Anyone, and I do mean ANYONE, who watches a dramatic movie made in Hollywood or anywhere else, with the expectation of getting a history lesson is simply ignorant of the purpose of movies. Movies are meant to entertain and in the case of advocacy cinema enlighten; documentaries are meant to educate. Movies do not educate; they can in fact be highly misleading. Anyone wishing to know about the Battle for Saipan may I suggest A Special Valor: the U.S. Marines and the Pacific War (ISBN: 0452007372 / 0-452-00737-2) by Richard Wheeler (this book also covers the first battle sequence, which was somewhere in the Solomons, possibly Guadalcanal given the 1942 year within which it occurred. For those too stupid to comprehend a serious history, try Guy Gabadon's Hell to Eternity; it's highly entertaining and full of the kind of boyhood heroics most of the people here seem to think never occurred (it even includes a neat decapitation of Gabadon's best friend during a Banzai Attack. Gabadon's gun jammed and he watched his friend get cut apart). If Gabadon is too heavy for folks, check out a semi-coffee table style book "Marines in World War II Commemorative Series-Breaching the Marianas-The Battle for Saipan", which is also available in a CD ROM format. For those interested in the naval battle for the Marianas, the definitive work is by Samuel Elliot Morrison ("Naval History of World War II", check for the appropriate volume for Saipan or find the abridged version of this study) or look for the Victory at Sea volume dealing with the Marianas. For those interested in the air battle, try "Operation Forager; Air Power in the Campaign for Saipan" by Army Command and General Staff College. If the tone of my comments seem a tad caustic that can simply be explained by the disgust with many of the comments herein presented. Most people offering sharp criticisms have no real clue about the Battle for Saipan or the Marianas operation more generally, Code Talkers or Navajo people more generally, and/or US Marine and Japanese infantry tactics/fighting during the Second World War. Most folks are rather fixed on criticising Nicholas Cage. Personally, I have no problem with anyone being critical of Cage; from my perspective, he's neither much better or much worse than most of the overpaid actors inhabiting Hollywood these days. I do have a problem with people making statements about this film's historicity or lack thereof without first educating themselves to the subject with which they are offering comments. My father was stationed on Saipan and Tinian in 1944 and 1945 (Army Air Corps). He arrived before the islands were secured and he had friends shot by snipers and saw Japanese snipers killed (he was not involved in the reduction of Japanese defenses but passed down hundreds of photographs of the process...to suggest this was an ugly fight is to do an injustice to what occurred). May I suggest that arm chair directors educate themselves before becoming critical of film content least they make themselves look foolish. I read perhaps 15 reviews and not a single one addressed this fundamental question. I don't give a care what anyone thinks about Nicholas Cage or whether Adam Beach looks like a Navajo; it would be nice if anyone offering comment about this or any film address what is perhaps the most fundamental issue of any review. and the only question of any relevance: Was this movie entertaining? One would hardly know from reading a couple of dozen comments.
Review of Windtalkers
