Genres

Visitors Review

bigcheese90 2013-05-21 03:14:25

A Must See

This is an excellent movie. It may be a little violent for a kid underthirteen. This movie should be played in every history class studyingWorld War II. Once again, Steven Spielberg has created anotherastounding masterpiece with an amazing cast and crew. Tom Hanks does anamazing job performing as a soldier. Each actor/soldier have their ownunique personality. From the beginner soldier to the veteransniper.Yes, one could argue that this movie has its imperfections, butfew movies are PERFECTLY flawless. I liked "Saving Private Ryan" forits depiction of D-Day at Normandy and how it ends the movie. This isby far one of my favorite war films. If you weren't able to catch it inthe theaters, go watch it!

Servo-2 2013-05-20 18:05:20

Very good, not quite great

Saving Private Ryan was a very good film. I loved the gritty realism of WWII that Spielberg depicted. The performances were all outstanding. A few complaints:1) Lack of character development. With the exception of maybe Hanks' character, we learn next to nothing about these men. The characterization has little depth.2) The sound effects drown out dialogue. I don't know if it was intended or not but it was very annoying.3) A little unrealistic towards the end. I've heard it was based on a true story so maybe I'm wrong here, but...Overall, I was a little disappointed, and I thought Schindler's List was far better and remains Spielberg's best film.

thomas.hansen 2013-05-20 10:36:15

Best war movie ever...

Forget Platoon, forget Full Metal Jacket.. This is the real thing, closertothe blood, guts and madness of war than ever before... This one grabs yourthroat and squeezes you mildly throughout, leaving you dizzy and with awrenching stomach... and with thoughts... lot's of thoughts that you won'tdigest in the first few days...

xeneize007 2013-05-19 19:50:11

Saving US pride

I can't say it was a bad movie, but i didn't fully likeit...*first of all it was too patriotic for a non american, and maybe for anamerican too, too many flags i guess...*next, the action wasn't as constant as in Black Hawk Down...it wasn't asrepetitive as in Thin Red Line, but maybe the varied action scenes lead itcloser to any common action movie...*the characters, although most of them good actors, it got too personal: irather see people looking alike, without names or even faces to remember(BHD, TRL)*the plot isn't the one of a war film, i think, i preffer those based on rellife battles*BUT the D-Day scene was absolutely amazing and shocking, and that'sbasically what saves the movie... too bad it was kind of a short scene theycouldn't do the whole movie about it...7/10

Henry Newton 2013-05-19 09:43:01

Saving Private Ryan, almost a masterpiece.

Over the last 20-odd years Speilberg has provided us with some of the mostmemorable moments in the cinema. From Jaws through Close encounters, E.T.Indiana Jones and most of all Schindlers List. Now he has added anothermilestone, Saving Private Ryan.This film in the first half hour must come as close to showing the fullbrutality of war as anything ever seen before. Despite an occasional soggymiddle section, in the opening sequences he fully makes up for any shortcomings that the film may otherwise have.With his track record now, I await the time when he makes his truemasterpiece and ditches his more saccharine elements. In the meantime thereis still plenty to appreciate.P.S. I liked Amistad as well!

aarakis 2013-05-18 21:18:28

Is it really that good?

Now that 2 years have passed and everybody has calmed down, (or has seenitmore than 20 times) ask yourself this: if it weren't for the superblyawesome beginning and ending action sequences, isn't this just as routineand regular as any other war movie in memory?If there's brilliant writing I don't see it. What else, besides those 2sequences, do 99.9% of the people marvel over when you mention the name"Saving Private Ryan"? The tear-jerking scene of Tom Hanks jerkingtears?Those 2 mind-blowing scenes rendered us defenseless, turning us intoturnips, forcing us to willingly nod our heads to an otherwise cornystory.For me, I watched this movie 4 times in the theater. From the second timeonward, I left the cinema shortly after "It's a Hitler youth knife" andcameback a little before "Reiban, get on that rabbit!".

Mike Curley 2013-05-18 00:53:26

Third greatest movie ever.

