Pearl Harbour at 20: Was it really as disastrous as reviews made out, or has it improved with age?
Michael Bay’s 2001 film was savaged by critics when it was released but it wasn’t without merits, writes Geoffrey Macnab
Is it time to cut Michael Bay some slack? To his many detractors, the American director is an abominable figure, a purveyor of macho, explosive and inane movies that are as noisy as they are incomprehensible. Reviewers, though, rarely give him an even break.
Twenty years ago, when Bay’s three-hour Second World War epic Pearl Harbour (2001) was first released in cinemas, many critics agreed that this was among the very worst films they had seen.
“Forty minutes of redundant special effects, surrounded by a love story of stunning banality … directed without grace, vision, or originality,” leading US critic Roger Ebert pronounced.
Subscribe to Independent Premium to bookmark this article
Want to bookmark your favourite articles and stories to read or reference later? Start your Independent Premium subscription today.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies