historical hits & misses in the movie emperor (2013) armchairgeneral.com

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

Subscribe to

Armchair

General

Magazine

Subscribe online

and save nearly

40%!

Posted on Mar 27, 2013 in Posted on Mar 27, 2013 in Books and MoviesBooks and Movies

Historical Hits and Misses in the Movie ‘Emperor’By Mo Ludan

Emperor (2012, PG-13, 105 mins), directed by

Peter Webber, starring Tommy Lee Jones

(General of the Army Douglas MacArthur),

Matthew Fox (General Bonner Fellers), Eriko

Hatsune (Aya Shimada), Toshiyuki Nishida

(General Kajima) and Takataro Kataoka

(Japanese Emperor Hirohito).

While not perfect (and there are, to be sure, some

troubling inconsistencies), Emperor succeeds in capturing the difficult

dilemma faced by General of the Army Douglas MacArthur. In late August

1945, he is the newly appointed Supreme Commander for Allied Powers

(SCAP) charged with the responsibility for establishing and overseeing the

occupation of defeated, war-ravaged Japan, at that time “teetering on the

brink of total collapse.”

MacArthur is also given the task of

gathering enough evidence, under a tight

10-day deadline imposed by Washington, to

prosecute Japanese Emperor Hirohito as a

war criminal. President Harry S. Truman’s

administration, as MacArthur has correctly

surmised, is keen on seeing the Emperor

tried, found guilty and hanged.

As MacArthur, actor Tommy Lee Jones

exudes the confident air of an American icon that’s larger than life. Matthew

Fox does a great job as the earnest young General Bonner Fellers (although

in real life, Fellers, born in 1896, was 49 years old during the events this film

portrays). Fellers is ordered to gather evidence that may determine not only

the fate of an Emperor but that of a nation and the lives of millions.

Historically, Emperor has its hits and misses. The film correctly shows

General MacArthur’s Tokyo office as sparse and devoid of luxury, from

faded window curtains to plain wooden panels to a drawer-less desk. (See

“General MacArthur’s Tokyo Hq” article/photo gallery at

http://www.armchairgeneral.com/general-macarthurs-tokyo-hq.htm.)

On August 30, 1945, MacArthur arrives at Atsugi military base, near

Yokohama, on the general’s personal plane, a Douglas C-54. But the film

does not show his signature “BATAAN” that was proudly painted on the

silvery plane’s nose. It also shows the incorrect US insignia on the plane (the

one shown on the film plane was not adopted until 1948).

of 12Historical Hits and Misses in the Movie ‘Emperor’ | Armchair General | Armchair Genera...

2/19/2014http://www.armchairgeneral.com/historical-hits-and-misses-in-the-movie-emperor.htm

The film gets MacArthur’s “transport” correct, however, when the general is

seen entering a vintage black Lincoln (check out the hood ornament).

Yet, when MacArthur arrives at his destination, the film cuts to the Dai-ichi

Building in Tokyo instead of the New Grand Hotel in Yokohama, 46 miles

away—the general did not move his headquarters to Dai-ichi until

September 8, 1945). In real life, from his arrival at Atsugi, MacArthur’s car

and entourage headed straight to his first “home” in Japan at Yokohama’s

New Grand Hotel. (See “Yokohama’s New Grand Hotel: MacArthur’s First

Home in Japan” article/photo gallery at

http://www.armchairgeneral.com/yokohama%e2%80%99s-new-grand-hotel-

macarthur%e2%80%99s-first-japanese-%e2%80%9chome%e2%80%

9d.htm .)

Five Misleading Scenes in Emperor

There are five scenes where the film goes out of its way to portray

MacArthur in an unflattering and insulting manner; yet, these are either

misleading or lack “the rest of the story”:

(1) A lavish mansion, amidst the rubble of a bombed-out Tokyo, is shown as

MacArthur’s private residence. Yet, the house was actually the former U.S.

