web
counter
 

"Theirs not to reason why, theirs but to do and die"

By Steven Lloyd Wilson | Posted Under Film Reviews | Comments (49)



Tom-Hanks-Saving-Private-Ryan.jpg

“You want to explain the math of this to me? I mean, where’s the sense in risking the lives of the eight of us to save one guy?” -Private Reiben

When Saving Private Ryan hit theaters, it made an understandably big impression. Just about every actor with a line was someone famous or soon to be so, Steven Spielberg directed it just a couple of years removed from knocking Schindler’s List out of the park, and the film itself dealt with World War II, that holy national crusade just going through all of the fiftieth anniversary fanfares. It won a stack of awards, made a cool half billion bucks, and finished cementing Tom Hanks as the official everyman of Hollywood productions.

My grandpa’s take on it? It wasn’t anything John Wayne didn’t do better.

If Forrest Gump was a surreal self portrait of the Boomers, and let’s not re-fight that particular war, Saving Private Ryan was the Boomers’ ode to their fathers. The Greatest Generation suffered through the Great Depression, fought the Great War, and then came home to the new and gleaming suburbs to raise a new generation with Great Daddy Issues.

It’s a curious thing, making films about the past. If they’re made too soon, they’re made by the previous generation, already sitting in the director’s chairs ready to churn out the first draft of history in real time. If they’re made too late, they’re made by the next generation, by the children trying to judge their own parents. There’s only a short period when a generation makes films about its own youth. An interesting project would be to map how the attitudes of World War II films changed over time, from the first swarm of heroic tales in the 1940s told by a generation trying to explain why it sent its own children into the meat grinder, up until the 1990s when Boomer directors really started trying to reinterpret the memory of that event through the lens of their own experiences.

Saving Private Ryan is simply a beautiful film, in a stark and horrible way. A desolate landscape of grays and blues stretches always to an indeterminate horizon that melds with the constant gray of the sky. There’s not a building that stands but in rubble, not a meadow that sits in silence but for the watchful eyes waiting in the tall grass. It resembles the ruin of post-apocalyptic visions, because that’s what modern war is for the lands upon which it falls, the end of the world, the breaking of all that has been built. It puts you from the first moments into a front row seat of the hell of war, playing ingeniously with sound like a horror film. Stretches of silence lull you so that the sudden staccato of bullets and death are all the more violent.

The suddenness of violence underscores the phenomenal job done by the actors, always teetering on the edge of outright madness, even their calmness betrayed by twitches and sudden outbursts. There is no gung-ho here, no patriots or heroes. Just normal men, played as terribly vulnerable, painfully aware that spam on a stick doesn’t have any chance but chance itself when set against the buzz saw of industrial war. There are no heroes, no villains. Sure, there’s the one German soldier who stabs our boys in the back, but we’ve also got the American boy at the beginning yelling “let them burn.” Everybody’s just trying to shoot the guys who are shooting at them. To the characters on the ground, there is no great crusade, no great idea for which they’re willing to lay down their lives. Soldiers on every side of every battle fight for the same reason: for the guys standing next to them.

The central story of risking the lives of a squad of soldiers to save one man whose brothers have all died revolves around this point of why we fight in the first place. A motif repeats throughout the film, hammering home situations of the many sacrificing for the one, challenging us of our notions that one man’s life is any more important than another’s. A general rides with a glider crew but is so important that they strap armor to the plane around him, leading to the glider’s crashing and killing of everyone on board. The squad stops to eliminate an enemy machine gun, though they could go around, losing one of their own so that the next group through will be safe. The sniper points out that they should be sneaking to Berlin, because he could end the war with a shot, killing the one man more important than everyone dying. And of course the ending, Miller dying so that Ryan may live.

Wrapped up in this sacrifice is a simple faith, the faith that the people above you giving the orders understand the moral calculus. You might just be able to stand giving your own life for something, not for a great cause, but simply because you believe that you would not be told to do it if it didn’t save others. When that faith dies, when the trust between leaders and peoples is broken, no war can be won. It’s a well worn trope to compare anything involving war to Vietnam, but this film means more if you can see the way that Vietnam alters the story. The great Boomer ode to their parents cannot be seen in a vacuum, pretending Vietnam doesn’t exist in the conversation. Saving Private Ryan is a message from one generation to its parents, at once an apology, a condemnation and an explanation.

