UNBROKEN: A World War II Story of Survival, Resilience, and Redemption. A Review of the Movie Unbroken-- Before I begin, I need to tell where I am coming from. I have read the book by Laura Hillenbrand at least eight times. To me the story is absolutely incredible, and a testament to the human will, and to the power of forgiveness through God. I have read this book to many students as it is part of my curriculum in American History class. I have been looking forward to this movie since I heard that it was being made two years ago. I have been exited to see it because it would finally give some visuals to this incredible story. I saw it last weekend and I was thoroughly disappointed. I understand that any movie director/wrote who is going to take on the task of turning a book of 400 pages into a movie has a huge responsibility. There are going to be things missing. That is a given. The enormity of that task is daunting when deciding what to keep and what to cut. Having said that, I believe that this movie did not do Louie Zamperini’s life justice. The title of the book (which is what the movie is based off of) is “a story of survival.” The survival part was covered well. The audience knows that he survives some horrific treatment from the Japanese. “Resilience.” Zamperini’s resilience depicted in the movie is also well done. He never gives up. A common theme in the movie is advice (something that does not appear in the book) from his brother “if you can take it, you can make it.” That mantra plays a key role in Louie’s survival and resilience in this film. The biggest problem that I had (among many) with this movie was the fact that Angelina Jolie decided that she was going to relegate the entire redemption part of the book to a footnote at the end of the movie. Louie Zamperini was not, in my opinion, defined by his wartime survival. He was defined by the redemption and forgiveness that he so graciously imparted on his Japanese captors. Not because of anything that he himself did, but because of the power of God changed him from a person severely traumatized by what the Japanese did to him; a person who suffered tremendously from PTSD; a person who almost destroyed (literally) his own life, and the life of his wife because of anger and resentment from what happened to him. Zamperini went to Japan and personally, face-to-face forgave the men who would have killed him, a gesture so powerful that any moviegoer (including myself) would have shed tears that would have filled up a swimming pool. I am extremely saddened by the fact that none of that was depicted in the movie. A few other things that I did not care for in the film: I did not feel like “The Bird” (Louie’s most feared captor) was depicted well. I thought the actor who played “The Bird” did an excellent job, but his sadistic nature, so evident in the book, was not nearly what it could have been. Another issue I had were factual issues. There were a few scenes that depicted men from the POW camps stealing from the Japanese, but it was in the wrong camp. In the movie it showed Louie and “Phil” on the raft being rescued on the 45th day, when they were rescued on the 47th day at sea. Louie did not promise to serve God during a storm, but in the calm and stillness of, what Laura Hillenbrand-the author of the book, called the “doldrums.” The movie also did not depict Louie in the first camp that he was taken to by the Japanese. Some may say that I am nitpicking. Perhaps I am. But my thoughts are that if someone has read the book (which millions have. It spent upwards of 150 straight weeks on the bestseller list) then the movie would have done a better job of at least getting facts right. The story shown in the movie is good for those who have not read the book, but I feel that a moviegoer who has read the book will be disappointed in what was made, I know this one was. I welcome your comments/questions thoughts.
Posted on: Wed, 31 Dec 2014 19:22:45 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015