Ambassador’s residence. Emperor is silent on this historical fact, which

permits the filmmaker to reinforce the image of MacArthur being obsessed

with the amenities of luxury. The film therefore repeats the same canard

that had been reported in 1942 at the outset of MacArthur’s New Guinea

Campaign in the South West Pacific Area: it was claimed that the general

built a “magnificent villa” atop a Port Moresby hill, but actual photographs

have shown this as totally untrue.

(2) MacArthur is shown in the film lamenting the scarcity of food in

devastated postwar Japan, then the camera pans to his dinner plate with

two fresh eggs, cooked over easy, and a good-sized steak. Here’s the truth

about MacArthur’s meal that night:

“That evening [August 30, 1945] the 11 Airborne [Division] scoured

Yokohama for eggs for MacArthur’s breakfast. The next morning, the

General ate one egg instead of his customary two. When he learned that a

nightlong search had yielded but a single egg, he realized the severity of the

food shortage. Thereupon he issued an order that was contrary to the

practice of conquering armies through history. Occupation troops were not

to eat local food but only their [military] rations. It proved to be one of his

most popular orders. (The East Magazine, Sept/Oct 2002, vol. 38, no. 3,

Kosuga Manison Rappongi #200, Minato-ku, Tokyo).

(3) A scene is created for the film in which MacArthur poses for two staff

photographers while pointing to a war map posted on the wall. This strange

scene which does not propel the film’s plot in any way can only have one

purpose: to reinforce once again the claim that MacArthur was obsessed

with self-promotion. One may reasonably ask: what exactly is he supposed

to be promoting this time—isn’t the war over?

(4) MacArthur is shown visibly disturbed by the tight, Washington-imposed

10-day deadline for gathering evidence against Emperor Hirohito, and

angrily mutters “that man [Truman] is a lying bastard!” Profanity of any sort

was totally uncharacteristic of MacArthur, both in public and private. And it

is especially ironic that the film chose to invent dialogue of profanity

directed at Truman—Truman is “on the record” as routinely using profanity

th



to refer to MacArthur (such as “that Brass Hat SOB” and other profanity

directed at the general), while there is no evidence whatsoever that

MacArthur ever referred to Truman in the same vulgar language.

(5) A tag line at the end of the film, in which Emperor inexplicably tries to

make a big deal of MacArthur’s “failed attempt” to run for U.S. presidency in

1948. One has to ask what this has to do with the film’s plot (other than to

take another back-handed slap at the general). The move to nominate

MacArthur actually grew out of a “grass roots” movement in America since,

like “Ike,” MacArthur was a hugely popular American war hero. From his

office in Tokyo 7,000 miles away, General MacArthur during the run up to

the 1948 election had barely started the long process of transforming Japan

into a democracy. Returning abruptly to the U.S. and campaigning across

the country for GOP presidential nomination at this critical point in the

occupation of Japan for which he was responsible seems uncharacteristic of

a leader who never left a job unfinished.

Another tag line casually mentions the demotion of Fellers to the rank of

colonel. However, the film fails to point out that Fellers’ demotion was part

of Truman’s massive postwar downsizing of US military forces which

included reducing in rank 212 generals (who held that rank as a “temporary”

wartime promotion, not their “permanent” official rank on the active army

list, which could be several grades below general rank). In 1948, Fellers (who

retired in 1946) was actually reinstated as a brigadier general on the Army

retired officer list.

Finally, the film is not clear what role General Shizuichi Tanaka had played in

the attempted assault on the Emperor by die-hard junior military officers

who were making a last-ditch attempt to prevent Japan’s surrender. The film

simply shows him committing suicide. The Oxford-educated, Shakespearean

scholar and former military commander of Japanese-occupied Philippines

was an old acquaintance of MacArthur when both were posted in

Washington earlier in their military careers.

