I agree with Abdul Rahman Koya that Pearl Harbor has more to do with flag-waving and a sappy love story than it does with historical events and analysis ('Pearl Harbor a Hollywood stink bomb ', June 16). In this it is no different from last year's horrible Mel Gibson vehicle (who is, ironically, Australian) The Patriot or to a lesser extent our very own Leftenan Adnan.

Although I find movies of this sort indigestible and unforgivable in their historical inaccuracy, something has to be said for literary licence. Perhaps the writer would have enjoyed himself more if he suspended belief and switched his brain off when he stepped into the cinema he is, after all, paying to see a movie, not a documentary.

I would like to add that Pearl Harbor's plot has many striking similarities to Shakespeare's Two noble kinsmen. Pearl Harbor revolves around the relationship between two martial best-of-friends male leads who compete for the affection of the same girl during a time of war.

One of the men is presumed killed and his rival/best friend hooks up with the girl, but the former miraculously returns at a later date, leading to a love-triangle and straining the male relationship. Everything is resolved, however when one of the men dies a noble, hero's death. The remaining man and his lady mourn their friend but go on to live happily ever after.