Talk:Flags of Our Fathers (film)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There are a few basic things wrong with this listing[edit]

There are a few basic things wrong with this listing. Bradley was a Navy Hospital Corpsman (formal rating) and not a Navy Medical Corpsman. The Navy has ratings (Hospital Corpsman, Machinist Mate, Radarman) and ranks. The listing gives the Marines ranks (Corporal, Sargent) but Bradley's rate. I believe Bradley left the Naval Service with a rank of Second Class Petty Officer. They were all Admirals and Generals as far as I am concerned. 69.130.85.55 01:48, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where was it filmed?[edit]

Where was it filmed?

The credits a variety of battle related craftspeople in Iceland, so it appears that substituted for Iwo Jima. Seaphoto 04:55, 30 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seaphoto (talk • contribs)

The soldier falling in the water[edit]

Did a soldier really fall in the water and drown because no one would stop to retrieve him?

Historical Accuracy in General[edit]

How much does it have? I'm not interested in seeing it if it's not highPEEEE. Jachra 04:38, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


From what I saw it was really accurate from a war perspective. I don't really know about the characters private lives though.

  • I've read the book and interviews with various marines who were there and the movie is pretty accurate. Only a few inaccuracies jumped out at me. In real life, only Ira Hayes believed that it was Harlon Block, and not Hank Hansen, in the photograph. When the issue was investigated by the Marine Corps in 1947,at first Bradley and Gagnon both insisted that Hayes was wrong and it was indeed Hansen. When shown the photographic evidence (Hansen in several other photos taken on the same day is wearing crossed bandoliers, a soft cap and "bloused" boots and is not wearing a field jacket unlike the man in the photo at the base of the flag) that Hayes was pointing out, only then did Bradley and Gagnon agree that "it could be Block."
  • Harlon Block was killed by a mortar blast, not by rifle fire as shown in the film. Franklin Sousley was shot once in the back by a sniper while walking down an open road, not several times, and did not die in the arms of Ira Hayes as shown in the movie. Sir Rhosis 04:44, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Doc" Bradley and Ira Hayes did not go into a Japanese cave and witness the horror of the Japanese suicides.
Should the last point be mentioned in this article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.171.129.165 (talk) 03:32, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Black Marines[edit]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't blacks in the USA barred from serving in the Marine Core? Goldfishsoldier 22:35, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • You're wrong. They were barred from serving in some military occupational specialties, but not the Marine Corps as a whole. Sir Rhosis 12:33, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
African Americans played a much smaller role with the Marine Corps then they did with the Army or the other services during WWII. As for Iwo Jima, there was a company or two involved as ammunition resupply specialists in an overall force of over 100,000. As for the Marine Corps in general...the majority served with the 51st and 52nd Defense battalions after having been trained at Montford Point. These were AAA/base defense units that saw limited action during the war. --Looper5920 16:28, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Spike Lee "apology".

The article states Mr. Lee sent a copy of a film he was working on to Eastwood for a private screening as a seemed token of apology.

There is no such thing as a seemed token of apology. An apology is unambiguous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.239.148 (talk) 23:57, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Battle[edit]

I'm not sure if this is accurate. In the movie, one machine-gun from a bunker sets off all of the Japanese guns. Was it really like that during the battle? Did one bunker start shooting and then all the other ones followed?


Unit designation[edit]

The flag-raisers were part of the 28th Marine Regiment, which was part of the 5th Marine Division. The 28th Division was (and still is) a Pennsylvania Army National Guard unit which fought in the European Theater of Operations during World War II and was never anywhere near Iwo Jima! PhantomWSO (talk) 05:13, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Flags1b1.jpg[edit]

Image:Flags1b1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 23:29, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Flagsofourfathers run.jpg[edit]

Image:Flagsofourfathers run.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 23:29, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Iwojimaflags.jpg[edit]

Image:Iwojimaflags.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 20:50, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Flags of our fathers.jpg[edit]

Image:Flags of our fathers.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:05, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism doesnt seem so unbiased[edit]

The criticism aspect doesn't seem very unbiased. Here's why. It intially begins by presenting both points of the view. But then goes on to present Clint Eastwood's side of the view exclusively. Basically after presenting Spike's viewpoint it doesnt go any further to explain why he said what he said and if he did know that black soldiers were indeed depicted in the movie

Basically, it doesnt present third party viewpoints but goes on to REFUTE Spike's comments to SHOW that he was wrong. These actions(in bold) were done by the author of the wikipedia page instead of showing commentary or actions of spike lee and the issues involved. While this may be true, it is not fair to present the information in such a way. More comments should have been presented reflecting Spikes view point since a lot of text was used to tacitly support Clint Eastwood's viewpoint by refuting Spike's issues with the movie. I think this violates terms of unbiased presentation on wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Surag238 (talk • contribs) 04:19, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Considering the criticism is refereed to historical accuracy that can easy be verified and sourced what do you think that should be done? I admit the ending part does put the argument to rest certainly comes close to original resource but the statement is linked to a source and so it can be verified. Fact is Spike Lee IS wrong and criticism should not be a debate85.139.81.34 (talk) 01:27, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Flags of Our Fathers (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:53, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Flags_of_Our_Fathers_(film)&oldid=1207243932"