IMDb > Hiroshima (1995) (TV) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb

Reviews & Ratings for
 Hiroshima (TV) More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]
Index 13 reviews in total 

24 out of 30 people found the following review useful:
God is in the details, 14 July 2002
9/10
Author: Robert J. Maxwell (rmax304823@yahoo.com) from Deming, New Mexico, USA

A very good docudrama. But you must be in the mood. It's a low-budget enterprise, talky, and with no bravura performances. Why is it good, then? I guess it's because it makes certain demands on the intelligence and moral concerns of the viewer that few other renditions of this story have bothered to even attempt. For many years, the United States mythos handled the issue in the most simplistic way. The Japanese were all kamikazes, an invasion of the Japanese homeland would cost untold thousands of lives, so we had to nuke them. Recent revisionist history has given us another version of what happened. The Japanese were on their last legs and they knew it. They were sending out peace feelers through Sweden, Switzerland, and Russia. The United States ignored these because we wanted revenge, so we had to nuke them, and fast.

This film illustrates exceedingly well both the Japanese and American sides of the issue, with restraint and intelligence. There are neither heroes nor villains here. And no easy shots are made at particular figures. We can often tell, in conventional flicks, who is good and who is bad by the simple expedient of seeing whether a given character is handsome or homely. We tend not to notice this casting sleight of hand in our own movies because the difference in appearance supports our own prejudices. (We want the villain to be ugly.) But if you want this trick to be in your face, take another look at "The Cranes are Flying," a Russian war movie in which the American officer looks and sounds like a fat bumbling idiot, while the Russian commander is ruggedly good-looking and wears a tolerant shrink-like smile. Such cheap symbolism certainly isn't committed here. The commander of the Japanese army, who wants to fight to the last man, is both attractive and highly principled. Truman may not be a brilliant thinker but he is down-home shrewd and up front about everything. (If there is a problem with the casting it is that the actor playing Curtis LeMay is too handsome and polite for the part. LeMay was a courageous, ruthless, cigar-smoking blowhard, whom no one but a mother would call handsome.)

So why was the bomb dropped? Evidently through a series of stochastic misunderstandings -- in intentions, exchanges, even in the translation of particular words. And ultimately in the rush of the United States to end the war -- for any number of reasons, including strictly political ones -- and in the desire on the part of the Japanese to find some sort of honorable peace in which their emporer retained his sanctity, leading to actions too deliberate to satisfy the Allies.

The film is at its weakest in posing a false dilemma. (Or maybe the historical characters were responsible.) (1) We invade the islands, or (2) we nuke them without warning. All the possibilities in between are dismissed for one reason or another. One of them, given short shrift, is the possibility of a naval blockade which would shut off all supplies and cancel all naval traffic from the islands. Japan having no natural resources worth mentioning, it would have been only a matter of time before it worked. Loss of life would have been minimal, and we would not have had to use the bombs -- plural, Nagasaki was destroyed only three days after Hiroshima. One of the reasons repeatedly brought up in favor of using the bomb is that the American taxpayer has put out two billion dollars for this gadget, and if it weren't used they would want to know why their money was spent developing it. (I don't know of any words adequate to describe this sort of logic.) A blockade, however, would have taken more time, which would have involved waiting, which is not our strong suit. Another weakness is that James F. Byrne was a personal friend of Truman's. Truman, uncertain and new to the presidency, looked at him as a font of wisdom. And Byrne was a devoted hawk. This isn't made entirely clear, but it was in fact the case.

Well, who knows what we and the Japanese should have done? Easy enough to make retrospective judgments. However, they should perhaps be made anyway. Maybe knowing what went wrong last time will help us prevent things from going so terribly wrong next time.

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
A Nutshell Review: (DVD) Hiroshima (1995), 26 December 2006
9/10
Author: DICK STEEL from Singapore

The closing stages of the Pacific Theatre of WWII are revisited recently by filmmaker Clint Eastwood, in his two movie compendium Flags of Our Fathers, and Letters from Iwo Jima, depicting the Battle of Iwo Jima from both perspectives of the Americans and the Japanese. Hiroshima, a made for TV movie in 1995 for Hallmark Entertainment, does so in one movie, clocking in at a massive 180 minutes.

But the running length is fully deserved, as this is probably as detailed one could get without boring the audience. Directed by Roger Spottiswoode and Koreyoshi Kurahara, they each take on their respective country's angle, beginning from April 12th 1945 with Roosevelt's death.

Spottiswoode focused on Truman's abrupt taking over the presidency, with a lot of catching up to do with regards to the war. As Vice President, he's kept largely out of the daily workings during Roosevelt's term, and suddenly is thrust into the hot seat with the passing of Roosevelt, making decisions that will affect countless of lives worldwide. Of note is the moral dilemma faced with the Manhattan Project, as well as looking into the inner circle's politicking of racing toward being the 1st nuclear power, and the demonstration of such a might with a public display of a detonation. You'll also see how the pilots train with mock bombs and mock targets during their countless drills just to get it right.

On the other hand, Kurahara was focused on the Japanese's lack of understanding and therefore deliberation on surrender, and takes a long hard look at how the Imperial Army dealt with impending invasion by the Allied forces. What's to note here is the portrayal of Emperor Hirohito, as he surveys his land bombed incessantly by B29s. Politics and bickering between politicians and the military take the spotlight here.

I'd bet most would find new nuggets of information from this informative dramatization of the events leading up to the detonation of the atomic bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki, like how Kyoto was deliberated over and spared, being the equivalent of a religious city, and a city with monuments worth preserving. I'd learn that the US actually had to call the bluffs, having only 3 bombs at the time, with Little Boy (Hiroshima's) made of uranium, and Fat Man (Nagasaki's) made of plutonium, and another plutonium one used as a test bomb, because the method of fission is slightly different from uranium's, and had to be tested first to ensure it works.

