dollar Baby animus happened last spring.

Although a DreamWorks spokesperson told me yesterday that nothing is really in place on the Fathers project, the closely-involved guy says it'll definitely film this summer, probably on Iwo Jima itself and perhaps also on one of the Hawaiian islands (i.e., somewhere where there are black-sand beaches).

No Fathers casting or anything else is happening just yet. Eastwood and DreamWorks are "going over budget issues" right now.

(*) The flag-raising by the six G.I.'s was actually the second that happened atop Mt. Suribachi on 2.23.45. Another U.S. flag was raised around 10 a.m. by five G.I.'s, but the event was repeated for p.r. purposes a few hours later with a second flag (on top of a 100-pound pole) and photographers capturing it for posterity.

Explanation: Clint's Absolute Power ('97) was initially distributed by Columbia, although Warner Bros. currently owns the title due its purchase of Castle Rock...even though the 35mm prints still open with the Columbia logo.

www.hollywood-elsewhere.com

Quote
...He'll then return to Warner Bros. after Fathers is wrapped and promoted to make another Haggis-scripted film, the details about which my source was unwilling to confide...

Just a rumor, but interesting. Another Paul Haggis-scripted film...
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: movie_guy on January 15, 2005, 01:05:28 AM
Hey, Ben and everyone else...

First, thanks for sharing that bit of info - it's interesting!

I finished reading Flags of Our Fathers, and must say that if you haven't read it - DO.  As a former Marine and Pacific War history buff, there were about five or so MINOR details that were MINOR distractions (technical or editing errors) to me, but other than that, the book is flawless.

The story is absolutely the most poignant thing I think I've ever known, and it really doesn't "polish the image" or anything at all.  In fact, there were some parts of it that I thought were almost bitter toward the USMC and the US government, but such is life for a Marine.  Sometimes you just get tired of stuff and cop a little attitude.  So I see it was much the same, 40 years before I was in (I guess the traditions keep it that way!).

Anyway, DO read it.  To correct a couple things in the presented quote, I would like to point out these issues:
Although a DreamWorks spokesperson told me yesterday that nothing is really in place on the Fathers project, the closely-involved guy says it'll definitely film this summer, probably on Iwo Jima itself and perhaps also on one of the Hawaiian islands (i.e., somewhere where there are black-sand beaches).

An important part of the story is where they all came together, when they trained in Hawaii before they went to Iwo Jima.  This would be an important part of the story, as told by the author.  No love scenes, no room for Jennifer Anniston in the movie - but it is an important point where they all cross paths for the first time.  My guess is that the filming on Hawaii will all be done for that part of it, and the Iwo filming would be all done on Iwo - which is a Japanese military base island today, and regular civilians do not get to go there.  As an aside, after the month of fierce fighting, there were so many dead bodies, the US military decided they needed to control disease by killing all the bugs, so they covered it well with DDT, and today, there are STILL almost no bugs there; it's pretty barren.

(*) The flag-raising by the six G.I.'s was actually the second that happened atop Mt. Suribachi on 2.23.45. Another U.S. flag was raised around 10 a.m. by five G.I.'s, but the event was repeated for p.r. purposes a few hours later with a second flag (on top of a 100-pound pole) and photographers capturing it for posterity.
Actually, the first flag was THE flag - the battalion flag.  In the book, (I think it was) Admiral Spruance (maybe Halsey?) saw the flag at 10 AM and said he wanted that flag, so he ordered it brought back to him, and another flag in its place.  The first flag raising was when a few Marines went up Suribachi, throwing grenades into the caves, shooting attackers, etc.  The photographer was on a landing craft and missed that event.  The second flag was when Rene Gagnon brought a flag that had been salvaged from a ship at Pearl Harbor right after 12/7/41, and was being kept for posterity.  Rene Gagnon was ordered to make sure that flag went up and to bring back the other flag, so another group went up Suribachi, virtually unopposed.  When they got up there, there was no pole (the first flag was put up on a piece of pipe), so the guys looked for a larger pole, and found a MUCH larger piece of pipe - and it weighed about 100 lbs.  The guys fashioned a cord on there, and they were timed to raise the second flag as the first flag was lowered, and the photographers were there when it happened - and almost missed it.  It was NOT staged at all.  The weight of the pole, the size of the larger flag in the high winds, made it so the few guys pushing up the flag needed a little help, and a couple guys jumped in to help stand it up quickly and straight.

I have left out a LOT of details, but that was the deal - it was DEFINITELY NOT staged, and Mr Bradley absolutely debunks the claims that Rosenthal staged the shot. 

And after reading this bit of news, and seeing the other tidbits of info, and reading the book, I am absolutely convinced that this movie will be simply superb.  People will cry when they see it and feel like I did after I read it; I feel like I knew these guys.  And what's more, they WERE the guys next door - our friends, brothers, fathers, and sons.

And toward the end of the book, Bradley's daughter wrote a letter to his father that is very touching.  But you GOTTA read the book for it to make full sense of it.

Oh - and I finished the book on the way back home from California (Ironically, John Wayne Airport), and sat across the aisle from a very nice woman about my age, whose son-in-law was injured in Iraq and having some troubles sleeping.  Although my copy of the book was coming out of its binding, I offered it as a gift that she might read and share with her daughter.  They will most definitely be able to identify with the book much more than I - that's the kind of story it is.

Best wishes to all,
--RG
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: movie_guy on January 17, 2005, 05:56:58 PM
For those who are curious about how Iwo looks today...

http://www.okinawa.usmc.mil/Public%20Affairs%20Info/Image%20Archive/020111-wing.html

http://www.okinawa.usmc.mil/Public%20Affairs%20Info/Image%20Archive/020315-air.html

http://www.okinawa.usmc.mil/Public%20Affairs%20Info/Image%20Archive/020322-iwo.html

I'm sure there is a lot of unexploded munitions there, so I hope the crew will be safe! 

RG
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: skunker on January 19, 2005, 12:06:35 PM
I don't think it's a question of whether it was staged or not (I agree, it was not staged), but that everyone associates the 2nd flag raising as the ONLY flag raising, when it fact, it was the 2nd one to be raised. Also, the people who rose the first flag came under intense enemy fire doing so.

Regardless, they were all heroes in my book.
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: AKA23 on January 20, 2005, 01:12:35 PM
It's very nice of you to have given the lady your book on the plane. I've enjoyed your comments, and please do feel free to come on back here and comment again. 
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: movie_guy on January 22, 2005, 09:36:52 PM
I don't think it's a question of whether it was staged or not (I agree, it was not staged), but that everyone associates the 2nd flag raising as the ONLY flag raising, when it fact, it was the 2nd one to be raised. Also, the people who rose the first flag came under intense enemy fire doing so.

Regardless, they were all heroes in my book.

Yes, indeed!  I am absolutely 100% in agreement with you!  The first flag up was a definite fight to the top which we almost never get to hear about.  This book sure does tell that story, too.  Really, I also know the guys who raised the flags (both flags) were doing what they needed to do that day - as were all the other Marines there at the battle.

