Hiroshima

The film is a bleak depiction of life in Hiroshima in the days leading up to the dropping of the atomic bomb (on Aug 6, 1945) and the consequences of the attack, with a focus on the short- and long-term term effects of radiation exposure, especially on children. The production is outstanding, with realistic recreations of the ruined city blended with authentic footage, and the cast (many of whom were not actors) is excellent*. The scenes of homeless, parentless, children trying to survive are especially poignant, notably the two siblings finding their family's rice bowls as they pick through the rubble of their home or the group of boys trying to teach the youngest enough English to beg for food from American servicemen. The film is scored by Akira Ifukube, who a year later would write the iconic themes for the original 'Gojira'. His stirring music plays over the end, in which the people of Hiroshima congregate at the Genbaku Dome, the unbelievable scenes that feature the multitudes of extras for which the film is famous. Not surprisingly 'Hiroshima' is unabashedly 'anti-war' but is not simply a screed against the U.S. The contentious idea that the bomb would not have been used if the target population was 'white' is briefly mentioned but is counterbalanced by scenes of the Imperial forces deciding to lie to the Japanese public about the nature of the weapon and use the devastated city as a rallying cry to incite even more hatred of the Allied forces (in an attempt to reinforce the implacable resolve that defenders of the A-bombing maintain made use of the devastating weapons necessary). While Hiroshima did have some military value as a target, the casualties were overwhelmingly civilian, including many children. The film's message (IMO) is not an overly-simplified 'don't drop the bomb' but rather a more nuanced plea to consider the consequences beyond tactical or strategic objectives. The film also touches on one of the lesser known consequences of the bombing - the survivors sometimes faced anger and resentment from the rest of the population for their unique 'victim status' as "Hibakusha" ("people affected by the atomic-bombs"). Unfortunately, the visceral impact the scenes of stunned survivors limping through the streets, filthy, burned and bloody, may be blunted to some viewers because they almost look like a parody of modern 'zombie' movies. Excellent: sad, and memorable and perhaps, in some small part, a contributor to nuclear restraint - despite the proliferation of the weapons (and the powers that wield them), and despite the numerous wars that have been fought since 1945, they have never again been used. *Comments pertain to the English-subtitled version shown on TCM in 2020 (the 75th anniversary of the bombing).

By victims.

relatively crudely staged but reflecting reality, even this film can't recreate the horror and suffering of the surviving residents in the aftermath of the bombing--but it tries with honesty.

a historical experience. their tale.

like a recounting of the holocaust by survivors.

This movie is excellent from start to finish. Its played so authentic, the characters feels so alive. At only 312 reviews at the current time of writing this review its also the most underrated movie ever. There are low budget, unimaginitive and just plain lazy knockoff trash movies that are more popular than this movie and its very sad to think that trash like that gets more attention.

There was minimal debate surrounding Oppenheimer's decision not to include any scenes set in Japan. I wouldn't call it a huge source of discourse, or a big controversy, but it popped up a little here and there, I noticed. Without going off on too much of a tangent, it was a damned if you do, damned if you don't kind of situation, because focusing on Oppenheimer, the man (as I think the film did quite effectively) does mean the victims of his weapons aren't directly given a voice... but if Christopher Nolan had set scenes in Japan, people might have taken issue with a white filmmaker overstepping a boundary (it's happened to a small extent with Scorsese making Killers of the Flower Moon, and that might blow up even more discourse-wise when that film gets a wide release).

But I think so long as people are aware that Japanese films also cover the effects of the atomic bomb while focusing on its victims, then that entirely negates the need for an American or English filmmaker to cover such a perspective. Unfortunately, not many people do seem to know about 1953's Hiroshima, as it only has about 1100 views on Letterboxd and about half of that on IMDb. It should be more well-known, though, because it's an impressively made and remarkably realistic depiction of the 1945 bombing of Hiroshima, including the aftermath and how the city grappled with the devastation following the end of World War II.

The film's commendable for how grounded and intensely real it all feels. The production value is, for the most part, incredible, with the scenes set right after the bombing feeling truly authentic and harrowing. It's a very tough film to sit through, but I think much of it will stick with me, and I don't feel like there are a ton of movies 70+ years old that feel quite this visceral.

I think the final act gets a little unfocused, if I was to have a complaint. I thought it all was losing me a bit towards the end, but then the final scene comes around and ties just about everything together in a haunting and effective way. It's not a film I think I'll ever rewatch, but I'm glad I've seen it now, because there's a ton to appreciate within this very hard-hitting historical drama.

It seems that CHILDREN OF HIROSHIMA was paid for by the Teacher's Union in Japan; they apparently felt it did not get the message across they wanted, so they commissioned this film. Instead of being seen from the viewpoint of an ex-teacher, the central character is a teacher. Eiji Okada's student suffer from leukemia, general malaise, and other symptoms, some real, some imagined, of having been around when the Bomb went off. There's some discussion talking about how the US looked for any excuse to use the A-Bomb; some concern about a fear that nationalism and a longing for the Old Days would retrigger millitarism and start the whole thing over again; and a harrowing re-enactment of the survivors struggling out out of the wreckage left by the blast.

I'm not sure the Teacher's Union got what they wanted out of this movie; the trouble with directors is they go off and make the movie they want instead of the one you want. In any case, some of the sequences looked like modern 'slow zombie' movies, except they seemed much more real and terrifying. The union did not make a third movie. Perhaps they ran out of money.