A tale of war and romance mixed in with history. The story follows two lifelong friends and a beautiful nurse who are caught up in the horror of an infamous Sunday morning in 1941.A tale of war and romance mixed in with history. The story follows two lifelong friends and a beautiful nurse who are caught up in the horror of an infamous Sunday morning in 1941.A tale of war and romance mixed in with history. The story follows two lifelong friends and a beautiful nurse who are caught up in the horror of an infamous Sunday morning in 1941.
- Won 1 Oscar
- 14 wins & 51 nominations total
Jaime King
- Betty
- (as James King)
Matthew Davis
- Joe
- (as Matt Davis)
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaWhen shooting the scene where Rafe (Ben Affleck) and Danny (Josh Hartnett) manage to get off the ground during the attack, and are chased by three Japanese Zeroes, one of the real planes clipped a palm tree and crashed. The pilot was dazed, and suffered only a broken finger.
- Goofs(at around 1h 20 mins) The Japanese are shown flipping a calendar from the 6th to the 7th of December on the morning of the attack. This is done for American audiences who are familiar with the date of the attack being 7 December 1941. Clocks aboard the Japanese ships were kept on Tokyo time, so for them the attack actually took place the morning of 8 December. The Japanese version of the film shows the calendar flipping from the 7th to the 8th.
- Quotes
Admiral Yamamoto: I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant.
- Crazy creditsUnusually, Pearl Harbor started without showing the opening Touchstone and Bruckheimer logos; they only showed up after the end credits.
- Alternate versionsThe VHS & HDTV versions of the movie are presented in 16x9 pan and scan with the battle scenes presented in 1.85:1.
- ConnectionsEdited into Transformers (2007)
- SoundtracksThere You'll Be
Written by Diane Warren
Produced by Trevor Horn and Byron Gallimore
Performed by Faith Hill
Courtesy of Warner Bros. Records
Featured review
Quintessential Hollywood Big production
Pearl Harbor
Pearl Harbor is Hollywood at its most ambitious. From glossy photography, beautiful wide-angle shots, eye-widening special effects and exceptionally good-looking people playing the lead characters, it offers a lot of eye candy to those who are willing to sit through the long movie. In fact, it reminds me of a big cake with a recipe in which the makers tried to include all the tried-and-true ingredients of a commercially successful movie: visual treats, humor, drama, action and a story involving love, passion, friendship, vengeance and a good dose of patriotism. It almost seems as if director Michael Bay wanted to challenge the audience with all these elements to be entertained by a movie twice the length of a typical feature without lapsing into boredom. If that was the challenge then he succeeded: it was entertaining, it really did not feel like three hours, and I, at least, did not feel bored at any time during the movie.
My impression is that most of the negative reviews are critical of the movie because they are looking for something that went beyond its intentions. Definitely, A Saving Private Ryan this movie ain't. But I believe that one should evaluate a movie, as one would any other work of art, for what it is and not for what it should be. Take the love story, for example. It has been criticized by many as being extraneous. It is true that a story about philosophical and ethical questions raised by war (and treated in Ryan) would have been more fitting in the context. As it stands, the life-changing attack could have been replaced by a natural disaster without losing much from the gist of the story. But what would a quintessential great Hollywood production be without a love story? Besides, the beauty of Kate Beckinsale adds to the visual aesthetics. Another possible charge against the movie might be that it tends to glamorize war. That may be true, but again, this movie is not meant to be a propaganda call for arms, but just a few hours of good entertainment. I must admit, though, that in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks against the WTC, the reply of William Baldwin's character to a question-that if he ran out of plane fuel, he would `find the sweetest military target and try to kill as many Japanese as possible'- sent chills down my spine because it illustrated how righteous the terrorists must have felt. I suppose the recent events highlight the movie's rudimentary treatment of the philosophical issues and conflicts associated with war, especially if one considers the obvious similarities.
In the end, if you eat this cake to be enlightened by some new insights, you will be disappointed. If you eat it, however, to enjoy it for its own sake, you will.
Pearl Harbor is Hollywood at its most ambitious. From glossy photography, beautiful wide-angle shots, eye-widening special effects and exceptionally good-looking people playing the lead characters, it offers a lot of eye candy to those who are willing to sit through the long movie. In fact, it reminds me of a big cake with a recipe in which the makers tried to include all the tried-and-true ingredients of a commercially successful movie: visual treats, humor, drama, action and a story involving love, passion, friendship, vengeance and a good dose of patriotism. It almost seems as if director Michael Bay wanted to challenge the audience with all these elements to be entertained by a movie twice the length of a typical feature without lapsing into boredom. If that was the challenge then he succeeded: it was entertaining, it really did not feel like three hours, and I, at least, did not feel bored at any time during the movie.
My impression is that most of the negative reviews are critical of the movie because they are looking for something that went beyond its intentions. Definitely, A Saving Private Ryan this movie ain't. But I believe that one should evaluate a movie, as one would any other work of art, for what it is and not for what it should be. Take the love story, for example. It has been criticized by many as being extraneous. It is true that a story about philosophical and ethical questions raised by war (and treated in Ryan) would have been more fitting in the context. As it stands, the life-changing attack could have been replaced by a natural disaster without losing much from the gist of the story. But what would a quintessential great Hollywood production be without a love story? Besides, the beauty of Kate Beckinsale adds to the visual aesthetics. Another possible charge against the movie might be that it tends to glamorize war. That may be true, but again, this movie is not meant to be a propaganda call for arms, but just a few hours of good entertainment. I must admit, though, that in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks against the WTC, the reply of William Baldwin's character to a question-that if he ran out of plane fuel, he would `find the sweetest military target and try to kill as many Japanese as possible'- sent chills down my spine because it illustrated how righteous the terrorists must have felt. I suppose the recent events highlight the movie's rudimentary treatment of the philosophical issues and conflicts associated with war, especially if one considers the obvious similarities.
In the end, if you eat this cake to be enlightened by some new insights, you will be disappointed. If you eat it, however, to enjoy it for its own sake, you will.
helpful•3739
- The Analytical Critic
- Oct 13, 2001
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official site
- Languages
- Also known as
- Tennessee
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $140,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $198,542,554
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $59,078,912
- May 27, 2001
- Gross worldwide
- $449,220,945
- Runtime3 hours 3 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.39 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content