When you read the book, you get to know some of the other guys who didn't raise the flags.  One Marine was a particularly unusual young man, and his off-beat thinking was one thing that seemed to stick with anyone who remembered him.  It seems this youg man from Montana was a really big guy, and he didn't brush his teeth because he thought it would wear his teeth down.  His "thinking outside the box" was something that helped save a number of other Marines.  And, I might add, made me really think about some of the people I know who think a little differently, and confirmed that it may be best to let them do JUST THAT...  Who knows?  It could save some lives.

But, yes...  Most Americans think there was only one flag that went up that day.  In fact, in 1945, most people thought so, too.  I don't begrudge anyone for thinking so - it's easy to be misled by the "World's Most Printed Photo" and conclude that was what happened.  But this book describes what really happened in as accurate of a story as I could have ever hoped, and I REALLY hope the movie shows all of this.

Thanks,
RG
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: movie_guy on January 22, 2005, 09:58:32 PM
It's very nice of you to have given the lady your book on the plane. I've enjoyed your comments, and please do feel free to come on back here and comment again. 

AKA:

Thanks - I think she really needed the book, right then; it seemed a bit more urgent than just recommending it, and she started reading it immediately.  I'm glad you've enjoyed the comments - and I do hope you'll get the book and enjoy it as much as I did!  I normally don't read books more than once, but this one was so good (in an unusual, unexpected way) that I am sure I will buy a few copies and share them - and I'll read it again for myself.  It's tough to set aside much time to read a book these days, but this one is definitely worth the time and money.  At about $15, it will give you hours of enjoyment, at a dollar-to-hour-ratio that no movie could ever give. 

Plus, after the movie, you'll also be able to sound like one of those snobs who always says, "Bah, the book was better..."  JUST KIDDING!!!!   ;)

Seriously...  A story this great, in book form - it's really THAT good.  And, the fact that Mr Eastwood is on the case, I am really confident the movie will do the story justice.  Better than the book?  I'd really doubt it, as a book can afford to print details that would cost millions to simulate on film.  Our imaginations can really make up a lot of the difference in a book.  But the movie will almost certainly be one of my favorites. 

Best wishes,
RG
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Brendan on January 23, 2005, 11:03:59 PM
According to Variety (http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117916729?categoryid=1019&cs=1&query=clint+and+eastwood&display=clint+eastwood) Warners is considering co-financing Flags of Our Fathers with DreamWorks.
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: gimpy on January 25, 2005, 01:18:27 AM
BIG BIG PROPS to Brendan. Always first to find out, that is great info right there.
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Grizzled on February 21, 2005, 12:40:58 PM
Last Saturday was the 60th anniversary of the start of the battle for Iwo Jima. As 'Flags of our Fathers' gears up I thought you might be interested in this article from The Wall Street Journal:

Quote
  Iwo Jima
The famous battle offers lessons for us 60 years later.

BY ARTHUR HERMAN
Saturday, February 19, 2005 12:01 a.m. EST

Sixty years ago today, more than 110,000 Americans and 880 ships began their assault on a small volcanic island in the Pacific, in the climactic battle of the last year of World War II. For the next 36 days Iwo Jima would become the most populous 7 1/2 square miles on the planet, as U.S. Marines and Japanese soldiers fought a battle that would test American resolve even more than D-Day or the Battle of the Bulge had, and that still symbolizes a free society's willingness to make the sacrifice necessary to prevail over evil--a sacrifice as relevant today as it was 60 years ago.

The attack on Iwo Jima capped a two-year island-hopping campaign that was as controversial with politicians and the press as any Rumsfeld strategy. Each amphibious assault had been bloodier than the last: at Tarawa, where 3,000 ill-prepared Marines fell taking an island of just three square miles; at Saipan, where Army troops performed so poorly two of their generals had to be fired; and Peleliu, where it took 10 weeks of fighting in 115-degree heat to root out the last Japanese defenders, at the cost of 6,000 soldiers and Marines.

Iwo Jima would be the first island of the Japanese homeland to be attacked. The Japanese had put in miles of tunnels and bunkers, with 361 artillery pieces, 65 heavy mortars, 33 large naval guns, and 21,000 defenders determined to fight to the death. Their motto was, "kill 10 of the enemy before dying." American commanders expected 40% casualties on the first assault. "We have taken such losses before," remarked the Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Holland M. Smith, "and if we have to, we can do it again."

Even before the attack, the Navy's bombardment of Iwo Jima cost more ships and men than it lost on D-Day, without making a significant dent in the Japanese defenses. Then, beginning at 9 a.m. on the 19th, Marines loaded down with 70 to 100 pounds of equipment each hit the beach, and immediately sank into the thick volcanic ash. They found themselves on a barren moonscape stripped of any cover or vegetation, where Japanese artillery could pound them with unrelenting fury. Scores of wounded Marines helplessly waiting to be evacuated off the beach were killed "with the greatest possible violence," as veteran war reporter Robert Sherrod put it. Shells tore bodies in half and scattered arms and legs in all directions, while so much underground steam rose from the churned up soil the survivors broke up C-ration crates to sit on in order to keep from being scalded. Some 2,300 Marines were killed or wounded in the first 18 hours. It was, Sherrod said, "a nightmare in hell."

And overlooking it all, rising 556 feet above the carnage, stood Mount Suribachi, where the Japanese could direct their fire along the entire beach. Taking Suribachi became the key to victory. It took four days of bloody fighting to reach the summit, and when Marines did, they planted an American flag. When it was replaced with a larger one, photographer Joe Rosenthal recorded the scene--the most famous photograph of World War II and the most enduring symbol of a modern democracy at war.

Yet, in the end, a symbol of what? Certainly not victory. The capture of Suribachi only marked the beginning of the battle for Iwo Jima, which dragged on for another month and cost nearly 26,000 men--all for an island whose future as a major air base never materialized. Forty men were in the platoon which raised the flag on Suribachi. Only four would survive the battle unhurt. Their company, E Company, Second Battalion, 28th Regiment, Fifth Marine Division, would suffer 75% casualties. Of the seven officers who led it into battle, only one was left when it was over.

But the Marines pushed on. Over the next agonizing weeks, they took the rest of the island yard by yard, bunker by bunker, cave by cave. They fought through places with names like "Bloody Gorge" and "The Meat Grinder." They learned to take no prisoners in fighting a skilled and fanatical enemy who gave no quarter and expected none. Twenty out of every 21 Japanese defenders would die where they stood. One in three Marines on Iwo Jima would either be killed or wounded, including 19 of 24 battalion commanders. Twenty-seven Marines and naval medical corpsmen would win Medals of Honor--more than in any other battle in history--and 13 of them posthumously. As Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, commander in chief of the U.S. Pacific Command, said, "Among the Americans who served on Iwo Island, uncommon valor was a common virtue."

Yet even this valor and sacrifice is not the full story of what Iwo Jima means, or what Rosenthal's immortal photograph truly symbolizes. The lesson of Iwo Jima is in fact an ancient one, going back to Machiavelli: that sometimes free societies must be as tough and unrelenting as their enemies. Totalitarians test their opponents by generating extreme conditions of brutality and violence; in those conditions--in the streets and beheadings of Fallujah or on the beach and in the bunkers of Iwo Jima--they believe weak democratic nerves will crack. This in turn demonstrates their moral superiority: that by giving up their own decency and humanity they have become stronger than those who have not.

