的影评```要英文的````急用```

的影评```要英文的````急用```
的影评```
要英文的````
急用```

的影评```要英文的````急用```
我帮你找到了一篇东京审判的资料,
''THE TOKYO TRIAL'' is a 4 1/2-hour account of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East that is visually satisfying but historically empty.Masaki Kobayashi,the director,himself a prisoner of war,has interspersed the trial scenes with bits from World War II archives that,granted the importance of the trial itself,seem largely irrelevant.
The sympathy of the movie,which opens today at the Film Forum,is with the 28 former generals,admirals and politicians who were tried from 1946 to 1948 for acts in the period from Jan.1,1928,to Sept.1,1945.The acts included conspiracy to make war and assorted atrocities.All of the accused - with the exception of three who died during the trial or were acquitted - were found guilty.Seven,including former Prime Minister Hideki Tojo,were hanged.
The accused faced 12 Allied judges.The judges glared at the Japanese.The Japanese impassively gazed at the judges.The viewer knows the outcome.Yet somehow these exchanges across the courtroom have a drama of their own.
Mr.Kobayashi put the film together from half a million feet of Pentagon film dealing with the Tribunal and the war.Obviously his sympathies are with the defendants and with his country.
Perhaps it is permissible to call Pearl Harbor a ''triumph of tactical surprise'' but objectivity demands that it also be described as a sneak attack against a naval base of a nation still at peace.
Moreover we get little about Japanese atrocities such as the Bataan death march or the Nanjing massacres after the Japanese Army took that city in its campaign against China.We do get the atom bomb attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.The message,to this reviewer,was that the West was worse than the East in terms of atrocities.
Sir William Webb,Chief Justice of the State of Queensland in Australia,presided over the trial.The prosecution was headed by Joseph B.Keenan.The Western judges were handcuffed to some extent by Gen.Douglas MacArthur's decision not to charge Emperor Hirohito as a war criminal or to allow him to stand trial.
The trial has its odd,if not funny,aspects.One defendant,Koki Hirota,a prewar Prime Minister,appears to have slept through most of it.One prisoner inexplicably smacks another across his bald head and then rises to begin a monologue.He is removed and is diagnosed as a tertiary syphilitic.
What should have been the climactic moment seems oddly flat.The faces of the accused when they hear their sentences are largely unmoved.Yet implicit in the trial scenes is the duel between the law of the West and the stoicism of the East.Fiction might have contrived to make the duel more evident and exciting.This is fact.
One notable aspect of the film is the historical footage that documents Japan's rise as a military power from the Russo-Japanese War early in this century.The Japanese invasion of Manchuria in the 1930's and the establishment of an independent Manchurian state hacked out of China are also shown.
The Manchurian adventure,the prosecutors asserted,was the warmup for the war with the United States.It certainly gave the Japanese military the confidence that enabled it to advocate war with the United States.
''The Tokyo Trial'' does not get to what to many then and now seemed a central question:How could the Japanese,no matter how confident and well armed,think they could win?Admittedly,in the first months after Pearl Harbor,the Philippines and Singapore,they appeared close to victory.
But of course once American industry was mobilized and American public opinion inflamed they didn't have a chance.What led them to think they did?
There is very little in ''The Tokyo Trial'' to explain this.And even less to explain why the Japanese acted as they did toward prisoners of war and civilians.Instead we get the impassive faces.
The film is weakest when it investigates the reasons for Japan's rapid postwar recovery gliding over the impact of MacArthur's economic reforms upon a ruined economy.Nor does it emphasize the fact that Japan,which has gained more from American military protection than any other power,consistently has refused to bear its share of the defense of the western Pacific.
The raw material for ''The Tokyo Trial'' is amazing.The pity is that the result is so biased and so unmoving.Far East Tribunal THE TOKYO TRIAL,directed by Masaki Kobayashi; screenplay by Mr.Kobayashi and Kiyoshi Ogasawara,based on original material by Shun Inagaki; edited by Keiichi Uraoka; produced by Hiroshi Suto,Masaya Araki and Ryu Yasutake; a Kodansha Ltd.Production.At Film Forum,57 Watts Street.Running time:270 minutes.This film has no rating.

