Hiroshima

1995
7.8| 0h30m| en
Synopsis

Hiroshima is a 1995 Japanese / Canadian film directed by Koreyoshi Kurahara and Roger Spottiswoode about the decision-making processes that led to the dropping of the atomic bombs by the United States on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki toward the end of World War II. A combination of dramatisation, historical footage, and eyewitness interviews, the film alternates between documentary footage and the dramatic recreations.

Cast

Director

Producted By

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime. Watch Now

Trailers & Clips

Reviews

Laikals The greatest movie ever made..!
Platicsco Good story, Not enough for a whole film
Philippa All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.
Marva It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,
eustfam So many others have given excellent comments about this made-for-TV film and so I shall not add any more to that except to say this is a very excellent film. Its use of historical footages add to the authenticity of its depiction. All i can say is that I found tears falling down my cheeks as the film ended--with the Emperor of Japan telling his military advisers that they too must endure the unendurable as he must. While I somehow felt some sympathy for him, I cannot understand why he did not use his imperial powers to stop these madmen from starting the war in the first place. The footage showing the soldiers with Gen. Wainwright need no words to describe the brutality of the Japanese occupation. Neither has Japan apologized for the atrocity done on so-called "comfort women." On the other hand, the photos taken right after the bomb was dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki are too painful to look at. Dr. Oppenheimer was right in his assessment--(I paraphrase--)"We may developed a weapon that will put an end to all wars...but can man be trusted not to useit for evil purposes?" The good book tells us, "The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked. Who can know it?" I cried for all who suffered during the Bataan Death March, those who lived through the barbaric occupation of the Japanese Imperial Army but I also cried for the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki who had to endure the unendurable. In war, everyone loses. This film did not glorify war but gave a factual presentation of the events that led to the bomb which changed the course of modern history...it showed both sides--good and bad...and so I gave it the highest rating.
Michael O'Keefe Excellent. Recounted are the events leading to President Truman's decision to drop an A-bomb on Hiroshima in 1945 and its aftermath. Filmed primarily in "tinted" black and white with the weaving of newsreel and stock footage. Witness testimonials put the explanation point on the haunting depictions. Kenneth Welsh is uncanny in his portrayal of Truman. Other stars of note are: Richard Masur, Leon Pownall, Wesley Addy, Daisaku Akino, David Gow, Ken Jenkins and Naohiko Umewaka. A must for WWII and history buffs.
Robert J. Maxwell A very good docudrama. But you must be in the mood. It's a low-budget enterprise, talky, and with no bravura performances. Why is it good, then? I guess it's because it makes certain demands on the intelligence and moral concerns of the viewer that few other renditions of this story have bothered to even attempt. For many years, the United States mythos handled the issue in the most simplistic way. The Japanese were all kamikazes, an invasion of the Japanese homeland would cost untold thousands of lives, so we had to nuke them. Recent revisionist history has given us another version of what happened. The Japanese were on their last legs and they knew it. They were sending out peace feelers through Sweden, Switzerland, and Russia. The United States ignored these because we wanted revenge, so we had to nuke them, and fast. This film illustrates exceedingly well both the Japanese and American sides of the issue, with restraint and intelligence. There are neither heroes nor villains here. And no easy shots are made at particular figures. We can often tell, in conventional flicks, who is good and who is bad by the simple expedient of seeing whether a given character is handsome or homely. We tend not to notice this casting sleight of hand in our own movies because the difference in appearance supports our own prejudices. (We want the villain to be ugly.) But if you want this trick to be in your face, take another look at "The Cranes are Flying," a Russian war movie in which the American officer looks and sounds like a fat bumbling idiot, while the Russian commander is ruggedly good-looking and wears a tolerant shrink-like smile. Such cheap symbolism certainly isn't committed here. The commander of the Japanese army, who wants to fight to the last man, is both attractive and highly principled. Truman may not be a brilliant thinker but he is down-home shrewd and up front about everything. (If there is a problem with the casting it is that the actor playing Curtis LeMay is too handsome and polite for the part. LeMay was a courageous, ruthless, cigar-smoking blowhard, whom no one but a mother would call handsome.)So why was the bomb dropped? Evidently through a series of stochastic misunderstandings -- in intentions, exchanges, even in the translation of particular words. And ultimately in the rush of the United States to end the war -- for any number of reasons, including strictly political ones -- and in the desire on the part of the Japanese to find some sort of honorable peace in which their emporer retained his sanctity, leading to actions too deliberate to satisfy the Allies.The film is at its weakest in posing a false dilemma. (Or maybe the historical characters were responsible.) (1) We invade the islands, or (2) we nuke them without warning. All the possibilities in between are dismissed for one reason or another. One of them, given short shrift, is the possibility of a naval blockade which would shut off all supplies and cancel all naval traffic from the islands. Japan having no natural resources worth mentioning, it would have been only a matter of time before it worked. Loss of life would have been minimal, and we would not have had to use the bombs -- plural, Nagasaki was destroyed only three days after Hiroshima. One of the reasons repeatedly brought up in favor of using the bomb is that the American taxpayer has put out two billion dollars for this gadget, and if it weren't used they would want to know why their money was spent developing it. (I don't know of any words adequate to describe this sort of logic.) A blockade, however, would have taken more time, which would have involved waiting, which is not our strong suit. Another weakness is that James F. Byrne was a personal friend of Truman's. Truman, uncertain and new to the presidency, looked at him as a font of wisdom. And Byrne was a devoted hawk. This isn't made entirely clear, but it was in fact the case.Well, who knows what we and the Japanese should have done? Easy enough to make retrospective judgments. However, they should perhaps be made anyway. Maybe knowing what went wrong last time will help us prevent things from going so terribly wrong next time.
Rev-Maynard Hiroshima is a great film, originally made for cable, about events leading up to the A-bomb being dropped on Japan. It shows the Japanese perspective very well and is one of the better WW2 films of recent years. Surprisingly, it is mostly a Canadian production that is very accurate with the facts they put on screen. Very well done.