Rate The Last Movie You Saw

you said "The vast majority of the sequence involving Hacksaw Ridge itself manages to make the combat more disturbing than "exciting" and the chaos is so overwhelming that it gets hard to tell who is "winning" or not because of how many people are getting brutally maimed or killed"

I'll repeat my earlier sentiments.. maybe we should go back and change history and the nature of war to suit your cinematic requirements so we can see who is... winning

I was excited.

As to the ending which you think doesn't fit in to the film is just befuddling, this film does not just show Doss the "conscienctious co-operater" it also shows the heroism of armed soldiers in war, which you admitted was brutal.. even at one point Doss is indirectly responsible for a Japanese soldiers death.. and devotes very little time at the end to the outcome of the war, it does not show the ridge being taken or the war being won, it shows soldiers giving cover fire as Doss comes down, the ending was correct within the whole theme of the film, I'm trying to be nice here but I don't expect you to meet me half way or anything

you said "The vast majority of the sequence involving Hacksaw Ridge itself manages to make the combat more disturbing than "exciting" and the chaos is so overwhelming that it gets hard to tell who is "winning" or not because of how many people are getting brutally maimed or killed"

I'll repeat my earlier sentiments.. maybe we should go back and change history and the nature of war to suit your cinematic requirements so we can see who is... winning

I was excited.

As to the ending which you think doesn't fit in to the film is just befuddling, this film does not just show Doss the "conscienctious co-operater" it also shows the heroism of armed soldiers in war, which you admitted was brutal.. even at one point Doss is indirectly responsible for a Japanese soldiers death.. and devotes very little time at the end to the outcome of the war, it does not show the ridge being taken or the war being won, it shows soldiers giving cover fire as Doss comes down, the ending was correct within the whole theme of the film, I'm trying to be nice here but I don't expect you to meet me half way or anything

Consider that the sentence about how "it's hard to tell who is winning" is supposed to reference how the film is deliberately causing directionless chaos to reflect the messiness of war - in effect complimenting the film. At that point in the film, both sides are still caught in a bloody stalemate. It was in the paragraph where I was actually talking up the film by saying it "did a pretty decent job" - I thought it was a choice that paid off considering the "war and violence are bad" points it was making for most of the movie. That's why I also thought that it "not being exciting" was a good thing - there's a common complaint about war movies where anti-war sentiments don't work because the war itself looks "exciting" to viewers, which directly contradicts the idea that war is an inherently horrible and traumatic thing. It's a difficult balance to get right, and my main problem with Hacksaw Ridge was that it was actually doing well at getting that balance right - up until the bit where the U.S. fights back against the Japanese and win (at least that's what is implied by the Japanese leaders committing suicide during the final assault - I doubt that they'd do that if they were winning the battle). The problem is that the rest of the film actually shows violence to be ugly and nasty even when the Americans are doing it to defend themselves, so for the film to suddenly start showing violence in a triumphant manner as the Americans take the ridge (and they do take the ridge) just feels...wrong. Like I said in that link, I know that's what happened in real life but the way they showed it in the film did not match to the point that the rest of the film was making.

Consider that the sentence about how "it's hard to tell who is winning" is supposed to reference how the film is deliberately causing directionless chaos to reflect the messiness of war - in effect complimenting the film. At that point in the film, both sides are still caught in a bloody stalemate. It was in the paragraph where I was actually talking up the film by saying it "did a pretty decent job" - I thought it was a choice that paid off considering the "war and violence are bad" points it was making for most of the movie. That's why I also thought that it "not being exciting" was a good thing - there's a common complaint about war movies where anti-war sentiments don't work because the war itself looks "exciting" to viewers, which directly contradicts the idea that war is an inherently horrible and traumatic thing. It's a difficult balance to get right, and my main problem with Hacksaw Ridge was that it was actually doing well at getting that balance right - up until the bit where the U.S. fights back against the Japanese and win (at least that's what is implied by the Japanese leaders committing suicide during the final assault - I doubt that they'd do that if they were winning the battle). The problem is that the rest of the film actually shows violence to be ugly and nasty even when the Americans are doing it to defend themselves, so for the film to suddenly start showing violence in a triumphant manner as the Americans take the ridge (and they do take the ridge) just feels...wrong. Like I said in that link, I know that's what happened in real life but the way they showed it in the film did not match to the point that the rest of the film was making.