Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

1953 'Phantom' A-bomb film 'Hiroshima,' with 88,000 extras, screening in Tokyo

mainichi.jp

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 125 posts

Re: 1953 'Phantom' A-bomb film 'Hiroshima,' with 88,000 extras, screening in Tokyo

#61

Post by gre »

pengaru wrote: post #52
gre wrote: post #25

"The bomb didnt beat Japan, Stalin did" https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/05/30/the-bomb-didnt-beat-jap...

> Many Japanese soldiers were soon on their way home from their bases > around Japan and were beginning to crowd the trains and buses. It was > difficult for some of them to understand the surrender. Although most of > the Japanese army in the field was still unbeaten, it was stretched thin > all across Asia. The string of horrendous losses at Leyte, Iwo Jima, > Saipan, and Okinawa and America's superior air power ag…

According to British historian Mark Felton:

"The Japanese murdered 30 million civilians while "liberating" what it called the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere from colonial rule. About 23 million of these were ethnic Chinese. It is a crime that in sheer numbers is far greater than the Nazi Holocaust. In Germany, Holocaust denial is a crime. In Japan, it is government policy. But the evidence against the navy – precious little of which you will find in Japan itself – is damning."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes#:~:text=....

Crimes all around. War is bad, actually?

Re: 1953 'Phantom' A-bomb film 'Hiroshima,' with 88,000 extras, screening in Tokyo

#62

Post by gre »

nradov wrote: post #58
gre wrote: post #25

"The bomb didnt beat Japan, Stalin did" https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/05/30/the-bomb-didnt-beat-jap...

Even if the Soviet Union had remained neutral, Japan would have certainly surrendered within a few more months after some more atomic bombs. No nation could possibly sustain a war effort while losing a major city every few weeks.

The article argues more than 50% of 66 cities were already destroyed by conventional bombs, and then we dropped the nukes. A full bombing run of 500 planes could equal about a quarter of a nuke, but with better targeting. According to the article.

Re: 1953 'Phantom' A-bomb film 'Hiroshima,' with 88,000 extras, screening in Tokyo

#63

Post by FirmwareBurner »

darkclouds wrote: post #59
cubefox wrote: post #49

According to a 2015 survey[1], 56% of US Americans say the bombings were justified, while 34% say they were not. This relatively positive (or non-negative) assessment of the A-bombs might have influenced their portrayal in "Oppenheimer", an American production. The Japanese re-screening of "Hiroshima" might be aimed at countering their depiction in "Oppenheimer". [1] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2015/08/04…

This is why history is selectively taught at schools. Here in the UK we werent taught anything about Hiroshima but whilst its portrayed as shortening the war, thats using an argument which is hard to prove. It also means that once that step is taken, ie dropping the bomb, there is no going back, the US will have to remain the dominant power for the foreseeable future in order to prevent retaliation. This then undermi…

>because of the saying, the victor writes the history books,

Yeah, in all my history books, the bad guys always lost and the good guys always won 100% of the time. What are the odds of that? /s

Re: 1953 'Phantom' A-bomb film 'Hiroshima,' with 88,000 extras, screening in Tokyo

#64

Post by wiseowise »

FirmwareBurner wrote: post #29
wiseowise wrote: post #5

This is what Oppenheimer should’ve been about. Not SPOILERS Mediocre politics, sex, boredom biopic.

>This is what Oppenheimer should’ve been about The movie called "Oppenheimer" is mainly about Oppenheimer (shocking, right?), it's not about "the bomb", otherwise it would have been called "Trinity" or "Manhattan" or something. If you want to see a movie about "the bomb" don't watch Oppenheimer.

> During World War II, Lt. Gen. Leslie Groves Jr. appoints physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer to work on the top-secret Manhattan Project. Oppenheimer and a team of scientists spend years developing and designing the atomic bomb. Their work comes to fruition on July 16, 1945, as they witness the world's first nuclear explosion, forever changing the course of history.

Literally from the description of the movie.

It promised work of Oppenheimer and team of scientists working on the Manhattan project. Instead it’s a shitty avengers rip off where Oppenheimer assembles team of scientists without any substance and literally no focus on Manhattan project.

I expected to see at least the Imitation Game level movie, not subpar plot focused on sex and politics.

Re: 1953 'Phantom' A-bomb film 'Hiroshima,' with 88,000 extras, screening in Tokyo

#65

Post by ransackdev »

koheripbal wrote: post #26
durkie wrote: post #2

In light of the release of Oppenheimer, people have been talking about, basically, the other side of the development of atomic weapons. John Hersey's "Hiroshima" article from the August 23, 1946 edition of the New Yorker came up as the definitive piece on the immediate impact of the dropping of the bomb on Hiroshima, and it is a gripping read: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1946/08/31/hiroshima

Yes, although they touched on the impact of the bomb on Japanese civilians a little, they didn't really do it justice, and it's a shame because I think it would have really provided an important insight on why Oppenheimer's views changed over time. The movie lacked a cohesive story anyway, so that would have added some meaning.