Free societies can afford only one response. There were no complicated legal issues or questions of "moral equivalence" on Iwo Jima: It was kill or be killed. That remains the nature of war even for democratic societies. The real question is, who outlasts whom. In 1945 on Iwo Jima, it was the Americans, as the monument at Arlington Cemetery, based on Rosenthal's photograph, proudly attests. In the jungles of Vietnam and Cambodia in the 1970s, it was the totalitarians--with terrible consequences.

Today, some in this country think the totalitarians may still win in Iraq and elsewhere. A few even hope so. Only one thing is certain: As long as Americans cherish the memory of those who served at Iwo Jima, and grasp the crucial lesson they offer all free societies, the totalitarians will never win.

Mr. Herman, a historian, is the author, most recently, of "To Rule the Waves: How the British Navy Shaped the Modern World" (HarperCollins, 2004).

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110006317
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: The Schofield Kid on March 01, 2005, 04:00:50 PM
Anybody got any updates on this project? O0
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Walt on March 01, 2005, 04:15:01 PM
Other than the fact Clint mentioned it as his next film at the Oscar press conference ........... 'fraid not .
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Cindy on March 01, 2005, 05:26:12 PM
A film that has Clint Eastwood in it is always....always more enjoyable!!!
"Mystic River", as great as it was, didn't have Clint in it   :( so it is not a film I will be seeing again any time soon. "MDB"had our guy in it so this is one to see over and over along with all the rest!!!
 O0
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: william on March 01, 2005, 06:59:15 PM
 :)Thanks aka, this is the story I have been waiting for. Not only did the duke do a great job on the sands of iowa jima, but now I can add Clints contribution of this war to my dvd collection 8)
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Brendan on June 03, 2005, 01:30:14 AM
Found this nice little piece of news:

http://www.wishtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=3404383&nav=0Ra7aPmM (http://www.wishtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=3404383&nav=0Ra7aPmM)

Quote
World War II Ship Might Go On Loan To Hollywood For Spielberg-Eastwood Film

(Evansville)  --   A World War II ship could debut in a Hollywood movie directed by Steven Spielberg and Clint Eastwood before finding its new home in southern Indiana.

Warner Brothers has filed a letter of intent to use the U.S.S. LST 325 in the filming of "Flags of Our Fathers," a movie that would be based on the James Bradley book about the famous photograph showing the raising of the American flag on Iwo Jima.

The August and September filming dates would delay the ship's arrival at its new home port at Marina Pointe. Evansville's mayor says the delay would not hurt area tourism as long as the ship was docked by October First. That's when the first LST-related convention was scheduled in the city.

The LST is identical to vessels built at the Evansville Shipyard from 1942 to 1945.
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Lilly on June 04, 2005, 09:35:32 AM
 8)  Thanks, Brendan.  That's a nice snippet.

I found the Official USS LST 325 Memorial site (http://www.lstmemorial.org). 

LST stands for Landing Ship, Tank.  It seems that during World War II, LST 325 was not used in the Pacific theatre, but in Europe.

Quote
LST-325 was part of Force "B", the back-up force for the troops going ashore at Omaha Beach on 6 June. On 7 June they anchored off Omaha Beach and unloaded the men and vehicles onto DUKW's and LCM's.

Quote
The day before the ship was to sail to the Pacific the news came that Japan had surrendered and the war was finally over.

But the same class of ship was used in landings in the Pacific, so that should work nicely for the movie.


Here she is in 1944 on a pre- D-Day exercise in England.

(http://www.lstmemorial.org/history/17d.jpg)

Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Meridico on June 04, 2005, 02:54:31 PM
I am very glad to hear about this film.  I read both of Bradley's books, Flags of our Fathers, and Flyboys.  I highly recommend both books to those who have not read them.  I am a History buff, and World War II is a point in time that I read about often.  Clint Eastwood should at the least have a support role, or merely a cameo in the film.  That seems most suitable for such a project, and would liven my excitement over it that much more.
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Lilly on June 04, 2005, 05:59:28 PM
Eastwood should at the least have a support role, or merely a cameo in the film.

Hi Meridico.  Eastwood is on record as saying that he doesn't want to do cameos.

KC posted in the Director cameos thread HERE (http://www.clinteastwood.org/forums/index.php?topic=2063.msg28368#msg28368) an Eastwood quote from the Boston Globe, November 7th 2002.
Quote
Don't look for Eastwood in this movie [ Mystic River ]. He's not into cameo roles. "None of that Alfred Hitchcock stuff for me," he says, smiling.
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Lilly on June 04, 2005, 06:34:39 PM
It seems that during World War II, LST 325 was not used in the Pacific theatre, but in Europe.

But the same class of ship was used in landings in the Pacific, so that should work nicely for the movie.

It's a small detail to those of us that weren't involved, but I wonder whether the production design people on Flags of our Fathers (will it be Henry Bumstead?) will temporarily paint over the ship's number 325 with the number of a ship that was present at Iwo Jima in 1945.

According to THIS (http://www.thehistorynet.com/wwii/bliwojimaheroes/) Historynet.com article, LST-779 landed at Iwo Jima, and was the ship from which a marine took the flag that was famously raised on Mount Suribachi.

(http://www.historynet.com/iwojima.jpg)
Quote
The second American flag flies triumphantly over Iwo Jima. The first flag to be raised on Mount Suribachi was considered too small to be recognized at a distance, and a larger banner was obtained from LST-779.

You can see the LSTs lined up on the beach.
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: KC on June 04, 2005, 07:07:55 PM
Hi Meridico.  Eastwood is on record as saying that he doesn't want to do cameos.

KC posted in the Director cameos thread HERE (http://www.clinteastwood.org/forums/index.php?topic=2063.msg28368#msg28368) an Eastwood quote from the Boston Globe, November 7th 2002.
He IS into cameos for his family members, though, so look for Dina or a child or two in bit parts.  :)
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Lilly on June 05, 2005, 04:48:35 PM
Good point KC. O0
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: movie_guy on June 07, 2005, 06:32:52 PM
Did anyone see these websites?

http://www.flagsofourfathers.net/
http://www.spielbergfilms.com/flagsfathersnews.html
http://www.jamesbradley.com/flagsmovie.cfm

Maybe it's not NEWS to you all (if it's OLD news, wouldn't that actually be OLDS?  I digress), but thought I'd share in case someone missed the links.
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: KC on June 07, 2005, 06:51:58 PM
I hadn't seen them. Thanks, movie_guy!
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Lilly on June 07, 2005, 07:46:10 PM
Thank you movie_guy!  That is great stuff. O0  I am feeling very excited about this film now.  I'm imagining...the realism of Band of Brothers but with the Eastwood genius, especially with dark material, and a powerful story with potential for sweeping scenes, about a major world event with so much resonance even today.

Of course I dunno how it'll be tackled, but imagine the noir of Million Dollar Baby put into a war film.  8)


http://www.jamesbradley.com/flagsmovie.cfm
Quote
Now we were doubly blessed. Clint Eastwood! The Oscar winner--Best Film and Best Director—for his Million Dollar Baby. I personally felt there was also a backstory that united these projects. With Flags of our Fathers I endured 27 rejections by publishers over a period of two years. And Mr. Eastwood’s Million Dollar Baby got the thumbs down from all of Hollywood until he eventually got it launched.