This was one of the most powerful movies ever made. I saw it thefirst day it was out and my life was changed forever. In thewell-publicized opening half-hour, you get a sense of the violence and heroism of WWII. The opening scenes have the best hand-held camera work ever done in film history. The low anglesand the shakiness add to the feeling of actually being there. Some of the visuals are extremely touching. I had chills for half the movie. Tom Sizemore and Ed Burns both give great performances squarring off against each other, reminesant of Elais and Barnes in PLATOON. It may sound cheesey, but I wasn't the same after this movie. It changed me. The brutality is evident, but if you love movies it won't cloud the plot of this great story. I wish there were words to express how I felt after seeing this movie. The only thing I could do was want to write my own war movie.SAVING PRIVATE RYAN, the title can't even begin to explain the feeling you get while you see what eight men went through tosave one. Thank you Steven Speilburg and Robert Rodat

Oslo Jargo 2013-05-17 15:49:04

Morally Weak Film Based on Flawed Sentimentality

Saving Private Ryan, Spielberg's continued descent into narrow,arrogant, low-brow revisionism, is at best a languid patriotictrump-calling movie with nothing better to do than applaud the"glorious, morally superior American armed forces", who were inactuality nothing but teenage thugs who beat German prisoners and rapedFrench women and looted European cities. He starts off with Kleenex totting bravery and then leads us intobrutal images that have no other point than to entertain the violentvideo game minded geeks of American malls, he then regresses into heavyhanded sentimentality that leads the viewer to conclude that Americanswere all "good guys". This is not the case, history has shown us so.Americans, for all their good intentions in World War 2, were just asloathsome as the Nazis, they had a deep segregationist attitude in theStates which killed people because of skin color, arrested andimprisoned innocent, hard working Japanese people and locked them inconcentration camps, kept black soldiers in separate units which oftenwere the lowliest positions, fire bombed non-tactical European cities,most notably Dresden, hired former Nazis to combat the "communistthreat" and finally, dropped two atomic bombs upon an innocent Japanesecivilian population. And after the war, things got even worse, the "Red Hunt", whichresembled the trials in Nazi Germany in the 1930's occurred under amadman named McCarthy. So if you want to be blindly led by Spielberg'sglorious war message that is simply propaganda, then by all means doand watch this film which has no redeeming qualities.It is truly amazing that people unaccustomed to great films shouldreveal this one to be the "best wars film ever" as if no capabledirector had ever attempted to bring the horror and stupidity of war tothe screen. Perhaps, instead of giving Spielberg the automatic creditof creating the war genre, they should go out and rent "Come and See"(Russian), The Burmese Harp (1967), Fires on the Plain (1959) or Pathsof Glory (1957), truly far superior films to thisHollywood-bastardization and candy treatment of war. There isabsolutely no plot in this uneven film and the whole landing at D-Day,according to Spielberg, was in some way just a side show to saving"Private Ryan". With such a simplistic statement, it is easy to see whymost reviewers revel in the sense that 'action, action, action' isequated with 'greatness'. I only guess that because they must beentertained that directors continue to keep punching out suchopportunistic filth. While most viewers, who are safely tucked away intheir houses, waving American flags and discharging a few tears,saying, "You German scum! You German scum!" can truly appreciate bloodand guts as "cinema" then there is a market for it. After you getthrough the puerile premise, then you can sit back, have a few beersand watch heads explode in the carnage that has no intellectual meaningand is the most cliché-driven rubbish that has ever been produced. The scenes themselves are overdrawn, stolen from previous war filmsfrom the 1950's, namely the Longest Day (1962) which was a great filmin itself. The beach landing is too long, and it shows only theAmericans as "heroic" while the Germans are seen as "evil Hun scum".Tom Hanks, in his most idiotic and candid self, seems out of place as aleader of a bunch of rejects that are entrusted to save Private Ryanand in one completely absurd scene, the remaining 15 Americans defeat abattle hardened, superiorly trained SS special unit group with just afew guns. Now, if you know anything about history, then you would knowthat the SS were not an "easy group" to defeat, they were some of themost fanatical and well-trained soldiers of the German Reich but sinceSpielberg thinks we all are just a bunch of idiots, he'll continue tomanufacture such inconsistent story lines. This is only a tear jerker movie and it does nothing else, I wouldsuggest watching "Hell Is for Heroes" (1962) with Steve McQueen,because it is a lot better and we don't have to be forced to carry anAmerican flag at the end.

MovieAddict2011 2013-05-12 12:45:37

Not the best war film ever made, but perhaps the most realistic.