“James, earn this… earn it. .” -Captain Miller

Steven Lloyd Wilson is a hopeless romantic and the last scion of Norse warriors and the forbidden elder gods. His novel, ramblings, and assorted fictions coalesce at www.burningviolin.com.









The Five Best New Shows of the Fall | Everyone Has a Price













Comments

This movie replaced Patton as my favorite war movie.

Posted by: jotthedot at October 7, 2009 3:49 PM

Lovely review, but please fix the spelling. The word isn't "dieing" it's "dying". Can't stand it!

Posted by: SAL at October 7, 2009 3:58 PM

... everyone dieing. And of course the ending, Miller dieing so that Ryan may live.

This review was very lovely, right up until I hit "dieing".

Posted by: appwitch at October 7, 2009 3:58 PM

appwitch, you and I are sharing a brain!

Posted by: SAL at October 7, 2009 4:01 PM

i just don't like this movie. spielberg always ties things up a little too neatly for me.

Posted by: jimmy at October 7, 2009 4:05 PM

Nice review Steven, thanks for that. I'd forgotten how much I enjoyed that movie. I'm looking forward to The Pacific on HBO next march. It's gotta be this kind of good too.

Posted by: Xtreme at October 7, 2009 4:09 PM

A great movie to be sure, but I liked The Thin Red Line better.

If Private Ryan was the high school version of WWII, Thin Red Line was the college version...more nuanced, more detailed characters and a lot of philosophical issues thrown in.

Posted by: Jacktrade at October 7, 2009 4:19 PM

And let's not forget that Nathan Fillion was the first Private Ryan.

Posted by: BWeaves at October 7, 2009 4:46 PM

Steven, you have consistently provided some of the best reviews of films on this site, IMHO. Keep up the good work.

Posted by: bignick at October 7, 2009 4:50 PM

More detailed characters? Nuanced? No. Boring.

Posted by: captainoblivious at October 7, 2009 4:54 PM

If Private Ryan was the high school version of WWII, Thin Red Line was the college version...more nuanced, more detailed characters and a lot of philosophical issues thrown in.

Posted by: Jacktrade at October 7, 2009 4:19 PM

If by "college version" you mean painfully dull, boring, pretentious, and thinking it's totally cooler than it actually is, I wholeheartedly agree. I hate Thin Red Line. I hate it so very, very much.

As for Private Ryan, I really enjoy the film. I don't really love the framing device, but the rest of the movie works. It gets a little "war is cool" during the whole sticky-bomb discussion, but the battle that follows quickly brings one back down to earth.

I have two good seeing Private Ryan stories (I think I saw it 4 times in the theater):

The first time I saw it was with a couple of friends. One, of which, is very, very squeamish about gore. He just can't handle it on screen (or in reality) at all. We're standing in line for the movie and he asks "This is a war movie. Do you think it'll be gory?" I replied, "Come on! It's Steven Spielberg how gory can it be?" After about 15 minutes into the film, it suddently dawns on me what's going on on-screen. I look over at my friend who is just sitting there, pale as a sheet and shuddering. Poor Matt.

Another time I saw it I was sitting in front of some older gentleman. During the scene where the German and the Jewish guy are having that knife fight in the room and Daniel Faraday is hiding on the other side of the wall, too afraid to come in, I could hear the older guy behind me start growling aloud, "Get in there, you coward. Get in there, you cowardly son of a bitch! Come on!"

Posted by: Forbiddendonut at October 7, 2009 5:03 PM

thin red line and saving private ryan are very different movies and really can't be compared.

saving private ryan sucked goat ass. thin red line didn't.

Posted by: jimmy at October 7, 2009 5:11 PM

I'm looking forward to The Pacific on HBO next march.

Hmmmm. Didn't even know that was happening.

Can't say I'm impressed much at all by the trailer.

It looks pretty awful in that overwrought Spielbergian way.

Perhaps it's just a lousy trailer (after Band of Brothers, I'll certainly give it a shot).

We'll see. It appears that they bought the rights to Eugene Sledge's memoirs With the Old Breed, which is a great start (I can't recommend it highly enough), but I can't say I have any faith that a Spielberg production is actually going to have the courage or subtlety to adequately tackle some of the nastier issues from that conflict.

