Hiroshima

The makers of this film had the opportunity to tell the story of this tragic event in history. Instead, it is another attempt to ignore the truth and try to justify the killing of tens of thousands of innocent civilians. There is not enough room here to outline all the misinformation in the film. The key point would be the American government's ignoring the Japanese attempt to surrender in the month before the bombs were dropped. The bomb was developed in order to attack the Germans. When the Germans surrendered before the bomb was ready, well, it had to be used to justify the 2 billion dollars spent. A sad and tragic story, and this film tries to justify the first use of weapons of mass destruction.

I thought this was a very well done docudrama about the dropping of the bomb on Hiroshima. It mixed historical footage, survivor interviews and dramatic re-enactments to bring the story to light. It left out almost all of the moralistic arguments used to frame today's arguments and just told the story of what happened, mostly through the eyes of the people involved (of which there are precious few left). Whether you think the decision to drop the bombs was right or wrong, this is an excellent movie to help understand the event. If you don't know much about the circumstances surrounding the dropping of the A-bomb on Hiroshima, this should be one of the first sources you visit to add to your knowledge base.

The message of this fairly well made documentary is its gift. No finger pointing. No demanding of apologies. No assignment of blame. Just a dramatic portrayal of events. Very dramatic. Some of the scenes, personal and intimate scenes, are very painful to watch but are there to illustrate a horror which is hard to imagine otherwise. I came away with the feeling that dropping the atomic bombs was a terrible thing, so terrible it is beyond comprehension, but, still, a necessary thing. However, this documentary is all about the sadness, the almost unbearable sadness, of it all. If you're trying to gain a better understanding of these events, I highly recommend this.

Have just watched the film with an eye to my history class and found it very good dramatically. I was kicking myself for losing another film of the same name that was more of a film and which demanded more from their actors; to see Truman in this version portrayed by a man twice his size with no physical or vocal similarity was a big disappointment whereas the older film's resemblances to him and the other two of the Big Three was uncanny. To compare the lack of concern in this regard to the care the BBC took with its Dunkirk where Churchill and Lord Halifax were lovingly portrayed is further frustrating. The graphics are outstanding as one would expect from the BBC; if you've seen its Auschwitz, Colosseum or Pompeii titles you'll know what high quality to expect. One quibble would be the lack of any mention of Japanese atrocities. Living and working in China with family who suffered from Japanese barbarism, I was dismayed to see Japanese bestiality whitewashed to portray them as the victims. Maybe one day someone will do a BBC-type Rape of Nanking to redress the balance. In the meantime, without bothering to fully explain why the Americans (and the British and Commonwealth who took on the Japanese too, a fact ignored by the British broadcasting Corp.)truly hated the Japanese is disingenuous. No real mention made too of the bomb in the context of the start of the Cold War, or how Nagasaki was probably more a warning to Stalin who had just invaded Japan with an eye to joint-occupation a la Germany makes this a rather one-dimensional analysis. Great value must be placed on the interviews of so many witnesses, particularly Tibbets and the last man to have actually have touched Little Boy. www.tracesofevil.blogspot.com

This "documentary" follows the American propaganda to the letter. About how the Americans were apparently wringing their hands in anxiety over whether to drop the bomb or not, how they implored Japan to surrender, how the bomb would be an alternative to an invasion of Japan which would spare up to a million lives.

Not a mention about how Japan actually were discussing surrender, which American cryptographers had picked up. Not a mention of Ellis Zacharias who managed to muddle the American message to the point that neither the Japanese nor the American media knew which was the official US line.

The tired old propaganda about how the bomb saved lives in the end, is of course nonsense. First of all, the calculated number of casualties resulting from an invasion of Japan magically rose from an estimated 31 000 by Marshall on 18 June 1945, to 500 000 battle casualties after the bomb was dropped. Nowadays people even like to use figures in the millions. A more blatant attempt to try and justify the mass murder of a hundred thousand with a single bomb could hardly be conjured up. Furthermore, the bomb and an invasion were not mutually exclusive. Truman never presented the bomb as an alternative to invasion until after the war.

Carefully toeing the American propaganda line, the "documentary" makes no mention of how the final discussions in the Japanese leadership went before finally surrendering. In short, they scarcely mentioned the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The main concern of the Japanese leadership was the invasion of Manchuria by the Soviet Union and the collapse of the Kwantung army. But God forbid that the Soviet Union should receive any credit in World War 2.

And it's quite unsettling to listen to these old men casually describing and justifying their mass murder.

If you really want to learn anything about the process of the development of the nuclear program, the decision to drop the bombs, and the aftermath, give this garbage a pass and read "Hiroshima Nagasaki" by Paul Ham instead. If you're interested in eyewitness accounts of the immediate aftermath, read "Hiroshima" by John Hersey.