Some things are just meant to be.  8)  (How in the hell did 27 publishers reject the book! :o)

Seems that Eastwood is taking on John Wayne's territory again (Sands of Iwo Jima) and will no doubt be superior. ;)

Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Lilly on June 07, 2005, 09:08:41 PM
http://www.flagsofourfathers.net/
Quote
Currently, Eastwood and his film crew plan to start shooting around August or September of 2005 in Iceland and parts of New Zealand.

From VisitReykjavik.is on 19th May 2005
LINK (http://www.visitreykjavik.is/displayer.asp?cat_id=17&module_id=220&element_id=1643)
Quote
Representatives of Clint Eastwood's corporation, Malpaso Productions have been in Iceland lately to look for possible filming areas for a big movie production, based on the book Flags of our Fathers. Black sand is the landscape they are looking for and three places have mainly been looked at; Sandvik in Reykjanes, Arnarfell in Krysuvik, and Thorlakshofn.
 
Soon it will be decided if Iceland or New Zealand will be selected as a shooting place, since it is important to use the summer for filming. Key scenes of the film will be shot in Iceland if it will be chosen, such as the invasion to Iwo Jima. The biggest scenes would involve around 700 people.

I wonder if they'll shoot anything in Japan at all?  Perhaps some wider shots and views of Suribachi. 

There doesn't seem to be much news about the "twin" film from the Japanese perspective.  Perhaps more of that would be done in Japan, and requires more arranging.  I wonder if they intend to shoot that after the first film, as a follow-up?

An Icelander on the IMDB message board for this film (LINK (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0418689/board/nest/19347971))seems to think that of the three locations mentioned, Krísuvík is the one that's been chosen.  That also seemed to be the name prominent in some Icelandic articles online, but I can't read them.  (KC, do you do Icelandic?) 

Anyway, as the quote above says, all the locations have black sand, which is what you get at Iwo Jima.  Krísuvík is in southwest Iceland, and has an extensive volcanic system.

(http://www.volcano.si.edu/images/full/075050.jpg)

Check out all that lava!  That's why the sand is black.

It supports the famous Blue Lagoon that you may have heard of or visited.

(http://www.robbroek.nl/ijsland/thumbnails/002.jpg)

A great place for Clint to be on location!  He'll HAVE to take a dip in the hot, healing lagoonal waters!

I wonder if they are taking the ship LST-325 to Iceland (!) or using it in the US.  And up to 700 people in the biggest scenes!  Quite a change from Million Dollar Baby.  Clint can only surpass himself by getting even more ambitious...great to see him diversifying (yet again) like this.

Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Lilly on June 08, 2005, 09:07:30 AM
This is from last February, when the Iwo Jima 60th anniversary commemorations were taking place, but I can't see a similar story on here, and there are a couple of nice quotes.

From The Independent, San Francisco Edition. 
http://sfindependent.com/article/index.cfm/i/022405n_vets

I've bolded the Eastwood-related bits.

Quote
Actor honors actions of Iwo Jima vets
Eastwood will film movie based on flag raising.
By Jo Stanley | Staff Writer

An emotional commemoration of the battle for Iwo Jima drew a low-key appearance by actor-filmmaker Clint Eastwood, whose upcoming movie will re-enact the story of the six men who famously raised the American flag there in the midst of fierce fighting 60 years ago.

"Flags of our Fathers," written by the son of one of those six, has become a best seller. Retired Lt. Gen. Lawrence Snowden told a large gathering at the Marines' Memorial Club on Wednesday that each of the aging survivors of that pivotal battle, which eventually gave the United States the air base it had sought near Japan in 1945, has dramatic stories that should be told.

"I tell them, don't be bashful," he said.

Eastwood, who appeared without the usual Hollywood retinue of handlers and hangers-on, mingled casually among the veterans during breaks. He said he was hoping to get in touch with some of the soldiers mentioned in the book that James Bradley wrote about his father, naval medical corpsman John Bradley, and his companions.

The six young men who struggled to plant the flagpole on the island's highest point were memorialized by an Associated Press photographer, but three of them died not long afterward.

Nearly all the 20,000-plus Japanese soldiers who tried to defend the outpost died there, along with some 6,000 Americans.

Snowden was 23 when he headed a rifle company of even younger Marines that lost half its members to death or injury. He still vividly remembers how it felt to inch forward on the beach while being fired on from heavily armored tunnels.

"They had a turkey shoot the first four or five days," Snowden said. "It was just an awful, awful experience to go through."

He said he had confidence that Eastwood, with whom he chatted several times at the gathering, would be faithful to the book.

Snowden, who went on to serve as a chief of staff for the military in Japan after World War II, said he's skipped most of the cinematic versions of wartime.

"My friends continually expect me to see every war movie on the screen, but I don't go," he said. "I've seen it all. I don't need to see it again."

Eastwood wasn't sure when his film would begin shooting, but he's done a lot of research already.

"I'm trying to get a feel for all these people," he said. "I think it's important for the world to know what they did."


Certainly sounds like Eastwood is very concerned with being respectful and accurate.

(I checked out the Marines' Memorial Club site.  There's no mention of Clint, but transcript and video of Lt Gen. Snowden's speech that he attended are HERE (http://www.marineclub.com/Events/SpeechTranscripts/Transcripts.asp?speech=GenSnowdenSpeech).)
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Americanbeauty on June 08, 2005, 01:56:17 PM
Thanks for the links, movie_guy!

Nice article Lilly  O0
Nice to see he feels so concerned about what really happened. So many filmmakers today would just make their movie and that would be it

I didn't know they would shoot in Iceland, great place anyway  O0

Can't wait to see the movie  :)

I'm imagining...the realism of Band of Brothers but with the Eastwood genius, especially with dark material, and a powerful story with potential for sweeping scenes, about a major world event with so much resonance even today.

Of course I dunno how it'll be tackled, but imagine the noir of Million Dollar Baby put into a war film. 8)
8) Yes, Band Of Brothers is also what came to mind when I first heard Spielberg and Eastwood were going to make a movie about Iwo Jima.

Sounds great to me ...

Spielberg and Eastwood ... the perfect association  8)
I think this movie will rock -just a hunch  ;)
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Grizzled on June 08, 2005, 02:30:36 PM
I wonder how much of the movie will be taken up by the scenes on Iwo Jima? Is there a possibility that people anticipating a Private Ryan-style bloodbath may end up disappointed?
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Lilly on June 08, 2005, 04:09:22 PM
I wonder how much of the movie will be taken up by the scenes on Iwo Jima? Is there a possibility that people anticipating a Private Ryan-style bloodbath may end up disappointed?

I haven't read the book (and have now decided not to until I've seen the movie, but then I definitely will), but isn't a lot of the story about the son's discovery of his father's deeds?  (To think he never told anyone he was in the famous photo!)

Perhaps that will be the framing story, a bit like The Bridges of Madiosn County in a way; the next generation learning their parent's unspoken past.

I've got no idea how much battle scenes will be in the film, but I personally wouldn't be disappointed if this wasn't a pure war film with a "bloodbath".  Surely Eastwood will go his own way in his own style, so I don't think we should expect this to be like anything, Saving Private Ryan included.  (I can't bear that movie anyway - I wouldn't expect Eastwood to be so over-the-top with the sentimentality, but that's just my view.)

