Talk:Hell in the Pacific

NOT

None but the brave does not have a similar premise to this film in my opinion. Groups of men can have truces in a war, and I think that has been done in movies before None but the Brave. I think that should be re-worded, or even removed. What's the citation of the relevance of None but the Brave to Hell in the Pacific. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.41.66.213 (talk) 02:04, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Months prior to it's release under "Hell In The Pacific," this film was previewed in a San Francisco Bay Area theater under the title "The Enemy Is War." Rating cards were issued to the audience at the conclusion of the movie, with a combination of multiple choice answers and a space for comments. No explanation for the change in the title has been made public. But it is a fact that the original title would most likely have been viewed as controversial at the time of its release due to the intensity of differences in opinion over the United States military involvement in Vietnam. With its original title, its difficult to present an argument that the entire film wasn't intended as an "anti-war statement" and that the change to "Hell in the Pacific" removed the offensive-to-many idea that war is "the enemy" and changed the entire context and meaning of the film to "another WWII war movie." Because no 3rd party sources were available, this citation was based entirely on personal experience.Dksweet (talk) 17:52, 20 November 2012 (UTC)David Sweet

A movie filmed on an island in the Phillipines Sea cannot have been filmed in the North Pacific. If nobody changes this in the next couple of weeks, I will do it myself. An absurd statement.Theonemacduff (talk) 05:44, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Reception section

I removed this section as it is nothing but uncited opinion. Links to reviews, quotes, etc., should be here instead. Sir Rhosis (talk) 01:14, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Hell4t6.jpg

Image:Hell4t6.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 14:36, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Ending of film in Plot section

I believe the ending of the film in the plot section is incorrect. The full film is available on youtube.

At the end, after kicking over the fire, the two men's dwelling is not hit by a shell and destroyed, but rather they dress and walk separate ways. Around 1:40:30 in the film t's shown as such. Marcuselden (talk) 06:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

• See the Production section of the article. Different releases have used two different endings. The bomb ending is probably the most familiar one. Sir Rhosis (talk) 11:30, 17 September 2024 (UTC)