Furthermore, there is little by way of denial by representatives of the Japanese side. When the film as representation of reality is taken into account, it is interesting to consider the tension between the presentations of the present as opposed to the past. The present is represented as the reality that it is; with the women displaying the current state of their injuries and explaining the effect of the events upon them. Since no footage remains of the events in questions, actors must necessarily reenact the events of the past, which casts some uncertainty over verisimilitude. Also, the events being related could be the result of distorted memory or the desire to create a shock effect that resembles the shock and horror the women experienced when being abducted from their homes and their lives.

While it appears plausible, therefore, that many of these women were lured from their homes and schools by promises of work and money, other accounts might be somewhat embellished. Some of the more outlandish accounts include how the women were forced to bayonet Chinese civilians and even eat human flesh. Interestingly, the past is also represented by archival film, still black and white photographs, and footage of soldiers and the dead. This relieves some of the tension created by credibility concerns.

It is highly unlikely that any of the women openly lied, or even embellished their stories. Indeed, there is as little evidence to suggest this as there is to suggest that they are speaking the truth. However, the way in which the film is set up as representative of the suffering that occurred during the war, suggests some challenges to its verisimilitude. This challenge might be met by arguing that the first-person accounts are provided individually, without coaching and without any external influence. Furthermore it might also be argued that the impenetrable Japanese culture would do little to divulge helpful information to lend more balance to the film. The filmmaker therefore...

255) confirms this view. According to the author, the representation of the past, even in historical fashion, does not as such mean that it is an accurate or precise depiction. On the other hand, this does not mean either that the memory presented is invalid. Certainly, the memories of the women who speak during the film appear sincere enough, especially when supported by evidence such as wounds and even death.
When drawing a conclusion about the appropriate presentations of the past in Kim-Gibson's film, the most valid view is possibly that it is a "hypothesis" of the past, where there is no denial that materials are limited and memories could fade. The hypothesis is not, however, invalid for this reason. Because the filmmaker acknowledges her limitations, she uses the materials that she does have to the best of her ability. Archival footage and photographs supplement the enacted material to provide substance to the testimonies of the women.

In conclusion then, it is suggested that the film provides a valid view of the past, where personal memories are used to describe a devastating war crime that ruined hundreds of thousands of lives. As the film's title suggests, the silence is now broken by showing the audience the depths to which the human spirit can sink as a result of either power or powerlessness. The women found themselves in a dispossessed state, where all their power of decision making is removed, and they are trapped by Japanese soldiers who care nothing for their well-being beyond what they could provide physically. In this sense, the film does its work with great sensitivity and validity.