Letters From Iwo Jima

The most American of genres—the World War II movie—used to examine war from the perspective of America's enemies. Filmed entirely in Japanese with Japanese actors, Letters from Iwo Jima proved that Eastwood's understanding of human nature was universal enough to encompass even those traditionally portrayed as inhuman.

We explore how Eastwood created something unprecedented in American cinema—a war film that humanized the enemy without glorifying war, that showed the universal tragedy of conflict without diminishing the specific costs paid by any side. 

Through General Kuribayashi and his doomed garrison, the film examined duty, honor, and the impossible choices faced by good people serving in desperate circumstances.This was Eastwood at seventy-six, using everything he'd learned about war and violence to transcend cultural boundaries and create a truly universal story about human conflict and the costs of survival.

Unlock an ad-free podcast experience with Caloroga Shark Media! Get all our shows on any player you love, hassle free! For Apple users, hit the banner on your Apple podcasts app which seays UNINTERRUPTED LISTENING. For Spotify or other players, visit caloroga.com/plus. No plug-ins needed!  You also get 20+ other shows on the network ad-free! 

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:03):
Kalaruga Shark Media. This is Eastwood reloaded. We've watched Clint
Eastwood evolve from Western icon to contemporary filmmaker, from action
star to artist, exploring the deepest questions about human nature.
Now we need to talk about perhaps his most ambitious project,

(00:24):
A film that took the most American of genres, the
World War II movie, and used it to examine war
from the perspective of America's enemies. Released in two thousand
and six, filmed entirely in Japanese with Japanese actors, a
companion piece to Flags of Our Fathers that told the
same battle from both sides of the conflict. The film

(00:44):
that proved Eastwood could transcend not just genre limitations, but
cultural ones, that his understanding of human nature was universal
enough to encompass even those traditionally portrayed as inhuman This
is Episode eight, two thousand and six Letters from Ewojima.

(01:07):
It was Eastwood at seventy six, using everything he'd learned
about war, violence and the stories we tell ourselves about
both to create something unprecedented in American cinema, A war
film that humanized the enemy without glorifying war, that showed
the universal tragedy of conflict without diminishing the specific costs

(01:29):
paid by any side. Here's what happened. While researching Flags
of Our Fathers, Eastwood discovered that the letters and diaries
of Japanese soldiers on Eojima had been preserved, translated, and published.
Reading them, he realized that these men portrayed in American
war films as faceless fanatics were individuals with families, fears,

(01:51):
and hopes remarkably similar to American soldiers. He decided to
make two films about the same battle. Flags of Our
Fathers would show the American EXAs experience the heroism, the propaganda,
the way individual sacrifice gets transformed into national mythology. Letters
from Iwojima would show the Japanese experience the same heroism,

(02:12):
the same propaganda, the same individual sacrifice, serving different national mythologies. Together,
the films would show that war is a human tragedy,
regardless of which side wins, that courage and cowardice exist
in every army, that young men die for causes they
may not fully understand, while old men make decisions they

(02:32):
may not have to live with. Letters from Iwojima follows
General Tadamichi Kuribayashi, the Japanese commander tasked with defending the
island against American invasion. Kuribayashi knows the battle is hopeless,
the Americans have overwhelming superiority in men, ships, and aircraft.
But he also knows that Japan expects him to fight
to the death, to take as many Americans with him

(02:55):
as possible, to demonstrate Japanese honor and resolve even in defeat.
The film shows Kurubayashi trying to balance these impossible demands
military realism and cultural expectation, individual survival and collective honor,
his duty to his emperor and his responsibility to his men.
It's a position that offers no good choices, only degrees

(03:18):
of catastrophe. Ken Watanabi's performance as Kuribayashi anchored the film
with quiet, dignity and intelligence. This wasn't the stereotypical Japanese
military leader of American war films, cruel, fanatical, divorced from
human feeling. Kuribayashi was a professional soldier who had spent

(03:38):
time in America, understood American capabilities and intentions, and knew
exactly how hopeless his situation was. But he was also
a man who believed in duty, honor, and the necessity
of fighting well even in lost causes. Watanabi showed how
these beliefs could coexist with clear eyed realism about the
costs of war and the futility of his mission. The

