Letters from Iwo Jima

So often in the portrayal or in the education of World War II, we have a depiction of good and evil. America tends to be heroic and Japan is the faceless, ruthless band of inhuman kamikazes. Even the Germans have a face in the form of Hitler, and they have human qualities, however insane and despicable. “Letters From Iwo Jima” turns the table, highlighting the Japanese, and demonstrating that we are all human in war.

The movie begins several months before the battle as the army is preparing for the Americans to land. From this point, we most closely follow the lives of General Kuribayashi (Ken Watanabe), a new and unconventional commander on the battlefield, and Saigo (Kazunari Ninomiya), a baker who has no interest of fighting this war. Our original perception of them is crucial to the emotional development of the rest of the film, for they are the ones that differ from the stereotype Americans hold of the Japs during the war.

When Kuribayashi first lands on the island, he drastically alters the standard battle plan, removing trenches on the beach and starting construction of tunnels in the hills. Although both he and his associates have no faith in success, his plan is to survive over a quick, honorable death. At first, I almost agreed with the conventional plan of attack. If it’s an honor to die for the country, and there is no chance of success, why prolong the suffering? Kuribayashi says in a powerful moment, “If our children can live safely for one more day, it would be worth the one more day that we defend this island.” I was sold from that point on.

Once the battle begins, we see the true colors of these soldiers and the conflicting morals they face. The first spot to fall in the battle is the base at Suribachi. Saigo has overheard Kuribayashi’s orders to retreat north, but the other commanders believe it is honorable to die in their spot. One of the most amazing scenes shows a small company of soldiers at Suribachi all gathered in a cave as one by one, they grab their grenades and commit suicide.

This is the dilemma they face. They are so convinced of some sense of honor to simply die for their country. Kuribayashi’s plan shows the practical means of serving the country and not just dying for it. As for Saigo, he proves that there is nothing dishonorable about surviving, about wanting to live and to return to your families. Preserving life is the most honorable thing, and through this story of grief, pain and suffering, we learn that greater truth.

Clint Eastwood directs this beautiful film, which serves as a counterpart to “Flags of Our Fathers,” the American perspective of the same battle. Eastwood’s use of some quite shocking imagery serves as a symbol for the inner conflict of honor they face. Furthermore, the melding of the two cultures (making for a movie that is about 95 percent in Japanese subtitles) allows for the image of Americans as the faceless, all-powerful mass of destruction. Looking from this perspective, and ultimately both in “Flags of Our Fathers,” we see that evil is in the eye of the beholder.

But there is also a great instance of the individual over the masses. The Japanese capture an American soldier, and one of them knows how to speak English. On this individual level, we share the same feelings, the same human qualities. When the Japanese read the letter from the soldier’s mother, it’s all made clear; they have mothers too. They are one in the same.

Although the action, writing and acting are all breathtaking, part of what makes the effect so strong is Eastwood’s use of pacing. Before the battle starts and even in the midst of it, we feel the biting anticipation as infinite numbers of Americans loom on the coasts. And in Saigo’s journey north from base to base, Eastwood creates a prolonged feel, a seemingly endless battle that further emphasizes the suffering these characters face, all for the honor of their country.

It’s a cliché that war is bad, and that in the end we’re all humans with common goals. We’ve heard that story so many times before. Now we’re hearing it from a different perspective, and that carries weight. But morals aside, Eastwood’s story is a powerful and shocking image of war, one more dramatic and depressing than almost any other film of 2006.

4 stars