CONCLUSION—Where Emperor Succeeds

Where I believe Emperor has scored solid points is in its attempt to make

audiences realize and appreciate the impact of two disparate cultures on a

horrific war. One example of the US-Japan cultural gap is depicted in a scene

referring to Emperor Hirohito’s use of words in subtle shades of gray

instead of straightforward black and white in order to announce Japan’s

surrender without actually ever using the word “surrender” (Hirohito instead

merely announces that Japan must “endure the unendurable”).

The much-maligned (by many film critics) love story of Fellers and the

Japanese woman Aya Shimada, plodding as it is, does have its own calming

energy that lightens the film’s otherwise intense dose of death, despair and

devastation.

Finally, MacArthur’s accomplishment, as most historians would agree, in

starting Japan on the path from feudal militarism toward modern

democracy represents “a greater triumph than any the old warrior had won

on the battlefield.” In driving home this point in history, Emperor deserves

kudos.

About the Author

Mo Ludan lives in the Seattle, Washington area, is a longtime Armchair

General subscriber, and has frequently contributed to the magazine. His



30 Comments

Great article. I saw the film a few weeks ago at a local art theater and really

enjoyed it.

We got to the theatre several minutes late, but I thought the car

shown was a very rare ’42 Chrysler….or was I seeing things? My

Dad had a ’46 that looked just like it except for the grill.

My roommate made an almost identical exclamation when

he saw that Chrysler!!

That was no Lincoln but rather a Chrysler as noted by

others. Became a favorite of NYC taxis in the late 40′s early

50′s.

web articles include his virtual tours of MacArthur’s Dai Ichi building Tokyo

headquarters and Corregidor.

Rick MartinRick Martin 3/28/20133/28/2013

REPLYREPLY

Don roemermannjDon roemermannj 4/5/20134/5/2013

REPLYREPLY

Carolyn DavisCarolyn Davis 8/8/20138/8/2013

Rich BarilRich Baril 8/20/20138/20/2013

AnnabelAnnabel 8/20/20138/20/2013



I too was curious, so I GOOGLED it. Turns out the car

shown in the movie was another miss by the film maker.

Yes, MacArthur “traveled from Atsugi to Yokohama in an

American car, a LINCOLN” (underscoring provided).

http://books.google.com/books?

id=M0x9AjxXinsC&pg=PA70&lpg=PA70&dq=macarthur,+yokohama,+lincoln&source=bl&ots=MJ92OT3IDm&sig=3MTfY6xXcAaMiG_flcjnhgJS9X8&hl=en&sa=X&ei=1ioUUv3jGoKdigLFioHIBw&ved=0CFUQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=macarthur%

2C%20yokohama%2C%20lincoln&f=false

and this:

“,,, the commander strode from the plane and glanced

around briefly before rumbling off in an ancient American

LINCOLN to Yokohama’s New Grand” (underscoring

provided).

http://www.pripix.com/features/macarthur.htm

I enjoyed the movie Emperor very much. I do understand the hits

and misses but from reading General Fellers’ bio I get the

impression he met the Japanese Exchange student before

attending USMA. Not in the 30′s like the movie suggests. But again,

is a movie and not a history book. General MacArthur is splendidly

brought back to like by Tommy Lee Jones, wow, even the photos,

the pipe, excellent job! There are signs and subtle messages

regarding cultural differences all over the movie. I am going to see

it again. Did not like the remark on the general’s demotion by

Eisenhower. Made it sound as if there was bad blood between

them. Even if there was, the demotion was part of the

readjustment of the army after the war. Over 200 generals, acting

generals or with a temporary rank of general, were brought back

to colonel. However, General Fellers was reinstated as Brigadier

General when he retired.

Ditto. Fine film. To answer the critic’s ponder on why was McArthur

promoting himself one only has to go to Wikipedia to read about

his plans to run for President.