''THE TOKYO TRIAL'' is a 4 1/2-hour account of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East that is visually satisfying but historically empty. Masaki Kobayashi, the director, himself a prison...

全部展开

''THE TOKYO TRIAL'' is a 4 1/2-hour account of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East that is visually satisfying but historically empty. Masaki Kobayashi, the director, himself a prisoner of war, has interspersed the trial scenes with bits from World War II archives that, granted the importance of the trial itself, seem largely irrelevant.
The sympathy of the movie, which opens today at the Film Forum, is with the 28 former generals, admirals and politicians who were tried from 1946 to 1948 for acts in the period from Jan. 1, 1928, to Sept. 1, 1945. The acts included conspiracy to make war and assorted atrocities. All of the accused - with the exception of three who died during the trial or were acquitted - were found guilty. Seven, including former Prime Minister Hideki Tojo, were hanged.
The accused faced 12 Allied judges. The judges glared at the Japanese. The Japanese impassively gazed at the judges. The viewer knows the outcome. Yet somehow these exchanges across the courtroom have a drama of their own.
Mr. Kobayashi put the film together from half a million feet of Pentagon film dealing with the Tribunal and the war. Obviously his sympathies are with the defendants and with his country.
Perhaps it is permissible to call Pearl Harbor a ''triumph of tactical surprise'' but objectivity demands that it also be described as a sneak attack against a naval base of a nation still at peace.
Moreover we get little about Japanese atrocities such as the Bataan death march or the Nanjing massacres after the Japanese Army took that city in its campaign against China. We do get the atom bomb attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The message, to this reviewer, was that the West was worse than the East in terms of atrocities.
Sir William Webb, Chief Justice of the State of Queensland in Australia, presided over the trial. The prosecution was headed by Joseph B. Keenan. The Western judges were handcuffed to some extent by Gen. Douglas MacArthur's decision not to charge Emperor Hirohito as a war criminal or to allow him to stand trial.
The trial has its odd, if not funny, aspects. One defendant, Koki Hirota, a prewar Prime Minister, appears to have slept through most of it. One prisoner inexplicably smacks another across his bald head and then rises to begin a monologue. He is removed and is diagnosed as a tertiary syphilitic.
What should have been the climactic moment seems oddly flat. The faces of the accused when they hear their sentences are largely unmoved. Yet implicit in the trial scenes is the duel between the law of the West and the stoicism of the East. Fiction might have contrived to make the duel more evident and exciting. This is fact.
One notable aspect of the film is the historical footage that documents Japan's rise as a military power from the Russo-Japanese War early in this century. The Japanese invasion of Manchuria in the 1930's and the establishment of an independent Manchurian state hacked out of China are also shown.
The Manchurian adventure, the prosecutors asserted, was the warmup for the war with the United States. It certainly gave the Japanese military the confidence that enabled it to advocate war with the United States.
''The Tokyo Trial'' does not get to what to many then and now seemed a central question: How could the Japanese, no matter how confident and well armed, think they could win? Admittedly, in the first months after Pearl Harbor, the Philippines and Singapore, they appeared close to victory.
But of course once American industry was mobilized and American public opinion inflamed they didn't have a chance. What led them to think they did?
There is very little in ''The Tokyo Trial'' to explain this. And even less to explain why the Japanese acted as they did toward prisoners of war and civilians. Instead we get the impassive faces.
The film is weakest when it investigates the reasons for Japan's rapid postwar recovery gliding over the impact of MacArthur's economic reforms upon a ruined economy. Nor does it emphasize the fact that Japan, which has gained more from American military protection than any other power, consistently has refused to bear its share of the defense of the western Paci

收起