The movie was about the man, not the bomb, which is why it focused primarily on a man, and not a bomb. The actual testing of the bomb was a small part of the movie and the real deployments of it were but a couple sentences. The movie Oppenheimer was never a movie about Hiroshima and while I think there needs to be more coverage in general about our impact on Japan by dropping those bombs, I think giving the movie Oppenheimer shit about it isn't reasonable just because the man worked on it. It covered everything from the his view point, and what he personally lived. He read about the bombs being used the same as everyone else, and it wouldn't have fit the movie to suddenly jump to Japan to show the impact of his work. It did however try to visualize the impact and eventual realization of what he had played a part in, in the visuals at the compound when he's giving the speech to the fanatical coworkers stomping their feet (which was very Aronofsky like imo)

Re: 1953 'Phantom' A-bomb film 'Hiroshima,' with 88,000 extras, screening in Tokyo

#66

Post by judge2020 »

nerdponx wrote: post #54
cubefox wrote: post #49

According to a 2015 survey[1], 56% of US Americans say the bombings were justified, while 34% say they were not. This relatively positive (or non-negative) assessment of the A-bombs might have influenced their portrayal in "Oppenheimer", an American production. The Japanese re-screening of "Hiroshima" might be aimed at countering their depiction in "Oppenheimer". [1] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2015/08/04…

Americans are often taught that the bombings resulted in less loss of life than a conventional land invasion of the home islands. So it's not quite a matter of "A-bomb good". Plenty of Americans alive today lived through the Cold War too, and spent years or decades in low-level fear of nuclear war. It's not quite as simple as "nukes good therefore no criticism of nukes in movie". Part of the interest in things like t…

> Americans are often taught that the bombings resulted in less loss of life than a conventional land invasion of the home islands.

Or, at least, less loss of American life. If The United Kingdom had not consented to the bombs and they were shelved, what are the chances the U.S. would've lost e.g. 50,000 and Japan 150,000 before surrender?

Re: 1953 'Phantom' A-bomb film 'Hiroshima,' with 88,000 extras, screening in Tokyo

#67

Post by lostlogin »

durkie wrote: post #2

In light of the release of Oppenheimer, people have been talking about, basically, the other side of the development of atomic weapons. John Hersey's "Hiroshima" article from the August 23, 1946 edition of the New Yorker came up as the definitive piece on the immediate impact of the dropping of the bomb on Hiroshima, and it is a gripping read: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1946/08/31/hiroshima

That should be required reading for everyone everywhere.

Re: 1953 'Phantom' A-bomb film 'Hiroshima,' with 88,000 extras, screening in Tokyo

#68

Post by Vecr »

gre wrote: post #25

"The bomb didnt beat Japan, Stalin did" https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/05/30/the-bomb-didnt-beat-jap...

I think using the bombs with the information the US had at the time was justified. From the information the US had, Japan had a quite credible claim that they would "never" surrender unconditionally, though lots of Japanese people and military units would surrender even if Japan itself officially did not, making it not literally "never". With nuclear bombs the US could have kept hitting them with increasing levels of force, probably not possible with conventional bombs. If the war had continued until 1950 most of inhabited Japan would have been destroyed, and the US would have won even without a single surrender.

Re: 1953 'Phantom' A-bomb film 'Hiroshima,' with 88,000 extras, screening in Tokyo

#69

Post by cubefox »

nerdponx wrote: post #54
cubefox wrote: post #49

According to a 2015 survey[1], 56% of US Americans say the bombings were justified, while 34% say they were not. This relatively positive (or non-negative) assessment of the A-bombs might have influenced their portrayal in "Oppenheimer", an American production. The Japanese re-screening of "Hiroshima" might be aimed at countering their depiction in "Oppenheimer". [1] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2015/08/04…

Americans are often taught that the bombings resulted in less loss of life than a conventional land invasion of the home islands. So it's not quite a matter of "A-bomb good". Plenty of Americans alive today lived through the Cold War too, and spent years or decades in low-level fear of nuclear war. It's not quite as simple as "nukes good therefore no criticism of nukes in movie". Part of the interest in things like t…

Yes, but the American views about specifically Hiroshima and Nagasaki seem different from most other countries, or at least from Japan. Outside the US it is quite common to view the bombings as war crimes, while this is uncommon in the US. This probably influenced how "Oppenheimer" handled the matter.

(A comparison would perhaps be the difference between a Russian and a Polish film about the Sowjet invasion of Poland. The history here is viewed very differently in the Russian/Polish public.)

Re: 1953 'Phantom' A-bomb film 'Hiroshima,' with 88,000 extras, screening in Tokyo

#70

Post by pengaru »

gre wrote: post #61
pengaru wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Many Japanese soldiers were soon on their way home from their bases > around Japan and were beginning to crowd the trains and buses. It was > difficult for some of them to understand the surrender. Although most of > the Japanese army in the field was still unbeaten, it was stretched thin > all across Asia. The string of horrendous losses at Leyte, Iwo Jima, > Saipan, and Okinawa and America's superior air power ag…

According to British historian Mark Felton: "The Japanese murdered 30 million civilians while "liberating" what it called the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere from colonial rule. About 23 million of these were ethnic Chinese. It is a crime that in sheer numbers is far greater than the Nazi Holocaust. In Germany, Holocaust denial is a crime. In Japan, it is government policy. But the evidence against the navy –…

> Crimes all around. War is bad, actually?

I'm not sure why this is in response to my comment, which speaks nothing of war crimes nor has anything resembling an accusatory tone, nor does it excuse Japan as innocent.

The excerpt in my comment was transcribed and posted because it speaks to the Soviet Union's entering the war in-context, relative to the atomic bombings, from a Japanese perspective.

Post reply on HN