Comparison of Thirty Seconds over Tokyo and Pearl Harbor - Essay Example

Comparison of Thirty Seconds over Tokyo and Pearl Harbor The films “Thirty Seconds over Tokyo” (1944) and Pearl Harbor (2001) are two films about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and the subsequent American bombing of Japan based on the book by Captain Ted Lawson, but they are vastly different in numerous areas. While the themes and characters are similar in both movies, the manners of expression within the movies differ in numerous ways. There are also similarities and differences in visual aspects of the movie, aspects of production, camera shots and angles, and mise en scene. This paper will compare the various details of these aspects within both the films and detail how film producers can create remakes that are unique and original. Although both of these films contain thematic content that has been the subject of numerous films, the writers, directors, and editors of “Thirty Seconds over Tokyo” and “Pearl Harbor” have managed to create films that are unique and were considered great films of their time. The theme of the attack on Pearl Harbor is not a new theme for war movies and has been exemplified in other films, like “From Here to Eternity” (1953) and “Tora! Tora! Tora!” (1970) (Fischer). However, this theme is crafted in an original manner on the film “Thirty Seconds over Tokyo”. In this film, the soldiers are the primary focus of the movie and the actual events of the bombing of Pearl Harbor and the American response are secondary. This pattern is also mimicked in the movie “Pearl Harbor”. The lives of the nurses and soldiers before the bombing are detailed and this focus is maintained throughout the film, keeping the actual events of the battles as secondary themes. The storylines are also similar in that they focus on the romance between the soldiers and their ladies and the battles the soldiers endure are expressed as secondary storylines. The movies are more romantic than military in content and context, although they still present the military aspects in the context of battle scenes. The first hour of the movies “Thirty Seconds over Tokyo” and “Pearl Harbor” emphasize the romances and civilian lives of the soldiers. However, “Pearl Harbor” also gives details about the lives of the nurses that were also in military service and were responsible for saving the lives of many soldiers and civilians. The battle scenes craftily interspersed with the romantic aspects of the films summarily remind the viewers that the films are about war. Although the movies were thematically based on the same topic, the characters in “Pearl Harbor” and “Thirty Seconds over Tokyo” were completely different. Beyond the mention of ‘Jimmy Doolittle’ in “Pearl Harbor”, which was supposed to represent the primary character of ‘Lt. Col. James Doolittle’ in “Thirty Seconds over Tokyo”, the characters in the two movies were completely different (Crowther; Scott). Additionally, the romance in “Thirty Seconds over Tokyo” was primarily centered around the romance between Doolittle and his wife, unlike “Pearl Harbor”, which also focused on the romances of several other characters. However, in both movies, the characters were supposed to represent commissioned soldiers that were called to fight for their country when the Japanese bombed the U.S. military base in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. The portrayal of these every day characters added to the drama created by the plot and theme of the movies. The director of the movie “Thirty Seconds over Tokyo” was Mervyn LeRoy and the producer was Sam Zimbalist. As the director, LeRoy was responsible for the direction of the actors and the direction the film took, specifically the restraint in the content of the film and the realistic portrayals of the characters (Crowther; Goodykoontz and Jacobs, 171). Based on the book of the same title that gives an account of the event from the perspective of Captain Ted Lawson, “Thirty Seconds over Tokyo” is filled with moving scenes of human emotion and vivid portrayals of B-52 bombers making daring take-offs from the deck of aircraft carriers (Crowther). The battle action is exciting and thrilling with convincing performances from the actors and riveting cinematography that depicts realistic action. The romantic moments are captured with sensitivity and give the impression that the viewer is watching a private moment in the lives of real people. The scenes in “Pear Harbor” follow the same production method. Directed by Jerry Bruckheimer and Michael Bay and executive produced by Mike Stenson, the movie is set in the lush, tropical atmosphere of the Hawaiian Islands. Bay and Bruckheimer use this pristine setting to paint an idyllic picture of the abiding friendship between Rafe and Danny and the love between Rafe and Evelyn. Their romance is shattered when Rafe volunteers for a mission and he is MIA, but later returns only to discover that Evelyn has fallen in love with his best friend Danny. The drama of this love triangle is peremptorily put on hold when the thrilling formations of Japanese bombers bombard this idyllic setting, causing destruction and chaos in this pristine setting. However, “Pearl Harbor” does not allow for the same character development and the grace of the storyline is lost in the melee of underlying storylines like the love triangle between Rafe, danny, and Evelyn, and the smattering of real characters, like Dorie Miller, James Doolittle (Scott). Although the plot and storyline of “Pearl Harbor” could have used significant improvement, the cinematography and special effects made up for these missing aspects. Bruckheimer and Bay capture stunning aerial scenes and terrific images of explosions combined with exciting computer generated images that make all the dynamic imagery seem realistic. The tough-guy character of Rafe is illustrated with stunning flight scenes filled with lots of gun fire and the shy, sensitive character of Danny is depicted with the poignant love scene shared between him and Evelyn after Rafe is declared