Windtalkers : Les Messagers du vent

I thought this was a film about Navajo code talkers. Well, it's not. While there are a couple of Navajos in the film, the story revolves around Nicolas Cage winning WWII all by himself. This guy's incredible and makes John Wayne look like a wimp. Every time the Marines are in trouble, up jumps good old Nicolas Cage with his Thompson and POOF! the battle is WON! I wonder how we won WWII without Nicolas Cage? The film has a LOT of combat footage and most of that is very well done. That alone is worth a watch but don't expect to learn much of anything about the Navajo code talkers. You should read about them, because theirs was an important part of history, but they're a minor part in this film. I gave it a 6, only because of the good combat footage.

I finally watched this movie, it long caught my interest but fell of my radar for years. I do recommend watching this movie--at least until some independent filmmakers (or streaming studio) makes a worthy version of this story. The story is incredible. As an high-tech engineer, I am blown away by the fact that the human brain and unusual language was able to solve a real-time encryption problem decades ahead of any possible other technology. Sure, machines like enigma could be used, but, that is a heavy and vulnerable asset to drag around on the front lines. Really heroic story, and even more moving given the lack of respect shown to native Americans since the European invasion of their homelands.

Incredible human drama. Great performances by the lead Navajo actors. Cage was his usual fantastic self, despite the flimsy lines he was given. The rest of the movie was---meh. Typical Hollywood narcissism. Spend most of the budget blowing things up and sending people careening in all directions in bits and pieces. Zero depth to any other characters, including the Japanese, who were little more than animated cardboard cutouts screaming and shooting. This movie should be a poster child for the imminent demise of the Hollywood glory days, following in the path of cable TV as they chase each other down in a great swirling flush. The best thing about the streaming media revolution is that it busted up the Hollywood empires, and with that I have hope in a retelling of this story by more intelligent, skilled hands.

A war movie done John Woo-style sounded like such a good idea on paper. The slow-motion action sequences and other typical Woo-ism elements are often even more laughable than beautiful or realistic. Same goes for the deeper and sentimental meanings of the movie.

It's obvious John Woo wanted to make a "Saving Private Ryan" realistic like war movie but the movie gets stuck somewhere between Hollywood action/war entertainment and a serious war movie.

The battle sequences look too fabricated and planned out, which is of course a killer for the movie its realism. Sure the battle sequences all look fine and it obvious cost some serious money to make this movie.

Between all of the battles and action within the movie, there are lots of slow moments. Guess it tries to be deep or something, also about the Navajo-culture, in those moments but it instead feels pointless and often like a drag. Same goes for most of the sentiments within the movie. It's also the reason why the movie is quite long.

The movie is an underwritten one that for a genre movie is too formulaic. It's mostly a predictable movie that offers very few surprises or original moments. A shame, since the concept of the movie is definitely an original one. The movie also doesn't bother to tell where and why they are fighting. What are all these battles? Why are they being fought? And yes, of course the movie also finds room to put in a love-story. All of the character also remain pretty shallow one's, no matter how far they dig into their past.

Nicolas Cage just wasn't made for these sort of movies. The movie is filled with some other well known names in it and most of them do a good job. It's not like the acting is one of the weakest elements of the movie but that still doesn't mean that everyone was correctly cast.

It's definitely a watchable movie but its shortcomings just prevent this movie from being a great or really memorable one.

6/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

I just watched the director's cut on DVD after having seen the theatrical cut some time ago.

Plot summary: In WWII, a code based on the Navajo language was used to securely communicate between US troops in the Asian Pacific, without the Japanese eavesdropping. We follow two Navajo code talkers and their US Marine "bodyguards" as they go into combat on a Japanese island.

A lot has been written about this somewhat flawed John Woo movie. After having seen both versions, my main disappointment is still that the two code talkers seem like background characters. A movie with a lower budget, without big Hollywood stars put in the foreground would probably have been more satisfying. Maybe that movie should have been done by another director too, I don't know.

Enough good "general" war movies have been made. The code talker part of the story should have been made much more pivotal as was done here.

I'm a fan of Woo's Hong Kong and Hollywood work. The director's cut of Windtalkers doesn't turn a mediocre Woo film into a masterpiece, but it is certainly an improvement.

Main advantages of the DC are more fleshed out characters. You get more background on all main characters, including the two Navajo code talkers. I felt more involved. As a result, the code talker part of the story is served better, but still not enough to my taste. The DC also has more uncut battlefield scenes. Woo really shows his talent here, with raw yet beautifully shot war action. You get the sense that you are in the middle of the action.

I was particularly interested if a scene was put back in where a US soldier takes a golden tooth from a Japanese corpse. This scene was described in several documentaries about censorship by the US Army. Not completely surprisingly, this scene was also absent from the DC.

If you are a Woo fan or already appreciated the theatrical cut, it may be worth checking out the director's cut.

My ratings: 6/10 for the original cut. 8/10 for the director's cut.

The film is actually quite good. One of the main drawbacks about this film however is its focus. The timing seems off regarding some aspects in my view, which is the fault of the director. John Woo is better at creating beautiful looking battle scenes than he is at letting characters capture their moments and develop. At times the war violence definitely also looks too impressive and choreographed, which in another way slightly takes away from the film. Are we watching a ballet, or a war film here? At the same time the story is mostly very good and Cage in my view was excellent. Even despite a director who's not overly great with developing characters and allowing us to feel them fully. Somehow, Cage still manages to create something special here. Despite what anyone may say about Cage, the guy, when given the right role can knock it out of the park. He pretty much does here. The film and his character in some ways are certainly a little Hollywood cartoonish one could say, but you also have to give some credence to the fact that some people really were and are brave war heroes. Extraordinary events like war can lead to extraordinary actions by human beings, sometimes both good and bad.

I have heard there is now a Director's cut of this film available, and to be honest I'm not sure what version I saw, since I just streamed it. Anyway, even so, there's little doubt in my mind that the best Cage/Woo film will probably always be, Face/Off. Nonetheless, this film is well worth checking out too. 7/10.