Hollywood pulled one on us again

By Lee Cataluna
Advertiser Staff Writer

After the parties and the fawning media coverage, after the red carpet and the "aloha crisp," after blistering reviews written with what seemed like gleeful malice, after three hours spent in a cold theater with too-salty popcorn, the entire "Pearl Harbor" movie experience leaves a series of questions that can best be summed up with that age-old expression:

"Eh, how come?"

Starting off with the pre-premiere hype, when the movie was pronounced the biggest, bestest blockbuster the world had ever seen. The film makers said it was the best ever. The actors said it was the best ever. Every local radio station did a live broadcast from the outskirts of the party and said it was the best ever.

Then they showed the movie, and it wasn't. Despite a budget that topped $150 million, despite experts and consultants and historians who weighed in, and despite a subject that is inherently gripping and epic and all-encompassing of the weight of human tragedy, the movie wasn't all that great. Eh, how come?

Eh, how come the title was "Pearl Harbor" when it wasn't really about Pearl Harbor? If the love story was the focus and the attack was just a backdrop, why wasn't it called "Red Lipstick" or "He Came Back" or "How Evelyn Got Her Groove Back"?

Eh, how come so many veterans gave a thumbs up to the movie when all of the three main characters are shown blatantly breaking military rules of conduct (unauthorized drills in flight school, taking a passenger for a joy ride in an Army plane, blabbing about secret missions ...) Didn't that bother anyone?

Eh, how come Ben Affleck's character can barely read in one scene and is writing eloquent love letters in another?

Eh, how come we're supposed to ignore the historical inaccuracies and focus on the love story when we never really understand why these people fall in love except that they're all really cute?

Eh, how come none of the characters have any faults?

Eh, how come the tower on the airfield and bunkers shown in the side of a hill are as rusty and crumbled as they are in present day?

Eh, how come there aren't any locals in the movie except for maybe the bartender? (How trite is that?!)

And how come yet another movie partially shot in Hawai'i and set in Hawai'i has very little to do with Hawai'i except for a couple of sunset shots and a tiki-torch bar filled with kitchy hula-girl lamps?

"Pearl Harbor" isn't as bad as some reviewers say, but it certainly isn't the epic everyone from the producers to the shamelessly cheerleading local media told us it would be. Once again, Hollywood over-promised and under-delivered. You'd think they'd know better. You'd think we'd know better.

Eh, how come?

Lee Cataluna's column runs Tuesdays, Fridays and Sundays. Her e-mail address is lcataluna@honoluluadvertiser.com.