If technical details aren't your cup of tea, then perhaps cultural differences between the two countries, and the bridging of this understanding, might be of interest to you. It's equivalent to today's lack of understanding, and the lack of a well thought out strategy, that we see wars fought and degenerated into the issues faced today. It was interesting to note that prior to WWII, Japan had never lost a war, and therefore, doesn't know what defeat, nor surrender is, and hence, absolutely had no idea going about doing it. It could also be attributed to the Asian "face" value, that death always be a better option compared to a humiliating defeat.

Combined brilliantly with stock archive footage, documentary reels and interviews from veterans on both sides. Hiroshima is well worth the 3 hours spent watching it, unraveling itself like a history book. My only gripe was that the ending was abrupt, all over with the announcement of the Japanese surrender.

All Region DVD comes with no extras.

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
A Perfect 10, 21 April 2003
10/10
Author: rblayer from San Antonio, Texas

Perhaps the best made-for-tv movie I've ever seen. Historically correct and blended with real footage and interviews of actual participants I was spell-bound for three hours. The haunting musical score only added to the emotional story telling of this significant historical event.

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
A Very Candid Look at the Monumental Decision, 6 October 2003
10/10
Author: pmcmurry from Lima, OH

First of all, it would have been absolutely impossible to find a actor who looked and acted more like Harry Truman that Kenneth Walsh. Second, the most fascinating aspects of this movie relate to what was happening in Japan at the closing of the war. The idea that a majority of the military officers would have rather seen Japan cease to exist as a people than to surrender really provides some counter-balance to all of the recent revisionist history that claims that Japan was in the process of surrendering and that the U.S. used the A-bomb simply to avenge earlier Japanese treachery. "Hiroshima" is historical film-making at its best.

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
excellent, 2 June 2003
Author: frankiehudson from UK

This is a brilliant, meticulous recreation of the events, both political and military, leading up to the tragic attack on Hiroshima in August 1945.

Brilliant performance by Kenneth Welsh as the Missouri haberdasher President Truman, strangely ill-dressed throughout this film in his trademark double-breasted suit and multi-coloured shoes. Here, Truman is a simplistic, Forrest Gump style president grappling with enormous moral issues about using the new ‘gadget'.

The excellent cinematography recreates the story in newsreel style footage, intercut with interviews with several people from the time. Also, shows the Japanese situation in Tokyo and the hardline military people on both sides.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Hell on earth., 11 November 2003
8/10
Author: Michael O'Keefe from Muskogee OK

Excellent. Recounted are the events leading to President Truman's decision to drop an A-bomb on Hiroshima in 1945 and its aftermath. Filmed primarily in "tinted" black and white with the weaving of newsreel and stock footage. Witness testimonials put the explanation point on the haunting depictions. Kenneth Welsh is uncanny in his portrayal of Truman. Other stars of note are: Richard Masur, Leon Pownall, Wesley Addy, Daisaku Akino, David Gow, Ken Jenkins and Naohiko Umewaka. A must for WWII and history buffs.

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
Outstanding, 12 July 2003
10/10
Author: Phil Karn from San Diego, California

This is an outstanding production. And I think it no coincidence that it wasn't produced in the US.

Over 50 years later, American emotions still run high about our use of nuclear weapons against Japan; the recent backlash against the Smithsonian exhibit is proof. This film is a nuanced, balanced, objective treatment with, as far as I can tell, remarkable historical accuracy. One sees just how simplistic and myopic the leaders of both sides were as they made (or avoided making) momentous decisions that affected the entire future of the human race. The one voice of reason, scientist Leo Szilard, is brushed off with hardly a hearing.

This film is an effective indictment of our human propensity to place enormous powers in the hands of just a few individuals. I doubt any American producer could have made it.

The film deftly mixes historical footage with re-enacted scenes using actors. Normally this sort of thing is rather jarring, but here it works. Even the transitions between the real Truman in newsreel footage and the actor playing him work well.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
A quality film, 9 December 1999
9/10
Author: kaijuguy from Philadelphia, PA

Hiroshima is a great film, originally made for cable, about events leading up to the A-bomb being dropped on Japan. It shows the Japanese perspective very well and is one of the better WW2 films of recent years. Surprisingly, it is mostly a Canadian production that is very accurate with the facts they put on screen. Very well done.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
damn good, 23 September 2003
9/10
Author: Ka Ru Fei



Definitely one of the best historical movies I've seen. Doesn't cast political dispersions on the events or judge people in hindsight, simply gives a relatively even view of it from all sides (except for the Soviets, which would have been a good addition, if its ever even been discovered).

They did a really good job of mixing the B&W with color, old with new footage, etc. If you get a chance to see it, check it out.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Intelligent and provocative and of highest quality, 2 February 2002
10/10
Author: amazme3 from San Diego

I found this masterpiece of a film by perusing the cable tv guide. Being a war history enthusiast, I was drawn to the content of the movie, only to realize that the production and actors and characters and images and storyline were equally well done. None of the performers are big celebrities, but that fact takes nothing away from their incredible performances and likenesses to the true people they portrayed. Kenneth Welsh as Harry Truman and Wesley Addy as Sec of War Stimson dominate with memorable renditions, but the entire cast deserves almost equal praise. I was not aware that President Truman was on a battleship when the uranium bomb descended on Hiroshima. The attitudes of American and Japanese leaders were nicely shown, and Truman's portrayed thoughtfulness and decisiveness were impressive. One of the infrequent 10's of my movie history. The docu-drama format gave the piece an even more realistic appeal.

Was the above review useful to you?
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Amazon.com summary Ratings
Awards External reviews Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history