Didn’t Miramax just make an artform out of self-hype?
Thank you, sir. Very interesting.
Struck me as funny, though, how the “I have full confidence in your courage…” quote is followed by an unused “in case of failure” announcement.
The connection between the beach assault troops and the airborne at Utah Beach was completewithin just a couple of days.. It had to be. Airborne troops can’t carry much with them in the war of supplies and resupply by air drop and glider is uncertain.
Actually most of the airborne units were mixed up in that they were scrambled because of inaccuracy in the air drops in bad weather at night. Ryan’s unit could have been composed of people from various companies, battalions and regiments but all would have been 101st.
In the case of this particular soldier the dates on the telegram indicate it took almost three weeks.
Yes, I am astounded that the brothers could have been killed on D-Day, that the army would find out about it and that there was a surviving brother; that a decision would be made to withdraw the surviving brother; that the word would be passed down the chain of command to the forces in France and an operation planned in the time between the landings and the full integration of the airborne units into the main assault force. I wrote earlier that a certain amount of suspension of disbelief is needed to enjoy any theatrical production. This one required so much such suspension that I simply couldn’t get into SPR as anything other than just another movie. And, as I said, the plot after the beach scenes was reminiscent to me of many westerns.
Try Stallingrad. Granted it is a German film, but Lord is it ever the most Anti war film I’ve seen.
I think the problem I have with SPR Aside from the 20 minutes is that it is a very American film. There is a very distinct way Wars are portrayed in American films with the possible exception of Vietnam. It isn’t exactly rah rah but there is a definte inability to face any defeat. Patton (the film) probably said it best “Americans like winners…”
SPR could have ended with them losing the bridge and still have Ryan head home but that last stand had to be shown and the good guys had to win.
It is rare, aside from Vietnam flicks, to find a US war film that doesn’t end in victory. It’s not really a criticism more of an observation.
What did annoy me, however, was that this film seemed to say that only America could win the war. Hell only America was in the war. The only time allies are mentioned is when Hanks and Ted Danson are knocking “Monty” and with their great warrior wisdom they plot out the exact path the war should go. It is as if even the lowest American officers on the field knew better than any forigen General. Sheesh. As pointed out the ending is a shot of the US Flag (God bless America indeed)
I disagree. We see instances of soldiers from both sides shooting surrendering opponents. I don’t see how that glorifies war or ennobles the soldiers.
It seems to me that the message of the movie is: War is evil, but it is sometimes a necessary evil; we should appreciate and remember the sacrifices made by WW II veterans.
Considering that I was the one who was arguing with lissener about this very topic in the other thread he mentioned (I assume, anyway. You forgot to include the actual link, lissener) I feel I should adress this.
Bushwah.
Sorry, but anyone taking a negative opinion about a movie they liked as a negative opinion about themselves has got some serious problems. lissener found the movie to be “the baldest propaganda.” I found it to be decently filmed, but overly sentimental and poorly written. RikWriter found it to be one of the greatest war movies ever made. None of these statements are in any way reflections on anyone else who saw the movie. To claim that lissener is implying that people who like SPR are stupid for swallowing Spielberg’s propaganda makes as much sense as suggesting that RikWriter is calling us unAmerican for not loving this tribute to Our Men in Uniform. All art is subjective. There is no “right” way to react to any work of art, and it’s impossible to have an open debate on art if one side has to muzzle their opinions so as not to offend the other side. We are all adults here, presumably. We ought to be mature enough to seperate who we are from what we like.
I don’t see the film at all saying “War is evil”, but instead saying “War is hell”
A subtle, but important distinction.
I’d say multiple scenes of gunning down surrendering soldiers goes beyond war being “hell” to war being “evil.”
It does seem that SPR has passed the test of time vis-a-vis SIL. I done hear anyone ever talking about the latter, but you see SPR a lot.
I hear a lot more about SIL than SPR. It all depends on where you’re listening.
It helps that this is the broadcast movie du Jour for Veteran’s Day and Memorial Day.
SIL is only shown on Queen Mum’s birthday.
Lissener (or anyone else) doesn’t have to do a damn thing. If he does choose to express his opinion, I’m just amused by all the shock he expresses when people react. “Honestly bewildered”… give me a break.
Or don’t. I’ll survive.
Yeah, given that the crowd you hang out with consider Starship Troopers a classic, I imagine your sample is a bit skewed… 
So, personal insults are a perfectly valid response to an opinion you don’t agree with, in a mature discussion about a work of art.