The thing is, Iwo Jima was a bloodbath, so if Eastwood is intending this to be a realistic portrayal of that slice of war (which the various news articles suggest is so), there is bound to be some hard battle footage.  But I wouldn't be surprised if he also delves into the quiet times of a soldier's experience too, and the dark emotions that he is so adept at portraying.

Just my 2 cents. :)  Perhaps someone who has actually read the book can make some more informed comments.
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: movie_guy on June 08, 2005, 10:51:55 PM
I haven't read the book (and have now decided not to until I've seen the movie, but then I definitely will), but isn't a lot of the story about the son's discovery of his father's deeds?  ...

I've got no idea how much battle scenes will be in the film, but I personally wouldn't be disappointed if this wasn't a pure war film with a "bloodbath". 

You SHOULD read the book!  It will remove ALL doubt.  Imagine a story that is about LIFE; several people from VERY diverse backgrounds, whose lives just HAPPEN to intersect on Iwo Jima - and what happened to each of them during and after the battle.  You'll also get to know a few of the guys who didn't raise the flag.

It's about as amazing of a story as you'll ever read, but I did see a COUPLE of MINOR details that were a little bit wrong (I can be a nit-picker, but don't want to say it's bad at all), but it's probably one of the most worthwhile stories I have ever read, PERIOD.  You will agree it's not about death, blood and entrails, severed stumps, and so on.  I felt like Windtalkers was about as "stumpy" as they could do, but Flags - the book - is NOTHING like that, and I am quite sure that Spielberg and Eastwood are not about that kind of movie-making.

So rest your head.  It's a GREAT book, and worth reading more than once (this, coming from a guy who reads most books only about halfway because they get tiresome).  I gave my copy away on a plane trip, but fully intend to buy another copy.  And I'll bet I'll give that one away, too!  It's that FINE of a STORY - because Bradley truly caught the essence of these guys' lives without going on and on about their deaths.  Some gory stuff (as can be understood), but when one of the guys dies, you won't think "Ohhh, GROSS!" - you'll think, "Oh, NO! I feel like I KNEW him! What a tragedy!"

Damn emotional, and if Clint captures all of that, he'll be doing a FIRST!  An accurate historical battle where we all get to know a bit of the real people, and we will FEEL a sense of LOSS for the guys and a sense of triumph for the human spirit to go through it and see the many ways we can all deal with the horrors.  Very poignant with our boys in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other places these days. 

The movie will most likely touch a chord in people like the book does, and bring us all a little closer.  You won't see these guys as joining the military because they were dummies with no prospects for anything better, but guys who felt a sense of OBLIGATION - something I don't think draft dodgers would ever comprehend unless they read the book.  Does that make sense?

==========================

And I would think that shooting in Iceland would be easier because I'm SURE there are a LOT of VERY unstable unexploded munitions on Iwo today - FAR too dangerous for a film crew.  And last I read, Iwo has almost no living creatures on it these days - NO BUGS AT ALL.  But they were there at the start of the battle, so they'd need to capture that if possible.

Semper Fi,
--Rob
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: movie_guy on June 08, 2005, 10:58:21 PM
I wonder how much of the movie will be taken up by the scenes on Iwo Jima? Is there a possibility that people anticipating a Private Ryan-style bloodbath may end up disappointed?

Hmmm...  Good question!  Some people DO like the Freddy Kruger slasher-flick stuff, but the book is nothing like that.  So I would have to say that anyone looking forward to seeing all the pools of blood and tattered stumps will likely be very disappointed.  The STORY won't require a blood-and-gore SFX crew to make this story like the book, but the acting will need to be REALLY right. 

Have you read the book?

Semper Fi,
--Rob
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Lin Sunderland on June 09, 2005, 02:01:30 AM
Both your posts Lilly and movie_guy, have really grabbed my interest and I plan to read the book first.  That is something I don't normally do.  I like to see the movie get the places and people in my mind then read the book, to see how well it has been interpreted by either the scriptwriters or by the director.  I don't do this with every movie of a book, of course,  but the ones that hold my interests and leave me wondering a little.
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Grizzled on June 09, 2005, 06:52:58 AM
Hey Lilly,

Thanks for the reply and I agree with your comments (well, apart from the jab at 'Ryan', a movie I'm rather fond of). ;) I think my original question was motivated by messageboard remarks I've read elsewhere from people eagerly anticipating another Saving Private Ryan. Yes, I've read enough about the history of Iwo Jima to know what a horrific, bloody experience it was for those who were there (I've also read Eugene Sledge's devastating 'With The Old Breed', a first hand account of the Marines in the battle for Pelelieu and Okinawa) but from what little I know of 'Flags Of Our Fathers' the emphasis appears to be on the stories of the flag raisers before and after the war. So I wouldn't be surprised if Flags ended up as a two and a half hour character piece with just 10 minutes of war footage in it.

And movie_guy, no - I haven't read the book although, like Lin, I think I will. Normally, if a movie is coming out that I'm looking forward to and it's a book adaptation I tend to stay away from the book until I've seen the movie but in this case I think I'll make an exception. Of course no one knows what changes Paul Haggis has made in adapting the book for the screen although I can't think of a better screenwriter to adapt the book, that's for sure.
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: movie_guy on June 09, 2005, 09:06:48 PM
Lin, Griz, and everyone else:

You will really feel like this book is very different from the "typical" war book.  I like Saving Private Ryan, thought The Thin Red Line was good (VERY different type of movie!) but sort of hard to sink in with, and the Band of Brothers series.  But this book is still just a bit different, and I am really looking forward to seeing a good movie adaptation JUST THE WAY IT IS.

So you can see my thoughts on war movies and see if your tastes are similar, I offer some thoughts (NOT trying to go O/T):  I was NOT a fan of Windtalkers, which was OKAY, but was more about guys getting "blowed up" and didn't really do justice to the TRUE story of the Navajo Code Talkers - not to mention it was chock-full of historical and technical inaccuracies.  Oh, and Nicholas Cage makes for a pretty inconvincing Marine Sergeant (if I ever had a sergeant who acted like him, I would have thought he was a real candy-ass - OOPS! Did I just say that?).  The original Sands of Iwo Jima was a stirring propaganda flick, but not something I block off a couple hours on the weekend to watch.  The DI with Darren McGavin was pretty entertaining for a movie of its type.  An Officer and a Gentleman was chick-flick all the way through, but Lou Gossett REALLY did GREAT.  For portraying a Marine, R. Lee Ermey is GREAT (he ought to play Chesty Puller).

Well, enough of my rambling.  If you liked the same movies I did, odds are good you'll like the book.  If you didn't and would rather watch a Mel Gibson movie or The Birdcage or something, then you'll merely LIKE the book.

HTH, and Semper Fi,
--Rob
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: movie_guy on June 09, 2005, 09:13:38 PM
Oh and I didn't think to mention the cute love story in Pearl Harbor was surrounded by ONE OF THE WORST movies I have EVER seen!  If I had a choice between watching Attack of the Killer Tomatoes and Pearl Harbor, it would be Attack of the Killer Tomatoes - TWICE!   :D
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Dannyman on June 17, 2005, 02:20:20 PM
Here is a good article about the movie from 'The Carmel Pincone'.

http://www.carmelpinecone.com/050617-1.html
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: vik on June 17, 2005, 02:48:16 PM
wow exciting - i hope it won't be like saving private ryan - it will be clint so will be a masterpiece
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Lilly on June 17, 2005, 06:38:10 PM
Thank you Dannyman!  That's a great article. O0

It has some interesting info on shooting methods:

Quote
“They want us to come and shoot, but it’s sacred ground for them, and because of the memorial aspect, I can’t use a bunch of pyrotechnics to create the mayhem the way it was,” Eastwood said. “Also, I can’t take a ton of equipment and men over there and have [the Japanese] all of a sudden say, ‘You can’t do that.’”