Posted by: Soylent Green is Sheeple at October 7, 2009 5:16 PM

Daniel Faraday... snerk.

When I saw this in a crowded theater, I realized how utterly silent the audience had become during the opening sequence. I don't think I've ever experienced absolute dead silence in a theater before or since then.

Posted by: elsie at October 7, 2009 5:20 PM

Just an interesting aside...in the original script, Miller doesn't die.
Bob Rodat is in the family, and we have a copy.

Posted by: W.E.Coyote at October 7, 2009 5:28 PM

Yeah. I yell at the cowardly fuck every time I see it. I also cry like a baby when Ryan asks his wife to tell him if he's been a good man.

That is my favorite scene. It's the model illustration of how powerful a sacrifice it really is and just how lasting an impression it can make. Your review talked much about how the individual can rationalize the risk of death and dying as long as it is sustained by the belief that their death will save others. Ryan's reaction shows the other side of that faith, the mutual need for worthiness.

Posted by: alphawhiskey at October 7, 2009 5:34 PM

Really loved this movie. That first scene on the beach had me nearly hyperventilating. When we were leaving, there was a gentleman in his seventies softly crying while his wife held him. I knew then that the movie had rung true and that I was probably not as tough as I thought I was or as those kids were who stormed the beach.

That said, Band of Brothers is far better.

Posted by: Forrest at October 7, 2009 5:39 PM

War movies should evoke, at a bare minimum, sorrow and anger. 'Ryan' may be a comic book version of war (and a laughable one if you really look at it), but it fulfills the basic premise of a war movie. The closest 'Thin Red Line' ever came was when it bored its audiences to tears. 'Thin Red Line' is to war movies what Amish Gone Wild is to pornography.

That being said, the opening scene in 'Ryan' is one of the greatest film sequences ever shot--like others, I was impressed at the complete silence in the theater at its conclusion.

Posted by: Friendless Nerd at October 7, 2009 6:00 PM

OK, my father was on Omaha Beach on D-day. I grew up watching John Wayne movies about WWII, TV shows like Combat and rat Patrol. And Hogan's Heroes.

I gave this movie to my dad. He started watching it. He can't.

I used to think he told "war stories". He didn't. He told Army stories. About the guys he served with, the French women he met, his "superior officers" who always cut him slack.

But the war itself fucked him up. And he won't watch SPR because he can't.

This movie completely exposed me to my father's experience. And it's painful.

Posted by: Dave at October 7, 2009 6:04 PM

The human element is one of the greatest strengths of SPR. The realization that Vietnam was probably a walk in the park compared to what WW2 veterans endured. That first beach scene, I think, sets the oh-how-bloody tone.

The city fights scenes though, especially the part where Adam Goldberg gets very slowly stabbed in the heart, those are the ones that stick.

We get to see boys, let by men, die like animals in the greatest industrial meatgrinder there ever was and hopefully, ever will be. That part succeeds very well.

However I absolutely despise THE German soldier coming back and shootin THE bullet which kills THE captain. Absolute utter bullcrap. Hundreds of thousands of soldiers were milling around Normandy at that time. The odds of that event are astronimical. It's a cheap and needless plot device.

That aside, no one can convince me that the initial mission isn't absolute bullcrap. It's a mission that would never happen, again, a cheap plot device to lead the action on. It's that glaring weakness which, in my opinion, makes SPR a good film, but not a great one. An important film, but one which doesn't transcend its subject matter to say something more.

Posted by: jpguy13 at October 7, 2009 6:27 PM

Wow...not much love for Thin Red Line it seems.

Not saying it's as exciting as Saving Private Ryan, but I think in terms of addressing the question of "what's a good war movie supposed to be like", it takes a worthwhile and somewhat unusual look at how war affects individuals, rather than countries or broad groups.

SPR's characters are pretty quickly sketched out, in pretty much the usual war movie fashion (broad traits to help us easily identify them). Even the Tom Hanks character is from central casting, the reluctant but decent warrior.

But in TRL, the characterizations take the entire movie in some cases (e.g. Jim Caveizel's Pvt. Witt), and reflect how people really are...complex, frequently confused, and full of conflicting motives that barely make sense to others in normal times much less during the hell of war. Nick Nolte's Commander Tall is a dangerous jerk, but he's frequently right about tactics, and his monologues betray a man surprisingly desperate for some sense of love and connection in the midst of all the slaughter.

I agree you can't straight up compare the two movies, but I do think TRL is worth the time, and serves as an interesting counterpoint to SPR.

Posted by: Jacktrade at October 7, 2009 6:29 PM

Beautiful review, Steven. I loved this movie when I saw it, but it's one of those films that I just haven't been able to watch all the way through a second time. I think maybe it's that knowing the story ruins a second viewing, and though you could get more out of some scenes, I just haven't been able to do it.

Posted by: figgy at October 7, 2009 7:14 PM

One of my favorite movies ever, and a great review (as always). Lot of great performances:

- Hanks, my favorite performance of his
- Damon, weird looking back on it before he was big
- Vin Diesel, WOW actually a good small performance
- Barry Pepper, my favorite of the soldiers, I felt like I got kicked in the nuts when he looked at that tank aiming at the bell tower
- guy who played Mellish, the knife fight with the German was about as intense as movies ever get

The movie is a bit too neatly packaged, but I find myself not caring. It's a movie. Stop crying and go watch Band of Brothers instead.

Any chance you can review BoB? Now THAT is some heavy shit.

Posted by: Mick J at October 7, 2009 7:50 PM

This movie destroys me every time I watch it. I can watch it all the way through with the exception of the German/Jewish soldiers stabbing scene. Seeing that once was more than enough.

Posted by: Dingles at October 7, 2009 8:00 PM

Does anyone else find the beginning battle sequence out of place? I realize this is a huge part of the movie that people find important, but I tried to rewatch Private Ryan this summer, and it just seemed so long with a 30 minute battle with no character context.

It probably struck me as odd because I just watched Band of Brothers where you get to know the characters before they get into to any battles. You end up really caring what happens to the men of Easy company. But with Private Ryan, I just felt like it was there to shock you into a battle setting which is promptly left. It just didn't affect me very much and didn't seem to jive with the main plot of tracking down a soldier.

That said, the end definitely makes me cry, no matter how ham handed it is.

Posted by: kelsy at October 7, 2009 8:09 PM

The opening sequence had me sobbing like no other movie before or since. Even just closing my eyes at times, hearing the popping of the bullets hitting the steel pots - I could almost feel it myself. War is fucking heartbreaking.

Add me to the Steven fan club - your writing is beautiful.

Posted by: Cindy at October 7, 2009 8:27 PM

Just for the record, I thought The Thin Red Line was meandering, senseless crap. I remember reading some comment somewhere (maybe here?) that "I kept expecting a sad clown to wander through." I absolutely agree.

I found Saving Private Ryan to be almost too exhausting to experience properly. There was the opening piece about Mama Ryan learning that three of her boys had been killed on the same day; that tore my heart out...and the next bit is Omaha Beach. After that I was too wrung out and numb to really feel the rest of what played out on the screen.

Posted by: Jerce at October 7, 2009 8:35 PM

Dave
But the war itself fucked him up. And he won't watch SPR because he can't.

This movie completely exposed me to my father's experience. And it's painful.

My dad could never really talk about what WWII was like, for the same reasons as yours I suppose.But he did say that SPR was unlike any other war movie he had ever watched because they "got the sounds right...the sounds of bullets and guns and maelstrom."

Also, I love that your name links to my all time favorite movie scene ever.

Posted by: brite at October 7, 2009 8:36 PM

Great review. Saving Private Ryan is the only great movie that I never want to see again. After the first half hour in the theater, I had a colossal headache from being so stressed out by what I had seen. Just thinking about that opening and all of those poor boys being killed makes me tear up.

Posted by: Groovy Violet at October 8, 2009 12:26 AM

I agree with the above comments about Thin Red Line. That movie seemed to be more of a nature documentary than a war movie. I read the book years later and was amazed how different the book was from the movie.

Posted by: ehass at October 8, 2009 12:39 AM

I to saw SPR in the theatre when it was released. I recall it left me feeling very numb. I will never forget the elderly couple in the seats next to me during the opening battle. The pair were sobbing while the gentleman's wife cradled his head into her chest. He kept repeating "That's how it was." Effected me more than any scene throughout the rest of the movie.
I've managed a number of pubs and poured a number of beers for "diggers" in the front bars of those pubs. Any time they would get together and start talking about "The War", it always started out with the romanticized stories and laughter. It wouldn't be long before they would become quite sombre and start talking about the horrible parts.
Old Fred (who still has a bump of shrapnel under his bald scalp thanks to time served in Tobruk) once told me, "We tell you these stories because too many young people think we had a great adventure and wars not all that bad. Well it's not. It's fucked. If you are ever asked to serve, tell 'em to piss off! Bloody Rommel!"

Posted by: Dexter Morgan at October 8, 2009 12:57 AM

However I absolutely despise THE German soldier coming back and shootin THE bullet which kills THE captain. Absolute utter bullcrap. Hundreds of thousands of soldiers were milling around Normandy at that time. The odds of that event are astronimical. It's a cheap and needless plot device.

Those were the SAME GERMANS ???

I've been oblivious of this for +10 years.


Posted by: Adere at October 8, 2009 8:17 AM

I find SPR cliched and hamfisted. I remember all the talk surrounding it claimed "this isn't your father's WWII movie..." Bull. It has every stereotyped character and situation stuffed into it as possible. And Speilberg made sure to cram as many Jewish related images as he could, you know, just in case you forgot about their role in WWII.

Besides the above mentioned incident where the German soldier they don't kill comes back and is the very person that shoots Hanks' character, Speilberg tricks the audience at the very beginning with the fade from the old man to Hanks in the boat approaching Normandy beach.

I don't see how people fall for this movie's tripe. Vin Diesel's death while wanting to save the kid was dumb, saving the German was ridiculous, the death of the medic (Giovanni Ribisi was it?) was overwrought, the stabbing of Goldberg while the German whispered "Shh" was melodramatic crap, and the whole "coward on the battlefield" was overplayed.

The opening was stunning (though I've seen documentaries on D-Day that were better), while the rest of the movie collapses under its own self-important weight.

By the way, the framing device of actually saving Pvt. Ryan is based loosely on truth. I believe the incident occurred in the Navy when a ship holding 3 or 4 brothers sank, killing all of them. A 5th brother was on a separate ship and was pulled from active duty because of the loss his family endured.

Posted by: B-Unit at October 8, 2009 10:32 AM

I realize I'm way late to the party on this one. However, I must report that, back in college, a few of us cinephiles used to use one's preference of SPR and TTRL as a litmus test for intelligence in artistic judgement (and possibly intelligence, in general). If you liked SPR over TTRL, you had very little aptitude for what excellence in film was. That's absurdly pretentious but we were in our early 20's so sue us.

Even ten years later, I still find TTRL to be the superior FILM. I'll give you that Malick takes his sweet-ass time painting a picture but I find it meditative and beautiful, like wondering a museum, pondering the artwork, and letting the images take hold. I suppose that's not for everyone, particularly the masses. Sheesh...this still sounds like I live in a manor and wear a tuxedo every day. But still...who's with me??

ForbiddenDonut - I have trouble you walked into SPR completely unaware of its reputation. Were you living under a rock in those days? Practically ever piece of media that came out talked about its graphic violence. I liken it to walking into Mel's Passion of the Christ thinking it's going to be the standard passion re-telling. That's just fucking ignorant.

Posted by: gunnertec at October 8, 2009 10:50 AM

Any chance you can review BoB? Now THAT is some heavy shit.

Yes yes yes please! BoB >>>> SPR. SO GOOD.

Posted by: Linda at October 8, 2009 11:05 AM

@jpguy13, Your last comment said this would have never happened. You need to read Cornelius Ryan's book "The Last One Hundred Days". George Patton sent volunteers from the 3rd Army behind enemy lines to try and rescue his son-in-law from a German pow camp. The description of Sherman tanks rolling down the autobahn in the dead of night sent chills up my spine. So the idea is not as far fetched as you might imagine. As far as SPR goes, the first thirty minutes are as good as anything I've ever seen in a war movie. And oddly enough the only time I've seen a theater that silent was at the end of "Schindler's List", another Spielberg opus. Nobody said a word, nobody moved. Somehow after watching both movies I can't help but feel they are his most personal works.

Posted by: TheBlackMenace at October 8, 2009 11:15 AM

It took me 2 tries to watch the opening sequence of SPR.
My father in law was a 10 year old in Germany as the war was going on and won't see SPR because "the sound of the bullets was too real" and besides....he was there.

Posted by: Bethers at October 8, 2009 1:50 PM

" ... the mutual need for worthiness."

I wonder if we'll get back to that one day.

Seems to be a great deal of entitlement running around. Lots of opinions about how stuff should be, you know, making it so being somebody else's job.

SPR has some cliche characters, maybe, but why not? If there aren't decent folks who rise to be heroic when the poo gets deep, maybe there should be. Little harm in trying, in any event.

Posted by: BierceAmbrose at October 8, 2009 3:35 PM

Well, I'm late to the party, but:

I love Saving Private Ryan. First DVD I ever bought. I saw it in the theater so many times that my brother-in-law joked that, by now, surely they must've finally saved that guy.


I too walked into SPR thinking, it'll be fine. Hadn't heard anything about the movie. Went with some friends. Twenty minutes in I was kicking myself in the head , remembering, this was Steven Spielberg; say what you will about him and his over-sentimentalism towards childhood, but he know how to make a movie. I should have known it was gonna have an impact. But who could have expected THAT much impact?


Regarding Kelsy's question about the opening battle coming too soon in the movie and it being basically 30 minutes of not knowing who's who:

One, apart from Tom Hanks, (and at that point in all their careers, maybe Tom Sizemore), you meet a lot of people in that thirty minutes, and you do meet all of the main characters from the later squad. You just don't meet them with any more fanfare than with anyone else. I think the point there is not that, hey! So-and-So is dying! It's that EVERYONE is dying, getting cut down like grass, and there absolutely is no safety. You DO meet everyone, though, from the squad (except of course the translator Upham) and one possible reason for this is, you don't later get to know this people because they're something special. It's just that they're the ones who happened not to die.ALL the soldiers, it might be saying, were people like these people. But most of them are dead now back on the beach.


Two, I read a review that said it was a measure of Spielberg's confidence as a film-maker that he put the giant battle scene not at the climax of the movie, but at the very beginning. You can take that for whatever you think it's worth, but I liked it.


Third, and probably most importantly: That initial battle set you up for the idea that death could come at any time for anyone around. I remember spending the WHOLE MOVIE tense because you could never foresee when violence would erupt.It was nerve-wracking. I remember one scene, early on in the first town they visit, where they call out the sign and someone gives the countersign and tells them to come on through... but you couldn't see the person, he was in shadow. I was like, shit, it's a trap, a German with an American accent learned their callsigns by listening to them challenge each other, they're all gonna die. They didn't... but you never knew.

On Forbidden Donut's story about the old man urging the translator Upham "Get in there, you coward. Get in there, you cowardly son of a bitch. Come on!":

I felt EXACTLY the same way that he did. I still remember, with all the visceral responses I had to that movie, THAT was the strongest. I hated that guy so much I could taste it. To this day I can remember that feeling. I remember thinking that if I was in a war (obviously, big leap, and big hypothetical bravery to follow) I would rather die than be that guy. I hated him for not going in and letting his friends die. I hated HIM so much that I developed a hatred for that poor ACTOR in any other roles (I next saw him in Solaris, which, really, didn't help matters much.)I think it was only in recent viewings of LOST that I got over that.


Obviously -- obviously -- that was an extreme reaction. I think too that I misread the way it was supposed to hit you. Spielberg himself said that if HE ever went to war, that guy was probably what he' be like, that character. That the point was to show that the stress of it can shut you down as well as make you scared or angry. But be that as it may... man, I hated that guy.


Regarding the general Thin Red Line comparisons:


I expected to love TTRL, and I didn't. I just, you know, didn't. As both a newborn WW2 fan (because of SPR) and a, well, sensitive actor/indie film lover type, i thought I'd totally be born to appreciate this movie in a way that so few people could. Turns out I totally DIDN'T appreciate the movie in the way a LOT of other people could. What can I say.I wanted to love it, I tried to love it... I couldn't love it. Interestingly, one of my main problems was similar to what Kelsy said above: I just couldn't tell any of the soldiers apart. Apart from Caviziel (and this movie DID give the world Jim Caviziel, so points for that) I honestly couldn't tell 'em apart. Totally threw me. I'm like ,hey, they all look alike! Well, duh, they're ALL IN UNIFORM. Except of course, everyone in SPR was in uniform too, and I never once had that problem.


Oh, regarding B-Unit and the framing story being loosely based on truth: The story actually IS true. Not that they were all on the same boat or anything though; there were four brothers (Niland was the name) all serving in the military. Three of them got killed within a few days of each other, two in Normandy, one in Burma. Because of the timing,working its way through the official system and the varying distances from the US, the mother got all three telegrams on the same day. And they DID pull the last brother, Fritz Niland, off the line and got him back home.

And oh, Adere: Yeah. The guy they let go is the guy who shoots Hanks. AND stabbed Mellish. He calls Upham by name, right before he gets shot. Appealing to their bond.


This is a long post, but, one final note. Even at the time, the central conflict of the movie(do we go get this guy or not? SHOULD we go get this guy or not) bothered me, cause I was like, hey, you're in the army. You're GONNA go. It's, like, an order. And in truth, I think they never really solved that question of, why is it worth doing to go get this guy out. I think the talk that Hanks and Sizemore had by the river to hash it out, didn't really answer the question. Ina sense, there's the failure of the movie for me. Although, interestingly, it may be really a script failure more than anything else.


But, even so, this remains one of my all-time favorites. Almost everything I know about World War Two, I went out and learned as a result of interest generated by watching this movie.

Posted by: karstark at October 8, 2009 4:05 PM

And oh, Adere: Yeah. The guy they let go is the guy who shoots Hanks. AND stabbed Mellish. He calls Upham by name, right before he gets shot. Appealing to their bond.


Actually these are two different actors. "Steamboat Willie" is played by a German actor named Joerg Stadler. The German who kills Mellish is Mac Steinmeier.

Never had a problem with this bit of artistic license. Yes its a highly improbable coincidence, but Upham is there as the audience's proxy, and we need to see, as he did, that the release of Steamboat Willie probably cost lives down the road. That act had a cost, and we needed to see that cost.

They did the moral thing in releasing him, but I think one of the points of the movie is that they're not there to do the right thing. War erases your humanity. Caparzo tried to do the right thing by taking care of the child, and was killed for it. Wade never even carried a weapon, but was gunned down anyway. And Upham stands up for Steamboat Willie, only to see him kill someone he knows. In the end, Upham executes him without hesitation, and his devolution is complete. There is no justice in war, just as there was no justice in sending the eight of them to save one.

Posted by: chato at October 8, 2009 5:27 PM

Saw SPR in Chicago when I was 19. I still remember these older men and some women were crying during the omaha beach invasion AND ACTUALLY WALKING OUT during this dreadful scene. Some walked out crying and others just walked out. I didn't realize it then, although it is obvious now, that these were veterans and the wives of veterans that were crying during this scene. I want to understand and think I do, but I really cannot comprehend what it was like for these veterans to relive on screen what happened to their comrades.

Posted by: Jordan at October 9, 2009 12:12 AM

to chato: thanks, I'll have to watch it again to be sure. Wikipedia's info and Imdb's contradict each other.

I gathered the German shot at the end by Upham called him by name because Mellish was screaming after him during the fight. When the fight was over the German sees Upham crying downstairs and smirks, hence his overconfidence when they meet again at the end.

Posted by: Adere at October 9, 2009 2:16 AM

Oh, regarding B-Unit and the framing story being loosely based on truth: The story actually IS true. Not that they were all on the same boat or anything though;

Actually, he was correct. The 5 Sullivan brothers served on the light cruiser Juneau and were all killed when the cruiser was sunk in a surface engagement off Guadalcanal (and in shades of the sinking of the USS Indianapolis, reports of possible survivors were not passed along the chain of command, 2 of the brothers survived the sinking but died in the water).

Posted by: Soylent Green is Sheeple at October 9, 2009 1:35 PM

This is a long post, but, one final note. Even at the time, the central conflict of the movie(do we go get this guy or not? SHOULD we go get this guy or not) bothered me, cause I was like, hey, you're in the army. You're GONNA go. It's, like, an order. And in truth, I think they never really solved that question of, why is it worth doing to go get this guy out.

One of the main criticisms that I have of the movie is that this central question isn't framed honestly or fairly by Spielberg. By cutting away at the end of the Omaha beach section and showing you both the evolution of the mission to rescue Ryan (George Marshall AND Lincoln approve!) AND the horror and grief of his mother upon learning of the deaths of her other sons, Spielberg has essentially given you the answer as to how you're supposed to feel about the rescue mission. Ryan maybe be a faceless soldier we've never seen, but he's the only surving sun of a grieving mother we *have* seen.

If Spielberg had gone right from the beach to Captain Miller being given the mission, the dynamic of the mission and the underlying question of whether it makes sense to potentially sacrifice 8 men to save 1 evolves and develops very differently. Miller *is* just some faceless, unknown soldier, while the men on the mission, who we watch fighting and dying are the only ones we have any connection to. The audience doesn't possess any knowledge that the squad doesn't and thus is much more honestly grounded in the same perspective as the men we know, wrestling with the question of sacrifice with only the same ignorance (limited perspective) that they have.

Posted by: Soylent Green is Sheeple at October 9, 2009 1:57 PM

Grrr.

sun = son
Miller *is* = Ryan *is*

Doh!

Posted by: Soylent Green is Sheeple at October 9, 2009 1:59 PM

Late to the comments, but my dad was in WWII, and I wanted to see this as a tribute to him. Holy crap. He told stories about bar fights, girls, his buddies. But never, NEVER stuff like this. THIS is what he held in. And seeing this, I could see why. If you voice it, it becomes real all over again.

Along with so many others....yes, possibly the first time I had ever experienced such SILENCE in a packed theatre. And, heard so much SINCERE (not wrung-out "Titanic-"type) sobbing at the end.

A beautiful movie. Thanks, Pop, and all your buddies.

Posted by: dammitjanet at October 9, 2009 3:57 PM

War is Hell

get over it

...fucken pussies

Posted by: fitzwilly at October 9, 2009 10:40 PM

That's true, Soylent Green, and I forgot to bring that up; but I was saying that, the 5-brothers-at-sea story wasn't the one the movie was based on, that the Niland (Ryan in the film) story was actually a true one. But I believe that it's correct that the Sullivan story was the one that made the US Armed Forces adopt a policy of brothers not serving together on the same ship.


And: veeeery good point on the idea of no back-home reference! It would have been very interesting to see Miller's troops go straight from surviving D-day to being given the assignment. "So we just went through living hell, but, it's okay to send us off to make sure some OTHER guy is okay?!?"


Of course, as Miller points out a little later on... it's not like if they weren't doing this they'd be off somewhere safe and warm. They would have just been "fighting the war" somewhere else.

And I honestly can't believe that the guy who stabbed Mellish isn't the same guy, Steamboat Willie"; all these years I would have sworn it was him!

I gotta check that out.

Posted by: karstark at October 9, 2009 11:27 PM

I first saw SPR when I was 19 and thought it was a pretty amazing movie but really looking back on it now it's not, sure the action sequences are full on but when you look a little deeper the movie is so mundane and predictable, with bare minimum character development the only guy I really felt for was the medic and that's purely because his the only one that helps people and risks his life doing so. Other things bug me too like the sniper being shot through his scope, I mean is it really nessisary? Couldn't he have just been shot in the head? Think it would have been more realistic, also in this scene the German should have shot Hanks being the highest ranking soldier out of the lot of them and clearly identified by markings. And I think the ending with Hanks being shot by his released pow is cheap.

Posted by: Roo at April 7, 2010 7:55 PM


















Viral Hits

>> Pajiba Movie Posters

>> Pop Culture's 20 Greatest Dancing GIFs

>> Mindhole Blowers

>> The 100 Greatest Insults of All Time

>> The "Other" 100 Greatest Movie Quotes

>> The 100 Greatest Movie Threats of All Time

>> The Sean Bean Death Reel

>> Chicks Dig Beards: It's Science

>> The Coolest TV Show Title Sequences

>> The Most Rewatchable Movies

>> The Most Expensive Movies of All Time