Unbroken (2014) Reviews

• A good introduction to the book

  lastliberal-853-2537082015-07-10

  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.

• Fabulous story, and troubling, but also weirdly bland, despite first rate filming...

  secondtake2015-02-10

  Unbroken (2014) Heartbreaking, inspiring true story, told and directed in straight up high quality realism. There is some true intensity in the fighting scenes, in the survival scenes on the raft, and in the prison camp with its torture and hardship. And this is balanced by determination and hope. If that sounds generic, in a way that fits—the movie follows some tried and true formulas. The beginning has us with the hero, Louis Zamperini (played by Jack O'Connell), in a big bomber heading for some targets against Japan in WWII. As trouble begins, leading to the crash which makes up the real start of the movie, we also get flashbacks to his simple Italian-American childhood. This is effective, but it's sentimental stuff. And it lets you know the kind of wholesome intentions of the movie. There is a lot going on here, in three main sections: running, surviving on a raft, and the prison camps. That Zamperini suffers and endures is the point of the film, and in that way the narrative is very straight forward. There are villains and buddies. The skies rain bombs and the sea is full of sharks. Some people are merciless, and others kind. But in the middle, through every turn and travail, is Zamperini. "If you can take it, you can make it," is a mantra in the film, and that's the message. The direction and photography were first rate…very subtle in a spectacular way (or vice versa). It's a truly fine film, and director Angelina Jolie (in her second feature, after a terrible first try) does a really good job. The story, co-written by the Coen brothers and others, based on a book by Laura Hillenbrand, is a great bit of history, quite sensational stuff. So why did we leave the movie feeling just so-so about it all? I'm not sure how to nicely say this, but it's really a good story, well told, lacking some quality of surprise or depth it really needs to rise above. As amazing as the photography and editing (and so on) are, it's all in service to a fairly ordinary kind of story. Not that this man's life is ordinary at all, but the way it develops and is told is oddly routine, as narrative storytelling. Good stuff, for sure. It's a bit hard to take sometimes for its brutality--there is a lot of graphic, personal violence--and the Japanese camps are portrayed as truly cruel (which many in Japan object to). But it's an impressive movie in many ways.

• Unbroken

  christopherhitchcock232015-02-04

  I cannot understand the negative reviews of this movie ,are the themes of bravery,endurance and forgiveness outdated?It is well known that the regeime of Japanese prison camps was cruel to say the least.The acting of the lead players was faultless proving again that British and Irish actors can play the roles of Americans.I found the movie moving, inspirational. Yes it was violent but not gratious. Ms Jolie is to be congratulated on her directing. One question did the leads fast for their roles or was CGI used to give the impression of their skeletal frames.The ariel dog fights did use use computer enhancement as did the plane crash.I found this movie much more watchable than the much praised"American Sniper"

• Where is the rest of the story?!

  juliecharbanic2014-12-26

  ***May Contain Spoilers*** The story of Louis Zamperini is only half told in Angelina Jolie's "Unbroken." After watching a screening of this film I did a little internet research on Mr. Zamperini and found that his life post-war, in my opinion, was equally emotional, meaningful and film worthy as his POW years. This film, while beautifully shot, lacked the true depth of Zamperini's life. In the beginning of the film, Angelina Jolie goes overboard in showing the viewer his early life and his Olympic journey. Next up are the war years and POW torture. The End. In addition to not feeling anything toward Zamperini's chief brutalizer, the torture scenes were way too long. After a few scenes viewers will get the point that this man went through Hell. What happens after the war is where the real story begins and where "Unbroken" stops. Louis Zamperini's struggles continued for quite some time until he found God. This new journey took him back to Japan where he sought out his captors and forgave them. However, his nemesis, the Bird, did not want to meet him...but Zamperini tried. I would have liked to see more of Zamperini's post-war PTSD struggle as this is such a relevant topic today, culminating with his will to forgive which ultimately saved him. For those who are only interested in Zamperini as an Olympian and POW, then you will appreciate this film. I found this film failed to address the full life of Louis Zamperini and felt his wikipedia entry would have been a better guide for Jolie.

• Little / No Character Motivation or Progression

  brentn32014-12-28

  !May contain Spoilers! This movie does little beyond telling the story of Louis Zamperini - and it does so with a lot of missing details, no character growth, and contains little else than drawn out scenes of suffering. The movie is very similar to The Passion of the Christ in that the film shows little progression except when the main character is shown suffering in some way. The characters shown in the movie, Louis and "The Bird" being chief among them, have little to no backgrounds, motivations, or growth / story arcs. Louis is shown first as a troublesome child, then a youth learning to run, then an Olympian, and finally a soldier; between these scenes, however, there is no transition, no story about him deciding to go for the Olympics, and no story on whether he was drafted or voluntarily signed up to be a soldier. This results in the movie being very oddly paced and Louis having little substance to his background. Louis, while suffering in the Japanese prison camp, is never shown thinking "I can't do this" or progressing to the point that he determines "I will make it out alive no matter what." He is simply tortured, repeatedly beaten and humiliated, and finally the war simply ends. Strangely enough, no other prisoners or "extras" are shown being killed / executed at the camp, which does little to help show the brutality of their conditions. Finally, the movie ends with written paragraphs on-screen which detail his life back in the US and how he forgave his captors. One of the biggest rules of film is to "show them, not tell them," and considering that the written part of the story at the end contains more interesting parts of his life than most the movie, it seems the film was barely able to "show us" as well. The source material for the movie; Louis's story, is extraordinary and exciting, its unfortunate that the movie does very little to give it justice.