So while wide shots of Iwo Jima, to be overlaid with digitally created invasion ships and airplanes, will be filmed on the island itself — along with a possible recreation of the famous flag raising — the combat footage will be shot on the desolate, black sand beaches of the far North Atlantic.

Quote
One of the movie’s scenes will be a massive parade through Times Square. Another will be a huge “Buy Bonds” rally at Chicago’s Soldier Field. Other scenes will recreate Hawaii’s Camp Tarawa (where U.S. troops trained for the Iwo Jima invasion), the dedication of the Iwo Jima Memorial in Arlington, Va., and the home towns of the six flag raisers — including Appleton, Wisconsin; Manchester, New Hampshire, and Arizona’s Pima Indian Reservation.

“Everything has to look as real as possible,” Eastwood said.

“The Warner Bros. art department even asked me, ‘What did the front porch look like where [flag raiser] Harlon Block’s family got the news he had been killed?’” Bradley recalled.

Really sounds like they're going all out for this.  8)

And the first info on the "sister" film:

Quote
Eastwood will shoot a companion piece about the invasion from the Japanese point of view. “It will be like a documentary, telling the story of the men who defended the island, their tenacity, and what it was like to have this armada coming at them.”

"Like a documentary"...so I guess we can expect a docu-drama?  Not quite a complete mirror movie then - but that would have been a huge undertaking.  This sounds like the best that could realistically be done and it sounds fantastic.  The cynic in me is just wondering whether the Japanese government asked him to do it, possibly as a condition of filming at Iwo Jima. ???  Although I'm sure Clint would be interested and want to show the other side anyway, which is a noble thing to do, and in the spirit of these modern times.

Eastwood:
Quote
“I just want the people who end up seeing these pictures to feel how the story happened, how these skinny kids were affected, and how they were a lot tougher than we are today.”

Great reason!  O0  Every time I read something about this film I get more excited to see it! 8) 8) 
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: movie_guy on June 17, 2005, 08:02:15 PM
Thanks, Dannyman - an interesting article!  I'll be sharing it with my friends, for sure...

I think the documentary going with the movie would be something that could be done while they're doing the filming for the main movie, seeing how it would cost a LOT less to just add some digital footage (fewer actors needed, etc) while they're there.

Also, while preparing to film, they'll need to know the locations of all the Japanese military emplacements, how effective they were, and so on.  Obviously, they'll be researching this VERY well to get the action scenes as accurate as possible.  And, OBVIOUSLY, this won't be another "Pearl Harbor," which totally ignored some of the truly finest stories of the REAL people who were WELL researched and written about in the book "At Dawn We Slept" by Gordon Prange.  Now THAT, my friends, is an amazing bunch of short stories about Pearl Harbor!

Anyway, I just plain HAVE A GOOD FEELING about this movie, and am convinced this will be well worth watching in the theater, buying on DVD, and talking about with friends and family.  The book HAS been that way for me, and I just think it'll be RIGHT.  Now, I hope my anticipation doesn't lock my mind into a channel of thought, only to disappoint me if the movie doesn't match my preconceived notions.

Well, so I won't think too much about it, but I am really looking forward to seeing it.  And like I say, the book is SUPERB!

BTW, did anyone see the show about the battle for Iwo Jima last night on the History Channel?  It was hosted by PJ O'Rourke.  VERY good.

Semper Fi,
--RG
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Lin Sunderland on June 18, 2005, 10:54:17 PM
Like Lilly, I am really looking for ward to seeing this movie.   The more I hear about it the more I want to know.  I like the idea of the documentary being shot at more or less the same time.   It will be interesting to see the Japanese point of view.
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Hemlock on June 19, 2005, 12:22:17 PM
The cynic in me is just wondering whether the Japanese government asked him to do it, possibly as a condition of filming at Iwo Jima. ??? 

I was wondering the same thing as I was reading Dannyman`s  The Carmel Pincone-article/post(thanks!).

Whatever the reasons are for the documentary I´m almost as intrested in to see it as I´m intrested in to see the Flags Of Our Father film itself.

It`s intresting to see what kind of cast Eastwood would pick since he`s not going to use any so called old and familiar actors.

Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: vik on June 19, 2005, 01:27:54 PM
also how much digital footage he will use

interesting article
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: vik on June 20, 2005, 05:57:51 AM
from the daily telegraph (needs registration)


Japan honours US dead at Iwo Jima
By Colin Joyce in Tokyo
(Filed: 20/06/2005)


maybe mr clint has prodded some japanese to


a piece on iwo jima - in it is a picture of the flag raising by us troops




Quote
Junichiro Koizumi yesterday became Japan's first serving prime minister to visit Iwo Jima in what analysts say is an effort to counter his image as a nationalist and revisionist.

 
Mr Koizumi paid his respects alongside bereaved Japanese and representatives of the American army

He made his visit during a ceremony marking one of the Second World War's most symbolic battles in which American troops first captured Japanese territory 60 years ago. The moment was caught in an iconic photograph of troops hoisting the Stars and Stripes on the island's peak, Mount Suribachi.

Mr Koizumi joined about 100 bereaved Japanese and representatives of the American army in Japan to pay his respects.

He said: "Over 28,000 Japanese and American lives were lost on Iwo Jima. I believe today's peace and prosperity is built on their noble sacrifice. Since the Second World War, Japan has never once participated or become involved in war and has maintained peace.

"From now on, too, we must never forget the tragic lessons of war. We must progress towards friendly relations between nations and must actively strive to create lasting world peace."

Mr Koizumi also laid a wreath at the island's memorial to the 7,000 American soldiers killed in the one month battle in February 1945. The tiny island, around 800 miles south of Tokyo, is now a Japanese military base. The islanders were moved to the mainland after the war.

   
Iconic: the moment American troops conqered Iwo Jima
Mr Koizumi has been attacked, especially in China, for repeatedly visiting Tokyo's controversial Yasukuni shrine. The shrine commemorates executed war criminals alongside 2.5 million Japanese war dead.

He has sought to explain that Japan is a pacifist country and that he visits Yasukuni only to pray for world peace and for the souls of all those killed

His visit to Iwo Jima is also seen as an attempt to stress that he is a man of peace rather than an admirer of Japan's wartime leaders. He has recently paid respects at Tokyo's Chidorigafuchi memorial to unknown soldiers, which is not tainted with the controversy of nearby Yasukuni.

Mr Koizumi went to Moscow for VE Day last month, which previous Japanese prime ministers have not attended. Next week he will visit Okinawa, south-western Japan, where memorial services traditionally emphasise the waste of lives caused by Japanese militarism.




LINK (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=NPDXVQPMGHFHDQFIQMFSM5OAVCBQ0JVC?xml=/news/2005/06/20/wjapan20.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/06/20/ixworld.html&secureRefresh=true&_requestid=55058)
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: KC on June 20, 2005, 06:29:29 AM
Vik, I edited your link to make it a titled link so it wouldn't affect the format of this page.

