I guess we don't have eyewitnesses yet. What I heard was

1. An item on the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal, which was scathing. Especially on the ground that the portrayal of Franklin Roosevelt was really and truly wimpy. Now, without further information, the fact that the WSJ editorial page pans a movie is a pretty good reason to go see the movie. On the other hand, I don't suspect them of excessive fondness for Roosevelt.

2. Comment on the op ed page of today's New York Times entitled "World War II for Fun and Profit," generally to the effect that the film is shot full of anachronisms, and that from watching the film, one could not tell what the war is about. This because a film which accurately gave the background would offend potential audiences in Japan. So to that extent, it apparently is not anti-Japanese, at least not to the extent of suggesting that Japan was wrong to bomb Pearl Harbor.

3. But for me, a much more serious problem than offending all those Japanese in Japan, is that according to NPR accounts, it is stirring up anti-Japanese,and generally anti-Asian sentiment in the United States. As if Asian-Americans weren't getting enough shit already.

And apart from all this, I know that films about historical periods I don't know about influence my attitudes toward history. So that I make a point of not seeing films like "Hoffa," "Nixon," and that one about the Kennedy assassination. Films that lie are damaging.

So I, for one am not going to go reward Disney at the box office. Unless someone points out where I'm wrong.