The depiction of the Doolittle Raid in Pearl Harbor is “just so bad,” according to a historian. Directed by Michael Bay and written by Randall Wallace (Braveheart), the 2001 war film depicts the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, following a love story between a combat pilot and nurse leading up to the attack, followed by the Doolittle Raid, a counter-attack by the United States. The movie stars Ben Affleck, Kate Beckinsale, Josh Hartnett, Cuba Gooding Jr., Tom Sizemore, Jon Voight, Colm Feore, and Alec Baldwin.
In a video from Insider, historian John McManus rated the accuracy of World War II battles in movies and TV shows, including the depiction of the Doolittle Raid in Michael Bay’s Pearl Harbor. Watch the portion of the video below, starting at the 14:03 minute mark:
The World War II historian claims the depiction of the Doolittle Raid in Pearl Harbor is highly exaggerated and historically inaccurate, particularly in terms of the destruction caused, the altitude of the planes, and the portrayal of Japanese antiaircraft fire. Overall, he rated the scene a 4/10 in terms of historical accuracy. Read his full comments below:
OK, where to begin? This one’s just so bad. I’m sorry. I mean, way too much destruction. The Doolittle Raiders, in total, dropped 16 tons of bombs on Japan. It was, relatively speaking, a pinprick. Not that it’s pleasant to be under 16 tons of bombs, of course, but it didn’t inflict anywhere near that much destruction.
The B-25 was supposed to drop anywhere from 7,000 to 8,000-plus-whatever feet, and it looks like they’re right down on the deck when they’re dropping their bombs here. So in this raid, by the way, I don’t think they’re quite that low. You know, they’re low enough to see what’s below them and to drop on their targets and whatever, but I think not quite as low as is portrayed here.
That’s the kind of artillery or antiaircraft artillery they would’ve had there, and they’re manipulating it more or less the right way. You know, a couple people on the crew trying to find targets up there, shoot at whatever they can. The problem is that the raid catches them mostly off guard. It’s portrayed as being way too suffocating and way too accurate. The Japanese would’ve wished that their antiaircraft fire was so effective against the Doolittle raid.
They seem to portray at the end of the clip that one of the planes gets shot down over Japan, that one of the planes gets shot down over Japan, which is just 100% inaccurate. All of them got across the water, most of them to China, one to the Soviet Union. Many of them, of course, were captured, of course, later by the Japanese. That’s a different matter. What bothers me about it is that these are not hard things to find out. The Doolittle raid is really famous. Most of the veterans lived and told their accounts, and there’s great books about it. It wouldn’t have been hard for the filmmaker to really explore it and try and tell it a little bit more accurately. Unfortunately, that’s not what happened here, and it kind of makes for neat action, I guess. But in terms of is it history? Well, not so much. I’m giving this one a 4.
How Historically Inaccurate Is Michael Bay’s Pearl Harbor?
The Doolittle Raid Is The Most Historically Inaccurate Aspect
Michael Bay’s movie presents a heavily fictionalized account of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, centering on a love story leading up to the attack, and the American counter-attack called the Doolittle Raid. In turn, Pearl Harbor received mostly negative reviews from critics, earning a 24% Rotten Tomatoes score, particularly for its historical inaccuracies. Though most of the movie presents a mixed bad in terms of historical accuracy, the depiction of the Doolittle Raid’s planning, execution, and aftermath is regarded as one of its most inaccurate aspects.
Historian John McManus mentions many of the historical inaccuracies found in Pearl Harbor‘s depiction of the Doolittle Raid. One of the most egregious inaccuracies is that the raid, named after Lieutenant Colonel James Doolittle who planned and led the attack, caused far less destruction than shown in the movie, as it was more of a symbolic strike that inflicted minimal damage. Furthermore, the movie also exaggerates how effective Japanese antiaircraft fire was, as all American planes made it out safely.
Our Take On Pearl Harbor’s Historical Inaccuracy
Michael Bay Prioritized Bombast, For Better Or Worse
As John McManus mentions, historical inaccuracies like the ones present in Pearl Harbor are easy to avoid, given the available historical records. This is why it’s likely that Michael Bay simply prioritized bombast and action over historical accuracy, as he frequently does in his films. In that case, it’s difficult to argue that the director didn’t succeed in his goal, as Pearl Harbor earned much praise for its spectacular 40-minute action sequence, received an Oscar nomination for Best Visual Effects, and won one for Best Sound Editing.
Source: Insider