In the future, let's stick to posting stories here that actually have something to do with Eastwood's film or the book it's based on, not just the battle of Iwo Jima in general.
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: vik on June 20, 2005, 06:37:30 AM
if it hadn't been for clint going to japan this guy would not have acknowledged iwo jima (ok so thats what i think)

don't you think its more than just a coincidence though

or using the flag raising picture which i couldn't show

or perhaps even better he reads this website everyday  ;D
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: mgk on June 20, 2005, 07:56:22 AM
if it hadn't been for clint going to japan this guy would not have acknowledged iwo jima (ok so thats what i think)

No, I don't think that.  I think this was a political move as stated in the article:

Quote
Junichiro Koizumi yesterday became Japan's first serving prime minister to visit Iwo Jima in what analysts say is an effort to counter his image as a nationalist and revisionist.

There is no mention of Mr. Eastwood and this section of our board should be limited to news that actually pertains to Mr. Eastwood.  That's what our members expect when they see a new post in the Eastwood News section.
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: vik on June 20, 2005, 07:57:56 AM
cool

Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: ceinjapan on June 20, 2005, 12:26:59 PM
hello vik
as  Japanese i can not accept your idea.
Mr Koizumi has traveled to Okinawa,Hiroshima,Nagasaki,many places where Japanese soldiers and civilians died before.
He visited Yasukuni Temple where many war criminals slept,saying what they did,they died for Japanese country and people while china and South Korea blame his visiting.
Just he has not have chance to go to Ioujima before.
i am afraid my English enough to understand.
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: vik on June 20, 2005, 01:13:09 PM
cool ceinjapan - i understand - and accept what you say and thanks for putting your point of view it helps us to get a better picture of japan

and it is nice he  remembers both americans and japanese
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: ceinjapan on June 20, 2005, 10:01:09 PM
yes vik!
and coming two pictures  will  help us to understand  both a lot.
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: vik on June 21, 2005, 09:34:44 AM
only if its to do with clint ceinjapan

Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: ceinjapan on June 24, 2005, 11:24:57 AM
i found this on Josh Groban official site
he will be  one member of  flag risers?

Crooner acts on his love for film
After nearly 18 months on the road touring, singer Josh Groban is enjoying being back home in Hollywood, living life as a “real boy”.
Groban was discovered at the age of 18 by renowned producer David Foster when he asked to be an operatic rehearsal fill-in for Andrea Bocelli.
Since then his unique blend of neo-classical pop has broken the mould of modern classical records.
“At this very second, I’m enjoying being a real boy and being off the road for a bit,”
the 24-year-old says as he finally unpacks his bags.
Keen to add to his already impressive list of achievements, Groban is now turning his hand to film-making.
Acting has interested him since he appeared on the season finale of Ally Mcbeal singing You’re Still You.
“It’s a world I don’t know a whole bunch about,” Groban, who is dating actress January Jones, concedes.
“But there’s something just as powerful in music as there is in watching a great film. I’m fascinated by it.
I auditioned for a Clint Eastwood film the other day, and the script just blew my mind.
I love acting, and I’d love to get in front of the camera.”
Groban last visited Australia two years ago, promoting his self-titled debut album.
Since then, he has released three more albums, toured across Europe and the US and sold more than 10 million records worldwide.
Although he still describes himself as “very new to the business”, Groban has had his fair share of time in front of the camera.
His most recent project was Live At The Greek Theatre, a DVD filmed on tour.
Groban is yet to tour in Australia, but is in demand and hopes to get Down Under again soon.
For the moment, he’s writing new material and reflecting on the musical spectrum he’s been exposed to during his most recent tour.
Musically, I obviously want to stick with the kind of singing that I do, keeping the classical influences that I have,” Groban says.
“But I hope the next album has a little more of an eclectic vibe, a world feel, to it.
Hopefully, it will be more of a mature pop sound.”
Groban may be only in his 20s, but he says he has as much to write about those universal themes of love, life, work and loss as anyone else.
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: vik on June 24, 2005, 11:36:11 AM
cool ceinjapan perhaps he could send the script this way ;)
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Lilly on June 24, 2005, 11:36:36 AM
Thanks ceinjapan! 8)

Here is the link to Josh Groban's Warner Bros Records site:
http://www.wbr.com/joshgroban/

I wonder how many people are auditioning.  Casting must be a little more complicated for this movie, compared to other Eastwood films.

(http://cdn-channels.netscape.com/cpshark/music/channel/i/2003_11/groban200.jpg)
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: vik on June 24, 2005, 12:29:43 PM
does that mean that casting is now taking place and if but does that mean mr clint is actually involved or only the major parts
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Americanbeauty on June 24, 2005, 06:58:05 PM
Josh Groban ? Why not after all ...
All I know is he's got an amazing voice, as an actor, I can't say much, because in Ally McBeal, he wasn't really acting, he was singing  ;D

I can't wait to see this movie, and to know who's gonna star in it  :) ... I think Eastwood's right not to pick very well known actors
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: vik on June 30, 2005, 02:48:39 PM
Quote
US movie actor and director, Clint Eastwood, will visit Iceland in August to shoot scenes for a new movie, "The Flags of our Fathers".

Based on a bestselling book by American James Bradley, the movie chronicles one of the most famous moments in US military history when six US servicemen raised the American flag on top of Mt. Suribachi during the epic World War II battle for the Pacific island of Iwo Jima.

Like in Iceland, Iwo Jima's beaches are covered with black, volcanic sand. Helga Reykdal of the Icelandic movie production company True North said in an interview in Morgunblaðið that it was the beaches that made Eastwood and his collaborator Steven Spielberg decide to come to Iceland. Eastwood and his crew have selected True North as their local partner.


http://www.hostel.is/displayer.asp?cat_id=262&module_id=220&element_id=576
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Lilly on June 30, 2005, 04:57:15 PM
 8)  Thanks vik.

Here's the production company's website:

http://www.truenorth.is

There are some nice pics on the Locations > Beaches page.  (And Lin there is a lighthouses page.)
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Lilly on June 30, 2005, 05:57:30 PM
Two articles with some new details.

Yesterday in Iceland Review Online (LINK (http://www.icelandreview.com/icelandreview/daily_news/?cat_id=16539&ew_0_a_id=141589)):

Quote
06/29/2005 | 11:57

Eastwood licensed to shoot in Krísuvík
Film director and actor Clint Eastwood has been issued a license to shoot scenes for his new movie "Flags of Our Fathers" in the area around Krísuvík in southwest Iceland.

The building commission of the town Hafnarfjörður issued the license to Eastwood and company yesterday with a "no-impact" stipulation under which the filming crew must leave the land where they'll be shooting in the same condition as it will be when they start later this summer. In addition they must take care to preserve any archaeological remains in the area and are obliged to solicit the services of the Icelandic Archaeological Institution to mark those areas which are likely to contain artifacts.

The license was issued in spite of being opposed by the environmental commission of Hafnarfjörður and the governing council of the national park Reykjanesfólkvangur. The environmental commission and the governing council of the national park have expressed concerns about the possible adverse effects of cast, crew and props on the delicate ecology and landscape at Krísvík.