What Steven Spielberg has done with "Saving Private Ryan" issimultaneously craft an enormously successful depiction of World WarII, and a touching story that places a platoon of bewildered soldiersin a world of frantic pacing -- a startling world of gunfire andproceeding death. The constant movement of the shaky hand-held cameraacts as a first person perspective -- we are not merely viewing themovie, but participating in it. This is perhaps as close as we willever get to realizing the unadulterated fear those soldiers must havefelt as they drew nearer to the beaches of France. It is one of thegreatest war films ever put on celluloid, its scope arguably largerthan any other in the genre, its conflict superb.The movie, based on the actual events surrounding the Nilan brothersduring World War II, is about a group of soldiers sent to rescuePrivate Ryan (Matt Damon), a young man who loses three brothers in thewar, and whose mother is spared the possible chance of losing herremaining son after Captain Miller (Tom Hanks) and his platoon are senton a dangerous mission to find, and return, Private Ryan to safety.The men who fight alongside Miller have to question their own actions.What makes Private Ryan more important than any of them? They all havemothers, too. But they follow orders, venturing into the battlefieldsof WWII France in search of Private Ryan. The most reluctant of thesoldiers is Private Reiben (Edward Burns), a pessimistic everyman whofeels no need to risk his own life for that of another man.The battle scenes are ultimately what made "Saving Private Ryan" one ofthe highest-grossing films of the decade, and what enticed so manyeager viewers into theaters. Many veterans of the war reportedly brokedown in tears during one of the first sequences, the landing at OmahaBeach, which probably lasts about fifteen minutes -- at least.However, the movie also reaches a sort of emotional height that fewother war films manage to capture. This is a fascinating account ofwar, packed with terrifyingly realistic scenes and some of the mostdisturbing images you will ever see in a mainstream film, but it alsohas a lot to say about friendship and selfless motivations. "Earnthis," Captain Miller tells Private Ryan at one point in the film.Spielberg has proved countless times that he is capable of abandoninghis famously schmaltzy style of film-making to record touching storiesthat often times relate to his own life. Spielberg claims that he feltan internal desire to tackle this project, as much as he felt it wasnecessary to direct "Schindler's List." Both films work as a sort ofdocumentary-style motion picture, but also contain fundamentalemotional truths, which elevate them to higher ground.Tom Hanks, as Captain Miller, is not the first actor who comes to mindwhen one thinks of war picture, but Hanks' position in the film works(to great effect) primarily because he personifies the everyman qualityof a soldier. As we too often forget, the men who fight wars are notalways the Schwarzeneggers with huge muscles and a wealth of weaponsand ammunition. The soldiers in World War II were fathers, husbands,brothers, sons. Hanks successfully embodies the image of a simple manwho is thrust into a world war and tries his best to stay alive.Is "Saving Private Ryan" a better movie than "Apocalypse Now,""Platoon," or other great war pictures in the genre? Not necessarily.But it stands on its own as an amazing achievement of pure film-making,and an ode to the thousands of men who lost their lives for thecampaign against Hitler's armies. If you can stomach the violence andaccurate depictions of brutal warfare, "Saving Private Ryan" is one ofthe most moving cinematic experiences you will ever have.

Matt Gault 2013-05-11 21:14:26

Breathtaking and Extraordinary...Ultimate War Depiction

I read the review on the title page that recommended watching this filmwith a surround sound system to make watching this film an astoundingexperience. I took the advice of this reviewer and I thank him, thesound quality was mind-blowing and captivated me for the 162 minuterunning time. However, this brutally realistic depiction of combat isan astounding experience regardless of surround systems.The film follows a group of soldiers of the 2nd Ranger Batallion whovaliantly agree to tackle a brutal mission where the subject is a youngtrooper by the name of James Francis Ryan who unknowingly as lost his 3brothers in combat. After his mother receives the news, the chief ofstaff of the U.S army orders the Generals to inform Captain Miller (TomHanks) that he is to locate Private Ryan and release from his duties incombat in order for him to return safely to his grieving mother.The film follows the group of soldiers as they go to extraordinarylengths in order to 'Save Private Ryan' which involves the death of twosoldier's, the medic Irwin Wade (Giovanni Ribisi) and Private AdrianCaparzo (Vin Diesel), along with the massacre of a number of German andFrench troops. After the soldiers locate their subject, they break thenews to him and despite understandably being crippled with grief,Private Ryan displays extreme reluctance to lead his camp whichprovokes mixed emotions towards him. Firstly, it's easy to appreciatehis nobility and his loyalty towards his duties but this is juxtaposedwith a feeling of disdain simply because he initially doesn'tappreciate the lengths that the soldier's have went to in order to finhim, whilst abandoning their original duties in the army.Spelberg's direction is awe-inspired and flawless. He masterfullycaptures the brutality of combat in the 22-minute opening scene wherethere is blood, guts and gunfire in abundance. Does blood and guts makefor a great depiction of war combat? Definitely not, but it'sSpielberg's direction which involves extreme close-ups of casualtiesand of course, the blood and rain onto the camera lens is an effectivetechnique. Spielberg is very impressive as he makes the viewer realisethe pain and suffering, the desperation and sometimes futility ofhard-fought combat. Contrary to these portrayals, he is equallyeffective in engaging the audience into positive emotions such as afeeling of triumph when the soldiers under the command of CaptainMiller penetrate the German infantry on Omaha beach when it lookedclear that the soldiers where in a desperate struggle against theGermans. The acting in this movie is not fantastic, it's not supposed to be. Themovie, unlike so many others in the modern-day film industry, does notdepend on the acting of the main protagonists in order for it toachieve on a number of levels. The acting, however, is impressive andbelievable. Believable being the operative word. Hanks and co. are verybelievable in terms of struggling to overcome adversity in itsextremist form and battling the almost overwhelmingly brutal elementsof combat. The film is particularly recognised for its intense opening scene seton the beach of Omaha, Normandy but in my opinion, the movie isentertaining, intense and captivating throughout the duration. It hasno spells of boredom, there are no dull and listless sequences ofdialogue. The dialogue sustains credibility, humour and purity.This film won 5 academy awards, it should have won more. It receivedaccolades for direction, obviously and also won for cinematography andsound editing whilst the Best Picture went Shakespeare in Love (sigh).Overall, this is a masterpiece. An intense and brutal depiction of theelements of war. It does to an extent glorify American soldiersconsidering that a number of soldiers abandoned their respective dutiesin order to retrieve an unknown private but it does it in an engrossingmanner. The script is solid, which is all it needs to be, the same goeswith the acting but the cinematography, editing and effects areastonishing. Truly breathtaking. This is the best Spielberg film I haveever watched (I haven't seen Schindler's List) 10/10! Pure cinematicmastery!