(04:00):
film's approach to Japanese military culture was sophisticated and nuanced.
It showed the way individual soldiers were caught between conflicting
loyalties to their families, to their comrades, to their emperor,
to their own survival instincts. Some embraced the prospect of
death with genuine fervor, Others went through the motions while

(04:21):
privately hoping to survive. Most fell somewhere in between, trying
to find honor and impossible circumstances. Eastwood didn't romanticize Japanese
attitudes toward death and sacrifice, but he also didn't dismiss
them as simple fanaticism. He showed how cultural values that
seemed admirable in peacetime loyalty, self sacrifice, dedication to duty,

(04:44):
could become destructive when applied to hopeless military situations. The
film's treatment of the American enemy was equally complex. American
soldiers appeared as individuals rather than symbols, capable of both
brutality and compassion, fighting for reasons they may not have
fully understood, but with the same courage and fear as

(05:05):
their Japanese opponents. Most importantly, Eastwood showed that the dehumanization
of enemies, the tendency to see them as less than human,
was a psychological necessity for soldiers on both sides, but
also a tragic distortion of reality that made peace more
difficult and war more terrible. The film's visual style reflected

(05:26):
Eastwood's mature understanding of how to use cinema to explore
serious themes. The color palette was muted, emphasizing the gray
ash and black volcanic rock of Iwo Jima. The cinematography
was restrained, allowing the performances and relationships to carry the
emotional weight. The battle scenes were filmed with characteristic realism, brutal, chaotic, terrifying,

(05:50):
but they were never glorified or stylized for entertainment value.
Violence was shown as necessary but never noble, effective but
always costly, unavoidable but never desirable. The film's structure followed
the ark of the battle itself from the initial American
bombardment through the gradual Japanese retreat into the island's cave

(06:11):
system to the final desperate defense and inevitable defeat. But
it also followed the emotional arc of men coming to
terms with their own mortality, their loyalty to each other,
and the meaning of their sacrifice. The relationship between Kuribayashi
and Baron Nishi, played by Suyoshi Ihara, provided the film's

(06:32):
emotional center. Nishi was an Olympic equestrian who had competed
in Los Angeles, spoke English, and understood American culture. His
friendship with Kuribayashi showed how shared intelligence and cultural sophistication
could create bonds that transcended military hierarchy. But the film
also showed how these bonds could be tested by the

(06:52):
extreme conditions of war, how even the strongest friendships could
be strained by the pressure of making life and death
decision for other people. The film's treatment of ordinary soldiers
was equally compelling. Saigo, played by Kazunari Ninomiya, represented the
reluctant conscript who wanted nothing more than to return to
his wife an unborn child. His journey from cynical survival

(07:16):
to genuine courage showed how war could transform people in
ways they never expected. Other characters represented different responses to
impossible circumstances. Some embraced death as a release, others fought
desperately for survival. Most simply tried to do their duty
while hoping for the best. What made Letters from Iwo

(07:36):
Jima remarkable was its refusal to judge these different responses.
The film understood that courage and cowardice, honor and pragmatism,
loyalty and self preservation were all human responses to inhuman circumstances.
No single response was entirely right or entirely wrong. The
film's ending was both inevitable and devastating. The Americans eventually

(07:59):
overran the Japanese positions, but add enormous costs to both sides.
Kuribayashi died fighting, having done his duty as he understood it.
Saigo survived, captured by American forces, who treated him humanely
despite everything that had happened. The final image Saigo on
an American ship looking back at the island where so

(08:20):
many of his comrades died, suggested both the tragedy of
war and the possibility of reconciliation. The battle was over,
but the human costs would be felt for generations. As
a piece of filmmaking, Letters from Iwo Jima was technically superb.
The production design recreated the claustrophobic conditions of the Japanese

(08:40):
cave system with remarkable authenticity. The sound design made the
audience feel the terror of constant bombardment. The editing maintained
perfect pacing throughout a story that moved between intimate character
moments and large scale military action. But the film's real
achievement was emotional and moral, rather than technical. Eastwood had