PatPat 8/4/20138/4/2013

REPLYREPLY

IsleMajeursIsleMajeurs 11/2/201311/2/2013

REPLYREPLY

Rod ArmstrongRod Armstrong 7/26/20137/26/2013



Good vetting of “Emperor.”

I’m especially glad you picked up on the script’s error in making MacArthur

such a “potty mouth.” Totally out of character with what I have heard

about MacArthur’s “Brigade of Cdets Commander” character.

Movies have to simplify, so it is understandable that the movie takes as its

central theme the request by Washington to get MacArthur’s

recommendation on treatment of the emperor. But in reality, the

historians will tell you that the decision had already been made—on the

recommendation of the pre-war US ambassador in Tokyo, Joseph Grew.

Grew knew that without the use of the emperor, the occupation might face

guerilla warfare and utter chaos. By the time of the Japanese surrender,

Soviet moves in central Europe had made it clear that if Japan was to be

saved from at least partial occupation by the Soviets (Hokkaido?), chaos

was not an option. (In two weeks after their entry into the war, the Soviets

killed 300,000 or so Japanese in Manchuria and Korea and took prisoners

as slave labor to Siberia—many died and others were kept until the mid-

fifties. (That figure of 300,000, incidentally, is about the same as the total of

the deaths caused by American fire bombing and atom blasts.)

My guess is that the movie’s Washington demand for MacArthur’s views

was designed to give the Truman Administration a political fig leaf by

getting the war here in Tokyo to approve their policy. What might have

been up for grabs was a decision on whether to force Hirohito to abdicate

in favor of the Crown Prince, who was in his early teens. But MacArthur

either was impressed with Hirohito or (more likely) decided he would

rather work with this guy than a regency of unknown orientation.

There was an aspect of the Fellers story that obviously couldn’t be fitted

into the movie. He had gone to Earlham College in Indiana, a very good

Quaker college. He clearly was not a practicing Quaker, but he had

contacts in the Quaker educational establishment (and the chair of the

wartime planning group in Washington was a distinguished Quaker

educator, Professor Hugh Borton). Fellers implanted a whole group of

Quakers in the Palace staff in educational roles, most notably Elizabeth

Vining as the present Emperor’s English tutor—”Windows for the Crown

Prince.” The effects of Fellers’s actions have lingered on for many years in

the quiet, sensible, and modest persona of the Heisei Emperor.

Well done! Carefully balanced, informative and engaging review. I enjoyed

the film, warts and all …

REPLYREPLY

Thor-Jürgen Greve LøbergThor-Jürgen Greve Løberg 8/10/20138/10/2013

REPLYREPLY

calvincalvin 8/14/20138/14/2013



We saw the movie tonight and enjoyed it very much, as once again we

disagreed with all the negative reviews. We have come to expect that

however.

After you see the humane consideration the USA showed towards a

former enemy, and after re-building similarly devastated Germany without

asking for reparations of ANY sort, I wonder how and why our so-called

President calls us “Imperialistic?” Maybe Barry Hussein doesnt know the

meaning of the word.

Or maybe the President was thinking about our illegal invasion of

Iraq without any reason or provocation.

Calvin, Imperialism carries with it the unspoken goal of

“self-enrichment” at the expense of the dominated

country. We’ve spent a fortune on a country full of snakes

thinking they MUST appreciate Freedom, not

understanding the Arab/Muslim mindset

Mitch

Invading a country you know nothing about and expecting

them to be just like you… Well that must a definition of

imperialism that wasn’t in your dictionary? There were so

many overtones and unexplained oversights in the

invasion of Iraq that one just gets the feeling it was a

belligerent country invading just ” because it could”.

REPLYREPLY

mitch abramsonmitch abramson 8/17/20138/17/2013

REPLYREPLY

calvincalvin 8/17/20138/17/2013

REPLYREPLY


RonrRonr 11/11/201311/11/2013



What the above article saw in MacArthur’s “Thick Steak” I did not see. I

rented the film so I cant re-view that scene, but i believe it was an egg with

a very THIN slice of ham.

