For the first time, I have decided to write a comment. You have seen enough reviews and ratings (and rantings). I prefer to address the commmon ways in which this movie has been misinterpreted.<br /><br />Many reviewers, both American and others, seem to have mistaken this movie for either a tear jerker or a political statement. In essence, it is neither. The novel it is based on is simply an expression of the guilt and pain felt by the author.<br /><br />To those who feel that it is a politically motivated story, or it only portrays suffering on part of the Japanese: Quite simply...it is not. The war scenes are not there for drama, they are there to place the situation into context. It is my opinion that your personal prejudices are coming into play. Being a patriotic American, I can state (not without shame) that there are plenty of mindless American movies which portray Americans as either heroes or victims (usually both) and their purpose (as with all flicks) is $. It is my sincere opinion that Akiyuki Nosaka's motives were far purer when he wrote this. He was looking for closure and writing a tribute to his sister at the same time.<br /><br />To those who feel revulsion towards Seita and feel that the war scenes were pointless: As mentioned earlier, all the the war scenes do is place the story in context. They are not there to excuse Seita's actions in any way. The story clearly shows that there is no absolution for Seita (Akiyuki Nosaka's alter-ego). He bares his shortcomings and imperfections (as seen from his own eyes) for the world to see and feel repulsed by in the hope to find some solace for his own guilty heart. I've dragged this on far too long and I have a test tomorrow morning.<br /><br />Cheers!