(09:00):
created something unprecedented in American cinema, a war film that
showed the enemy as fully human without diminishing the justice
of the American cause, that explored the universal tragedy of
war without falling into false equivalencies about who was right
and who was wrong. The film's reception was extraordinary. Critics

(09:21):
recognized it as a masterpiece of anti war filmmaking. Audiences
embraced it despite its foreign language and challenging subject matter.
The Academy nominated it for four Oscars, including Best Picture
and Best Director. But more importantly, Letters from Ewojima influenced
how Americans thought about war. Enemy combatants in the nature

(09:41):
of conflict itself. It showed that understanding your enemies as
human beings didn't mean accepting their cause, that recognizing their
courage didn't diminish your own. Let's take a break here.
When we come back, we'll talk about what Letters from
Ewojima meant for war films as a genre, how it
Influencedmerican foreign policy discussions, and why Eastwood's empathetic approach to

(10:04):
former enemies remains relevant in an era of global conflict.
We're back. Letters from iwo Jima appeared at a moment
when America was deeply involved in conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan,
when questions about the nature of enemy combatants, the treatment

(10:26):
of prisoners, and the morality of war were front page news.
The film didn't address these contemporary conflicts directly, but it
provided a framework for thinking about them that was both
emotionally sophisticated and morally complex. The film's central insight that
enemies are human beings with families, fears, and hopes, seems obvious,

(10:49):
but it was revolutionary in the context of American war films.
Most World War II movies had portrayed Japanese soldiers as
either faceless fanatics or cartoon villains. Letters from Iwajima showed
them as individuals making impossible choices in impossible circumstances. That
humanization didn't excuse Japanese war crimes or diminish American sacrifices. Instead,

(11:13):
it suggested that understanding the humanity of your enemies was
essential for understanding the full cost of war and the
full meaning of victory. The film's approach to military leadership
was particularly sophisticated. Kuribayashi wasn't portrayed as either a brilliant
strategist or a foolish commander. He was a professional soldier
trying to do his job under impossible conditions, making decisions

(11:37):
that would result in the deaths of thousands of his
own men, regardless of what he chose. His relationship with
his subordinates showed how military hierarchy could coexist with genuine
care for individual soldiers, how professional duty could be compatible
with human compassion, how leaders could maintain authority while acknowledging
the terrible costs of their decisions. That new one understanding

(12:00):
of military leadership became relevant to discussions about American commanders
in Iraq and Afghanistan, about the relationship between strategic objectives
and human costs, about the responsibilities of leaders who send
others to fight and die. The film's treatment of Japanese
military culture was equally important. Instead of dismissing concepts like honor, duty,

(12:23):
and sacrifice as foreign or fanatical, Eastwood showed how these
values could motivate extraordinary courage while also leading to unnecessary deaths.
The films suggested that cultural differences and attitudes toward death
and sacrifice were real and significant, but also that these
differences didn't make Japanese soldiers less human or their suffering

(12:45):
less meaningful than American suffering. That understanding became crucial for
American military and diplomatic efforts around the world. The film
showed that you could oppose your enemies while still recognizing
their humanity, that you could fight against their cause while
still understanding their motivations. The film's technical achievements were also significant.

(13:05):
Eastwood's decision to film entirely in Japanese with Japanese actors
created an authenticity that dubbed or subtitled performances couldn't match.
The audience experienced the battle from a genuinely Japanese perspective,
not from an American perspective translated into Japanese. That commitment
to authentic perspective became a model for other filmmakers dealing

(13:28):
with cross cultural subjects. It showed that American audiences were
sophisticated enough to handle foreign languages in unfamiliar cultural contexts,
that authenticity was more important than accessibility. The film's collaboration
with Japanese filmmakers, actors, and cultural consultants also established new

(13:48):
standards for cross cultural production. Eastwood didn't just hire Japanese
actors to play Japanese roles. He worked with Japanese partners
to ensure that the film represented Japanese experience is accurately
and respectfully. That collaborative approach became increasingly important as American
filmmakers began dealing with global subjects in international audiences. Letters