You rented the film, so you can’t review that scene?? Call me crazy,

but usually when you rent a movie, you CAN actually review,

rewind, review again, rewind again, re-review and repeat as often

as you wish. LoL. Just sayin.

Yes Jim. I rented that film from Redbox and obviously

returned it, or yes, I could have re-viewed it. Duh…

Yes, I think it was SPAM , may have to re-rent again!

Mitch, you’re correct. It was a slice of ham. I’m glad someone else was

watching the film.

SPAM, which makes the Generals comments sarcastic.


REPLYREPLY

Jim StoneJim Stone 8/19/20138/19/2013

REPLYREPLY


RonrRonr 11/11/201311/11/2013

REPLYREPLY

JeanJean 8/17/20138/17/2013

REPLYREPLY

RonrRonr 11/11/201311/11/2013

REPLYREPLY



Methinks the film is beyond the question of whether or not MacArthur had

a “thin slice of ham” or a “thick steak,” The future of postwar Japan and

millions of people did not depend on this point. Also, the reviewer did not

seem to have the luxury of dissecting “Emperor” on a DVD by freezing it

frame by frame but instead saw it at a theater, like most everybody else

did (the review was posted on the pre-DVD release date of March 27,

2013).

Here’s the more salient issue, in my view. The movie review refers its

readers to a certain link, where you will find footnote #8 re subject scene.

One may find it quite revealing. It tells the reader what really happened

and may, in fact, lead one to appreciate the larger message of what

MacArthur did that fateful day.

http://www.armchairgeneral.com/historical-hits-and-misses-in-the-movie-

emperor.htm#hide

Eh… Where is this link that you speak of??? I see NO links for any

“footnote #8″. Only links for pics. One may want to assist us far

less intelligent beings so that one may prove that one may be

supreme. ;)

See paragraph 7 of above text. Click on the link at the end

of the paragraph as I just did and you will see “Yokohama’s

New Grand Hotel – MacArthur’s First Japanese Home.”

Scroll down to Footnote #8 is at the end of the article,

which reads (as it says in above review):

” 8) The East Magazine, Sept/Oct 2002, vol. 38, no. 3.

Kasuga Mansion Roppongi #200, Minato-ku, Tokyo: The

hotel prepared a lunch of walleye, mackerel, and

cucumber garnished with vinegar. The General ate a single

bite and put down his knife and fork. His subordinates

wanted to sample his evening meal before he ate. He

would not permit it. The hotel staff were grateful for the

gesture of trust. It was an expression of trust in the hotel

and in the Japanese nation, but it was also a sign of

MacArthur’s hunger. He had skipped the earlier meal, and

by evening was too hungry to share his hamburger with

anyone for any reason.

AnnabelAnnabel 8/18/20138/18/2013

REPLYREPLY


REPLYREPLY

AnnaabelAnnaabel 8/20/20138/20/2013



“That evening the 11th Airborne Division scoured

Yokohama for eggs for MacArthur’s breakfast. The next

morning, the General ate one egg instead of his customary

two. When he learned that a nightlong search had yielded

but a single egg, he realized the severity of the food

shortage. Thereupon he issued an order that was contrary

to the practice of conquering armies throughout history:

Occupation troops were not to eat local food but only their

rations. It proved to be one of his most popular orders.”

There, I hope that helps.

You mention the love story between Fellers and Shimada only in passing,

but to me, this is what the entire movie was really about. But did such a

relationship ever really exist? Given what you say about Feller’s real age,

the time line is awkward. I would like to know more about this.

