'Pearl Harbor' fails to hit critical targets

By Derek Paiva
Advertiser Staff Writer

Not long after the brilliant, special-effects laden attack sequence that is the centerpiece of Disney's otherwise soulless "Pearl Harbor," Japanese Adm. Isoroku Yamamoto, taking stock of the surprise bombing that he helped plan, says, "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant."

•	Read reviews by: Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times Entertainment Weekly Los Angeles Times New York Daily News film.com • • •
•	Critics' ratings (out of four stars) The Journal News (Westchester, NY) ** 1/2 Saint Paul Pioneer Press (Saint Paul, Minn.) ** The Detroit News, Susan Stark * The Philadelphia Inquirer ** The Kansas City Star ** Gannett News Service *** • • •
•	Other comments "Nothing more than 40 minutes of showoff stunts padded with more than two hours of a love story that exceeds all known tolerance levels for sappiness." — Rolling Stone "'Pearl Harbor' strives to weave a story of personal dimensions into large, historic events but mostly tests one's patience with unseaworthy dialogue and performers drowning in oily cliches." — Hollywood Reporter "The surprise is that it may be the squarest event movie in years." — Entertainment Weekly "Hunting for your name in the 10-plus minutes of end credits would be far more productive than watching the nearly three hours of dreck that precedes it." — Associated Press

Disney executives are hoping for a record $100 million-plus opening Memorial Day weekend for their epic.

"'Pearl Harbor' is a deep-down phony," wrote Rolling Stone magazine's Peter Travers, accusing Bruckheimer and Bay of, "trying to pass off shoddy goods as history and get a piece of the Oscar pie that's been feeding the ego of 'Titanic' director James Cameron."

Time magazine's Richard Schickel called the film, "... watchable in a dim, beclouded sort of way," while Philadelphia Inquirer critic Carrie Rickey wrote, "Michael Bay's 'Pearl Harbor' sells American patriotism hollow as souvenir plastic Liberty Bells."

Critics let loose on subjects ranging from the film's ignorance of the attack's most recognizable icon, the USS Arizona, to Ben Affleck's wooden acting, and from the film's often inane dialogue, to its emotionless, white-bread love triangle storyline.

Roger Ebert colored the love story one "of stunning banality" lacking "... a shred of conviction or chemistry."

"Perhaps they should have called this 'Bore-a, Bore-a, Bore-a,' " wrote Washington Post critic Desson Howe, grousing that by the time Bay stages the attack, "you're ready to bomb something yourself."

Many critics couldn't resist showing their disdain for the director's three-hour plus finished product, even when praising Bay's visually stunning 43-minute rendering of the Pearl Harbor attack.

If not for the attack, " 'Pearl Harbor' would be an almost complete embarrassment—an unaffecting, cliche-riddled bore," wrote Kansas City Star critic Robert W. Butler. "One might as well seek sophisticated entertainment by watching pre-schoolers play dress-up."

Associated Press film writer David Germain called the film "... the ultimate modern example of Hollywood bloat and bilge" and "a dumb, soulless behemoth that delivers the cinematic equivalent of shell shock."

Of the film's conclusion — a video game-ready version of the 1942 Doolittle bombing raid on Tokyo meant to achieve an "eye-for-an-eye" feel with moviegoers — Saint Paul Pioneer Press critic Chris Hewitt concluded, "One of the worst moments in U.S. history is dragged, kicking and screaming, to a happy ending."

Not surprisingly, little is mentioned in Mainland reviews of the film's disregard for the effect of the attack on O'ahu's noncombatants. Sixty-eight civilians were killed, mostly by friendly fire. The film falsely gives the millions likely to see it the impression that O'ahu essentially is Pearl Harbor, or at most, an outpost of military bases filled with transient Mainlanders.

Then again, locals may have gotten off easy, what with the blink-and-you'll-miss-it storyline of real-life Pearl Harbor hero Dorie Miller — played by Cuba Gooding Jr. — who Time critic Schickel wrote, "is merely sketched into the narrative."

Still, not every critic was negative.

The Los Angeles Times' Kevin Thomas called "Pearl Harbor's" love story "engaging," and the film, a blend of "artistry and technology to create a blockbuster entertainment that has passion, valor and tremendous action."

And even the most fickle reviewers predicted a happy holiday weekend for Disney chairman Michael Eisner's multimillion dollar stock portfolio as moviegoers flock to their local multiplexes.

As for us, we're still trying to forget our glimpse during a "Pearl Harbor" media screening last week of the morning sun of Dec. 7, 1941, rising ... over the Wai'anae mountain range.

Consider yourself warned.