And for those of us who were wondering whether the ship would go to Iceland or have a different number painted on... (maybe that was just me! :-[)  Seems they have a few difficulties to surmount (and will be using some of that Spielberg digital wizardry).

From the Evansville Courier and Press:

Quote
City may be movie stage for LST 325

By BYRON ROHRIG
Courier & Press staff writer 464-7426 or blrohrig@evansville.net
June 30, 2005

New developments involving the use of LST 325 in the filming of a Clint Eastwood-produced movie about the World War II landing on Iwo Jima could set the stage for shooting segments in Evansville.

Mayor Jonathan Weinzapfel said Wednesday he has pitched the idea to those in charge of filming marine portions. Film officials, in turn, requested documents and photographs showing areas where shooting might take place. "We are in the process of preparing those now," Weinzapfel said.

 One factor that may open a door for filming in Evansville is LST 325 Commander Capt. Robert Jornlin's refusal to allow the ship to go to Iceland, chosen as filming site for much of the movie because its terrain resembles Iwo Jima's. LST 325, by the wonders of film technology and repainting different numbers, will represent 30 landing ship tanks in the film, Jornlin said earlier this month. But the Courier & Press learned from Mike Whicker, Evansville author and teacher as well as an LST 325 crew member on an East Coast voyage this summer, that Jornlin vetoed the Iceland trip because of potential risk to the ship.

Whicker explained that the U.S. Coast Guard insisted the ship be towed to Iceland, an operation that could place LST 325 in jeopardy in the event of a major storm or other emergency. That's because standard operating procedure would require the towing vessel to cut LST 325 loose under those conditions, almost certainly dooming the ship.

Weinzapfel confirmed Whicker's account. Attempts to reach Jornlin, aboard LST 325 in the Atlantic between Savannah, Ga., and Jacksonville, Fla., were unsuccessful Wednesday.

Technology also could play a big role in Evansville's favor, enabling filming LST segments virtually anywhere, yet making action appear to be taking place at the primary site where shooting occurred.

"All this is purely speculative," Weinzapfel said, "and filming would probably be limited. But it would be nice to see it happen in Evansville."

George Rehnquist, chairman of the Evansville LST Committee, seemed to relish the idea.

"I can't imagine something better than a movie for publicizing (LST 325's docking in Evansville) - especially a movie by Eastwood."

A target completion date of Sept. 15 has been set for a new municipal dock at Marina Pointe. It will become LST 325's permanent mooring site on or before Oct. 1.

LINK (http://www.courierpress.com/ecp/news/article/0,1626,ECP_734_3893204,00.html), but  free registration required.  You can get in with cookies enabled and using username: courierpress@mailinator.com  password: evansville

Seems a shame they can't take the ship to Iceland.
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Lilly on July 07, 2005, 08:15:35 PM
The ship discussion got split between two threads.  I'm bringing it back here and quoting tgy's post.

The USS LST 325 may now not be used for Flags of our Fathers.

fox19 (http://www.fox19.com/Global/story.asp?S=3562357)

Thanks for that info tgy.  Bit of a shame for the previously keen locals.

Here's a bit more detail from the Courier Press site.

LINK (http://www.courierpress.com/ecp/gleaner_news/article/0,1626,ECP_4476_3905684,00.html).

Quote
LST won't be part of Hollywood

By BYRON ROHRIG, Courier & Press staff blrohrig@evansville.net
July 6, 2005

EVANSVILLE -- Plans to film LST 325 for the movie "Flags of Our Fathers" have been abandoned, a movie official told ship commander Capt. Robert Jornlin on Tuesday.

"They told me they were just going to paint (an LST) on the backdrop and save themselves a lot of money," said Jornlin, who was reached aboard the ship in Mobile, Ala.

 Jornlin added he suspected movie officials decided in part to eliminate any role for the ship in the Clint Eastwood production because they were unhappy with Jornlin's refusal to allow the ship to go to Iceland, where filming will take place this summer. "I think a lot of them have the attitude that, if you don't do it our way, you don't do it at all," he said.

The Coast Guard insisted the ship be towed to Iceland, which meant that as standard operating procedure LST 325 would have been cut loose from the towing vessel in event of a serious storm. Loss of the ship would be likely in such an event, and Jornlin refused to risk it.

"It's not a lot disappointing," Jornlin said. "It kind of takes the load off. We're a volunteer crew ... now we'll all get to go home for a while and take a break. We're ready to go home to our families."

This weekend, the ship and crew concluded a voyage of more than a month's duration to Washington, D.C., and Boston.

Mayor Jonathan Weinzapfel said Tuesday the development is unlikely to change the schedule for completion of the new municipal dock.

"We will have a dock ready Sept. 15," Weinzapfel said. "Of course, if we can get it done earlier, they can come earlier."

Both Weinzapfel and Jornlin held out some hope that LST 325 may yet appear in the movie.

"I'd like to get them to Evansville to at least film the inside of the ship. There are several things they could do here that wouldn't even require us to move the ship," Jornlin said.

Jornlin will meet again with movie officials in Iceland, where he and his wife have planned a trip for August.
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Grizzled on July 13, 2005, 01:45:26 PM
Jornlin added he suspected movie officials decided in part to eliminate any role for the ship in the Clint Eastwood production because they were unhappy with Jornlin's refusal to allow the ship to go to Iceland, where filming will take place this summer. "I think a lot of them have the attitude that, if you don't do it our way, you don't do it at all," he said.

The Coast Guard insisted the ship be towed to Iceland, which meant that as standard operating procedure LST 325 would have been cut loose from the towing vessel in event of a serious storm. Loss of the ship would be likely in such an event, and Jornlin refused to risk it.

But don't they have weather forecasts for this sort of eventuality?! I mean is it really likely the producers of Flags of Our Fathers, who are paying to hire LST 325, would ever put it in a position where it would end up having to be cut loose in the middle of a storm? I don't want to sound like Mr Cynical here but it sounds to me as though, for once, it just might be the owners of the ship who are trying to put one over on the producers rather than the other way round.

"I'd like to get them (the filmmakers) to Evansville ..," Jornlin said. Yeah, I'll bet he would.  ::)
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: vik on July 13, 2005, 02:57:52 PM
eh your talking about the atlantic aren't u

very unpredictable seas

i think i can understand what with a volunteer crew as well

of course could get hijacked as well
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: paulk on July 13, 2005, 11:19:30 PM
It'll will be interesting to see this movie.  Clint is always trying something different.  He hasn't been sticking to one type of movie.  If he's acting or directing,  it's always a pleasure to watch his movies.  The man was ahead of his time.
Title: Re: Eastwood to direct WWII drama for Spielberg
Post by: Grizzled on July 31, 2005, 06:19:11 AM
From poster 'Sean Flynn' at the GoldDerby.com forums re Flags of our Fathers:

'I know someone who read the script - he said it made Saving Private Ryan seem like a comedy.'

Normally I wouldn't dream of mentioning such 'I know someone who knows someone who knows somone else..'' type-comments but regular readers of GoldDerby will know that Sean Flynn's knowledgable posts strongly suggest that he is indeed an industry insider (anyone interested should head over there and run a search for Million Dollar Baby. Interesting stuff awaits). 

So 'Flags' makes 'Ryan' seem like a comedy, eh? ...blimey... :o