I've been very interested in WWII-themed stuff lately. Mainly because I watched "Eichmann in Jerusalem A Report on the Banality of Evil", and then watched more WWII-themed movies one after another.
This film is really reflective, a rare good film.
1. The justice of war?
2. Who is the American soldier or the Japanese soldier who was not born to his mother, and who has no parents, wife and children? Who is pure "devil" or pure "holy"?
3. Thinking about the concept of "jade broken", but I think thinking about the concept of "jade broken" is inseparable from the definition of the concept of "military man" under "militarist madness". There is a difference between "soldier" and "killer". People give honor to "soldier". Otherwise, what is the difference between a soldier and a killer? Soldiers must obey the orders of their superiors (this is also the reason why many war criminals in World War II justified themselves, saying that they killed themselves and massacred themselves just to obey the orders of their superiors). Soldiers must be brave and have a spirit of sacrifice. Soldiers protect the country and protect the people. Justify the "profession" of a soldier, otherwise what is the difference between a "soldier" and a killer on the battlefield? In short, from the perspective of "militarism" and "military", thinking about the concept of "jade break", jade break seems to make sense.
However, a "soldier" is also a "person", a person with flesh and blood, thinking about the concept of "jade shatter" from a personal point of view, "jade shatter" is full of "injustice", especially like the male protagonist in this movie , he originally opened a bakery, he was not a fanatical militarist, but was "forced" and "coerced" to be sent to Iwo Jima to participate in the war. For these people who were forced from their own will, he was Forced to become a soldier, so for him, where is the justice of "Yu Sha"?
4. In the past World War II movies, American soldiers were portrayed as "saviors". How many of the victims in the movies were saved by seeing American soldiers. However, the director in this play mentioned a scene: a soldier in Japan felt that he was dead no matter what, it seemed that he could only survive by surrendering to the US military, so he surrendered. As a result, the US military force sent two people to stare at them. The two U.S. soldiers thought it was troublesome, so they shot and killed them. This scene was shot so well. Although there is a "Geneva treatment", on the one hand, in a state of "war" that "drives people crazy", on the other hand, not everyone obeys the "rules", so really everyone Are you complying with the "Geneva Treatment"? Do they really not kill "prisoners of war"? (It was later discovered that the director of the show was an American, so he dared to portray American soldiers like this.)
5. The title is very good. The letter from Iwo Jima, who is writing the letter, to whom, and what is written in the letter? Through the title, the director emphasized that as a person, filial piety to parents, cherishing children and other aspects of human theory, rather than war, "military "military" aspects of the content.
A person is a person first, and then he must protect his family: filial piety to his parents, loving his children, being a good wife, husband, sons, daughters, parents, and other human relations responsibilities, having a family first, and then having a country.
However, I still have a sense of awe for those who died for the country. However, the most important thing is still: anti-war and hope for world peace. People all over the world are human beings. Without you, me, and others, from the human species, war is cannibalism.
View more about Letters from Iwo Jima reviews
