Inquebrantable

Unbroken opens with an extended sequence of a bombing run by a US B-17 crew against Japanese targets in the Pacific, and the subsequent attack on the bomber by a squad of Japanese Zero fighters. This aerial combat sequence is one of the most harrowing of it's kind I have ever seen. You actually feel like you are in that plane experiencing that terror and exhilaration first hand. This segment cannot be over praised, it is that good. Another sequence in a bomber, where the plane experiences massive engine failure and crashes into the sea with the crew all on board is also very well done. The flashback segments on Zamperini's running career are also fine, the extended sequence depicting three airmen's time on a life raft floating in the middle of the Pacific ocean is well done. So far it's all good.

Then we get to the meat of the film, the prisoner of war scenes, and the film becomes a ponderous slog through torture and brutal beatings of the main character by an effeminate and sadistic Japanese captor. This is essentially the entire second half of the film, and it becomes monotonous and numbing.

The photography, sound , and music in this film were all award-caliber, and Jolie shows great promise as a mainstream director.

This film came out a few months ago, so by now there are quite a few reviews--so I'll try to make my comments brief. The film is a biography of the wartime experiences of Louie Zmaperini--as well as a few flashbacks to his life before the war. Zamperini was famous both for being an Olympic athlete as well as his being a prisoner of war in Japan--all of which he later wrote about in his biography. In it, he also talks about his difficulties coping with PTSD and anger towards his Japanese tormentors--as well as, with the help of God, he was able to let go of the anger and life a normal life. In many ways, this is extremely similar to another recent film, "The Railway Man"--a film which, to me, is better and makes a much stronger emotional impact.

What what did I like and dislike about the film? The aerial sequences were pretty amazing--particularly how they used wonderful CGI to make it appear as if Mitsubishi Zeros were attacking a formation of B-24 Liberator bombers. The story also was very interesting. But the film also seemed to be missing the spiritual and emotional side--and mostly only talked about this in the epilogue which was written only. In many ways, interesting but curiously uninvolving at times.

I never compare books and movies, but one thing the book has over the movie was the distinct unpreparedness we had for war. The planes were flying deathtraps, and the supplies were totally inadequate.

Angelina Jolie had to make decisions about what to include and exclude in a two-hour film, so we missed a lot of important information that was in the book. No matter, the film itself was well worth watching. Not a great film, but entertaining.

If you want to be shocked and angered at the aircraft manufacturers, the military that failed to supply the troops ( where have we heard that before?), and the absolute barbarity of the Japanese in their prison camps, buy the book.

Come to think about it, watching the film will help you appreciate the book so much more.

Louis Zamperini (Jack O'Connell) is an Italian-American from Torrance, California. As a boy, he's a juvenile delinquent. Then his brother Pete notices his running abilities which takes him all the way to the '36 Olympics in Berlin. During WWII, he's a bombardier in the Pacific. He is captured and imprisoned by the Japanese.

This movie looks good technically. Director Angelina Jolie shows her competency in that respect. Jack O'Connell is OK. There is simply nothing that jumps out. There is little tension and no excitement. The story rolls on like a recitation with limited emotional content. It's still an interesting life and a compelling one to watch.

Okay, I've read Hilenbrand's book, which is simply riveting. Louis Zamperini's story is almost unbelievable and the movie cannot possibly do it justice in just over two hours. This could easily have stretched to four hours, but today's cinema-going public haven't got that kind of patience. The film is well done and I was certainly thoroughly entertained by it, knowing in advance it would never be as good as the book, but it certainly didn't leave me cold, demanding my ticket price back. Just watch this for the good movie that it is. Yes it could have been better, but it's a very good attempt by Jolie at the book. I just cannot understand why so many people have given it bad reviews. IMDb puzzles me greatly at times, especially when some awful movies get glowing reviews. Is there some sinister network of people out to sabotage certain movies? I really don't know. This is a very decent movie and Jolie should be proud of it.