(14:11):
from Iwo Jima showed that successful cross cultural filmmaking required
genuine partnership rather than just cultural consultation. The film's influence
on war films was immediate and lasting. Subsequent American war
movies began including more complex portrayals of enemy forces, more
nuanced examinations of military culture, more realistic depictions of the

(14:33):
human costs of conflict. Films like Zero Dark, Thirty, They
Shall Not Grow Old, and Nineteen Seventeen all showed the
influence of Eastwood's approach. The commitment to showing war as
a human tragedy regardless of which side wins, the refusal
to glorify violence even when it serves just causes, the

(14:53):
understanding that individual courage and sacrifice exist in every army.
But the film's broader cultural in influence was even more significant.
Letters from Ewogima changed how Americans thought about World War II,
moving beyond simple narratives of good versus evil to more
complex understanding of how good people can serve evil causes

(15:14):
and how evil systems can produce individual acts of courage
and decency. That more nuanced understanding of historical conflict became
crucial for American foreign policy discussions. The film showed that
you could oppose regimes while still recognizing the humanity of
people who served them, that you could fight against ideologies
while still understanding the individual motivations of those who embrace them.

(15:39):
For Eastwood personally, Letters from Ewogima represented the culmination of
everything he'd learned about war, violence and the stories we
tell ourselves. About both. The film synthesized insights from his
earlier war films, the understanding that violence corrupts everyone. It
touches that heroism and cowardice exist in every conflict, that

(16:01):
the costs of war are always higher than anyone expects.
But it also showed his growing sophistication as a filmmaker
and as a human being. At seventy six, Eastwood was
old enough to have perspective on American military involvement around
the world, wise enough to understand that strength sometimes requires empathy,

(16:21):
experience enough to know that the most important truths are
often the most difficult to accept. The film's box office performance,
modest by blockbusters standards, but strong for a foreign language film,
proved that American audiences were ready for more complex, more
challenging portrayals of war and conflict. It showed that there
was a market for films that asked difficult questions rather

(16:43):
than providing easy answers. That success encouraged other filmmakers to
take similar risks, to make films about war that went
beyond simple patriotism or anti war sentiment to explore the
full complexity of human behavior under extreme stress. The film's
awards recognition four OSCAR nominations, including Best Picture, established Eastwood

(17:05):
as one of the few American directors capable of making
films that were both artistically ambitious and commercially viable, both
culturally specific and universally relevant. But perhaps most importantly, letters
from Iwo Jima showed that the most patriotic thing an
American filmmaker could do was to examine American actions in

(17:26):
American enemies with complete honesty, to show the full human
cost of American military success, to acknowledge the courage and
sacrifice of those who fought against American forces. That kind
of patriotism based on truth telling rather than myth making,
on understanding rather than demonization, became increasingly important as America

(17:48):
dealt with the consequences of military interventions around the world.
The film's legacy continues to grow. It studied in military
academies as an example of how to understand enemy motivations
and capabilities. It's taught in film schools as a masterpiece
of cross cultural filmmaking. It's referenced in diplomatic discussions about
how to build understanding across cultural and political divides. But

(18:13):
for general audiences, letters from Iwajima remains what it was
intended to be, a deeply moving story about the universal
human costs of war, the way individual courage and sacrifice
transcend political and cultural boundaries, and the possibility of understanding
and even respecting those who fight against us. Next time

(18:34):
on Eastwood Reloaded, we'll look at how east would apply
these lessons about human nature and cross cultural understanding to
one of his most controversial films, American Sniper, the movie
that divided audiences and critics while becoming one of the
highest grossing war films of all time. But for now,
remember this Letters from Ewajima wasn't just a war film,

(18:56):
or even just a great film. It was a work
of moral imagine that showed how entertainment could promote understanding
rather than hatred, how popular art could bridge cultural divides
rather than deepen them, How the best of American values,
including the courage to examine our own actions honestly, could
be expressed through stories that acknowledge the full humanity of

(19:18):
everyone involved in human conflict. Eastwood Reloaded is a production
of Calaroga Shark Media. Executive producers John McDermott and Mark
Francis Ai assistants may have been used in this production,