Tom Hanks is an accredited war history buff, and I think he really has put his heart into paying homage to WWII vets. His heart's in the right place, but his head is in Hollywood.RTWT at the link.
Why should I be surprised a "docudrama" like The Pacific is shit? The whole effort behind the docu part is invested in toys such as gunner's gloves. I long ago boycotted documentary filmmakers who want my brand to legitimize their sorry little TV vignettes. Their objective is entertainment centered on the dramatic visual, not the intellectual, and not quite the historical. If self-professed documentarians can't get it right because they edit the talking heads to accommodate their thin film libraries, why should self-professed entertainers make a better effort, show greater concern?
Has anyone else noticed that the talking heads -- nameless, unexplained vets -- in The Pacific seem to be reading from scripts rather than dipping into memories? They merely mouth error-filled platitudes. Band of Brothers used interesting people with interesting observations. This is the worst way to exploit vets -- making them look like idiots.
It is difficult to frame this story using this set of icons. But the people behind The Pacific volunteered for this. This is their befouled vision, perhaps with the aid of a few bought historians who were probably ignored when the script -- a visual outline -- was fabricated from its many disparate parts. Their good intentions ran afoul bad toilet training; they left the seat up and neglected to flush.
When I first heard read Tom Hanks' comments on "why we fought the Japanese" I thought I'd withhold comment until I'd seen some of the episodes. But after last Sunday's showing, the series so far seems definitely down compared to "Band of Brothers." I'm not giving up on it, but here's hoping things get a little deeper.
My earlier posts on "The Pacific" are here.
Photo Credit: American Power off Hollwood Boulevard, March 20, 2010.
No comments:
Post a Comment