I just finished watching the Emperor on blu-ray, then a few minutes later

ran across this article. I felt it necessary to correct a couple things in this

article just because I thought the author, “Mo” would like a taste of his own

medicine in regards to nit-picking little details… In the scene where

MacAurthur is on the phone with the president, he says (and I quote

verbatim) “And thank you, sir. (slams phone down) You lying son of a

bitch.”. In the dinner scene, MacArthur states that they won’t be dining on

steak because the country is starving and some spiel about moral

authority. He then states “Ah, it looks as if our dinner is ready.” (pans to

plate of food which consists of a thin slice of ham with sauce drizzled on

top, 2 slices of carrots, 3 small chunks of potatoes and 4 green beans.)

Then says “Courage, men.” Then everybody has a lol moment. I rather

enjoyed the movie a lot. I especially enjoyed the love interest story within

the story. The actress (Erika Hatsune) that played the part of Aya is VERY

beautiful and VERY real and natural! Nothing fake about her acting at all. I

did not like the Major Gen Richter! He was a Major pain in the ass and

apparently had a hard on for getting Fellers up shit creek! Tommy Lee

Jones was excellent as always as well as Matthew Fox!

Mike AllenMike Allen 8/18/20138/18/2013

REPLYREPLY


REPLYREPLY

EllenEllen 9/21/20139/21/2013

of 12Historical Hits and Misses in the Movie ‘Emperor’ | Armchair General | Armchair Gen...


Clearly you are a fan of MacArthur and let that fact ruffle the feathers of

your review. I feel like defending the filmmakers a bit by taking up several

of your points.

1) I think the filmmakers were probably more concerned with recreating

the scene accurately. The meeting did take place in “a lavish mansion,

amidst the rubble of a bombed-out Tokyo.” Historic photos of the meeting

depict the same reality. Are they claiming that MacArthur had an affinity

for fine things? And would such a claim necessarily be wrong if he was

indeed living in such a fine dwelling?

2) commentor Jim Stone does everything I would wish to with this.

3) This scene does propel the plot. It comes after someone has pointed out

to Fellers that MacArthur is simply self promoting and says something

about noticing all the pictures he’s taking. This scene is showing Fellers

watching this picture taking going on and gives a hint of him reflecting on

MacArthur and the words of warning he was given.

5) It is ridiculous to say “Emperor inexplicably tries to make a big deal of

MacArthur’s “failed attempt” to run for U.S. presidency in 1948.” It is not

inexplicable. The film features the idea that at least some of his military

men saw this as a goal for him and as a reason Fellers should be cautious

with MacArthur. It makes perfect sense to say that he did run (which he

truthfully did).

I would say that if anyone has an agenda regarding MacArthur it would be

the author of this article and his clear fandom of the general more than

the filmmakers.

I agree with another comment that the author, in #2 above, clearly

misinterpreted the scene dealing with the meal. In it, MacArthur clearly

states that they would not be having steak, and he gave the reason why.

And the plate of food held, I’m fairly certain, fried spam.

Yes it was. SPAM. I think that was too subtle for some people to

see. I did notice that though, and that’s whyat made the Generals

comments “sarcastic”

REPLYREPLY

David SmithDavid Smith 9/30/20139/30/2013

REPLYREPLY

RonrRonr 11/11/201311/11/2013

REPLYREPLY

PrinceHarryPrinceHarry 11/12/201311/12/2013



Bearing in mind the film was about Bonner Fellers, it did fail to mention

that as a Colonel in the North Africa campaign, Fellers unwittingly almost

gave North Africa to Rommel.

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=3341

Well presented. The anti-American or self-loathing propagandized in the

film and clearly pointed out in your review seems de rigueur in today’s

films rather than acknowledging American exceptionalism.

One unmentioned slight was the bombing raid comparison, “childrens’

shadows on the wall”, and negative narration, willfully ignoring the weeks

of warning the Japanese were given before the atomic bomb strikes.

REPLYREPLY

Darrell ThompsonDarrell Thompson 12/23/201312/23/2013

REPLYREPLY



historical hits & misses in the movie emperor (2013) armchairgeneral.com

Documents