MIA. Unlike “Thirty Seconds over Tokyo”, the horror of the attack on Pearl Harbor is emphasized in the title picture and blatant images of the devastation caused by the Japanese attack are captured through brilliant sequences of the death and mayhem caused by the bombing. Dramatic images of the destruction of the docked ships with hundreds of sailors on board and buildings and people being blown to bits engage the audience visually and emotionally, bringing cheers of jubilation when the heroes fly off to avenge the lost lives of American civilians and soldiers. Both movies use various camera angles to engage the audience and present the desired impression. “Thirty Seconds over Tokyo” was made in 1944 and the available cinematic devices used in “Pearl Harbor” were not available when “Thirty Seconds over Tokyo” was created. However, “Thirty Seconds over Tokyo” uses typical horizontal eye level, low level, and high level camera angles to capture numerous aspects of the action on screen (Goodykoontz and Jacobs, 97). The angle of the camera is symbolic of the perception the director wishes the audience to have of the character, like if the camera appears to be looking up at the actor, it may be intended for the audience to see this character as someone to be admired (Goodykoontz and Jacobs, 97). The film is shot in the 1.33:1 aspect ratio, as was typical during the 1940s and uses lenses of normal focal length and zoom lenses to capture close-up images of the characters in dramatic sequences (Goodykoontz and Jacobs, 99-101). “Pearl Harbor” is captured with the use of much more sophisticated technology than what was used in “Thirty Seconds over Tokyo”. However, the camera angles used in “Pearl Harbor” are similar to those used in “Thirty Seconds over Tokyo” with typical horizontal eye level, low level, and high level camera angles used to emphasize the personalities of the characters and embellish the drama of the story (Goodykoontz and Jacobs, 97). The sophisticated technology available during the making of “Pearl Harbor” makes use of green screens and computerized imagery as well as live action to create a superior cinematographic experience. Wide angle shots capture picturesque images of planes flying in formation over green grasses and rolling hills as small children watch in awe and realistic special effects show massive explosions that seem to pop off the screen. The camera follows Japanese missiles specially fitted to traverse shallow waters as they plummet from the Japanese fighters and explode on the decks of unsuspecting American ships in riveting detail. Lighting, along with a variety of types of camera shots varying from extreme close-ups to extreme long shots all combine in “Pearl Harbor” and “Thirty Seconds over Tokyo” to create powerful, emotional images that bring the shared story of Captain Lawson to life on the screen (Goodykoontz and Jacobs, 85). In both films, the shots are specifically designed to keep certain aspects in focus to enhance the emotional aspects of the scene, like when Lawson says goodbye to his wife in “Thirty Seconds over Tokyo” and when Evelyn sees Rafe again after thinking he was dead for several months in “Pearl Harbor”. Additionally, “Thirty Seconds over Tokyo” uses lighting within the shots to enhance specific aspects in close-up and medium close-up shots (Goodykoontz and Jacobs, 85). In “Pearl Harbor”, the colors are vibrant, depicting the use of saturation, while “Thirty Seconds over Tokyo” is in black and white and shows the use of desaturation, which gives the movie a realistic look (Goodykoontz and Jacobs, 95). Both films use framing to achieve a “combination of dramatic impact and aesthetic balance” (Goodykoontz and Jacobs, 98). The cinematographer interprets and intensifies the elements of mise en scene and the lighting as they see fit to create the imagery according to the instruction of the director (Goodykoontz and Jacobs, 87). The mise en scène includes numerous aspects of the cinematic experience, including the scenery, movement and positioning of the actors, props, the background, the blocking, and the intensity of the lighting (Goodykoontz and Jacobs, 87). The mise en scene in “Thirty Seconds over Tokyo” accurately depicts elements of the time with costumes and numerous elements as does “Pearl Harbor”. However, the mise en scene in “Thirty Seconds over Tokyo” is a bit more authentic, undoubtedly because the film was made during the 1940s when these elements were easily available and “Pearl Harbor” was made decades later. Despite these slight differences in the various elements of mise en scene, both films were able to accurately coordinate the various elements of mise en scene to present stunning, moving films. The contrasts between the visual aspects of the movie, aspects of production, camera shots and angles, and mise en scene within both the films have allowed the directors to create stunning remakes of the same material that is both distinctive and original. Although both of these films contain similar thematic content, “Thirty Seconds over Tokyo” and “Pearl Harbor” are unique and were considered great films of their time. Works Cited Crowther, Bosley. “The Screen: ‘Thirty Seconds over Tokyo’, a Faithful Mirror of Capt. Ted Lawson’s Book, With Van Johnson, Tracy, at Capitol”. New York Times 16 November 1944 Movie Review 22 Jul. 2011 . Fischer, J. “Top 7 Pearl Harbor Films and TV Mini-Series”. About.com. 22 Jul. 2011 . Goodykoontz, Bill and Jacobs, Christopher P. Film: From Watching to Seeing. 2011 California: Bridgepoint Education, Inc. https://content.ashford.edu Howe, Robert F. “They Turned the Tide: Members of the Doolittle Raiders Celebrate the 60th Anniversary of the U.S. Answer to Pearl Harbor”. Smithsonian Magazine-Smithsonian.com. August 2002. 22 Jul. 2011 . Pearl Harbor. Dir. Michael Bay. Touchstone Pictures, Walt Disney Studios Distribution, Gaumont Buena Vista International. Scott, A.O. “Film Review: War is Hell, but Very Pretty”. New York Times 25 May 2001 Movie Review. 22 Jul. 2011 . Thirty Seconds over Tokyo. Dir. Melvyn LeRoy. Metro-Goldwyn Mayer, 1944. Read More