SPOILER ALERT but theres not much to add to the points given away in other user comments.
First off, I can't imagine that the filmmaker's intentions were solely to gross out the audience or to provide us with some of the old titillating ultraviolence any more than Spielberg did with Schindlers List - I haven't read any of the comments on SL but I can't imagine any users have scored that for gore/sadism/effects.
I'm also completely ignorant of the true facts behind Unit 731 and the work done there but I'm completely willing to believe the user comments that the events in the film are an accurate reflection of what happened there.
The point? Its an extremely well made film, well shot, well acted, good effects (although whether some of them are actually effects appears to be debatable and theres no excuse for animal cruelty regardless of the point you are trying to make - you notice the cat didn't jump once so it was either real old or real drugged when they threw it in there).
I just think if the director was so angry surely he would have made some of the characters in the film three dimensional and sympathetic rather than purely cataloguing the atrocities committed at the camp.
The only vaguely sympathetic characters are the woman whose child is taken away on arrival at the camp (and she's really put through the wringer after that) and the mute boy whose sole purpose seems to be to introduce an element of doubt into one of the Japanese characters.
It sure isn't just an exploitation flick but there's something missing which prevents it from being the devastating emotional history lesson that it seems to want to be. Maybe I'm missing something culturally?
And as for the US harbouring war criminals - wow! who'd have thought. Next thing they'll be telling us that the US supports third world regimes and then declares war on them when they stop co-operating! "Those that forget the past are condemned to repeat it."
First off, I can't imagine that the filmmaker's intentions were solely to gross out the audience or to provide us with some of the old titillating ultraviolence any more than Spielberg did with Schindlers List - I haven't read any of the comments on SL but I can't imagine any users have scored that for gore/sadism/effects.
I'm also completely ignorant of the true facts behind Unit 731 and the work done there but I'm completely willing to believe the user comments that the events in the film are an accurate reflection of what happened there.
The point? Its an extremely well made film, well shot, well acted, good effects (although whether some of them are actually effects appears to be debatable and theres no excuse for animal cruelty regardless of the point you are trying to make - you notice the cat didn't jump once so it was either real old or real drugged when they threw it in there).
I just think if the director was so angry surely he would have made some of the characters in the film three dimensional and sympathetic rather than purely cataloguing the atrocities committed at the camp.
The only vaguely sympathetic characters are the woman whose child is taken away on arrival at the camp (and she's really put through the wringer after that) and the mute boy whose sole purpose seems to be to introduce an element of doubt into one of the Japanese characters.
It sure isn't just an exploitation flick but there's something missing which prevents it from being the devastating emotional history lesson that it seems to want to be. Maybe I'm missing something culturally?
And as for the US harbouring war criminals - wow! who'd have thought. Next thing they'll be telling us that the US supports third world regimes and then declares war on them when they stop co-operating! "Those that forget the past are condemned to repeat it."