Shawn Watson 2013-05-04 21:36:00

War is hell

In the late-90s there were two particular films that redefined theirparticular genres. Saving Private Ryan was one of them (the other,unfortunately, was The Matrix). Almost every war movie that followedSPR, right down to 2008's Rambo, seemed to be no more than a pasticheof Spielberg's hectic style.SPR proves what an inconsistent filmmaker Spielberg can be. The man hashad his fair share of misfires (Hook, anyone?) but this was his lasttruly great effort. War of the Worlds and Munich were good, thoughhardly as revolutionary, but The Terminal, Catch Me If You Can, and themovie that called itself Indy IV were all just too gutless andinoffensive. You'd never believe they were from the same director ifyou didn't know better.A lot of critics have repeatedly praised SPR over the years, but theyall praise the same things (the documentary style, the realism, etc.)Simultaneously, a lot of people have dismissed it as shallow,badly-written, and void of any thrills beyond the 30-minute mark. Butlook beneath the surface and you'll find that SPR does actually have atight screenplay, despite going through the motions on few occasions.The wide and diverse cast (including Paul Giamatti, Ted Danson, DennisFarina, and Dale Dye) do good with the material. It's refreshing for awar movie to move beyond the 'point of view of one man' cliché.Janusz Kaminski's desaturated, gritty, high-shutter-speed photographyis full of deep blacks and high contrast. This look has been imitatedto death over the years, but coupled with Spielberg's hurried, almostunscripted approach to the action it adds an element of authenticity tothe film that the copycats have not been able to emulate.You really have to feel for all those poor soldiers who were massacredon Omaha Beach (all men, I should point out). But what a badly plannedmission. No flack jackets, no smoke screens to cover theirlanding...warfare has come so far in 65 years, it would be insane tosend so many hundreds off to die like that now. Many of them were purecannon fodder and the Military knew it. The film certainly does nothold back on the bloody carnage. Most WWII movies up until that pointwere sanitized and bloodless. Hardly realistic at all!The 169 minute running time passes fairly quickly. The film certainlydoesn't deserve the criticism that nothing interesting happens afterthe beach invasion. As it has been imitated many times since, some ofthen innovative moments (such as the silent 'war is hell' amid battlechaos - which this film does three times!) have become clichés, butdon't judge SPR for it.The film won 5 Oscars, but lost the Best Picture award to Shakespearein Love, which is absolutely insane. I mean...what were theythinking??? SPR is most certainly a classic, and one of the mostinnovative and important war films of the past two decades, whileShakespeare in Love is largely forgotten.

anonymous 2013-05-04 09:25:32

Actually quite mediocre

Nice battle scenes, but the plot is actually unrealistic - just ask aveteran. During the largest invasion in the history of the human race, nocommanders were worried about individual men. No squads sauntered throughenemy territory talking loudly and generally acting like big targets. Ifthe dialogue and the acting were better, I could overlook the flaws, butMatt Damon in particular is rank. For a real, true to life war movie,watchA Bridge Too Far; no Hollywoodization there.

chinaman_can 2013-05-01 03:22:21

Best war movie ever made

I've seen many war movies after that of Saving Private Ryan. It has been 6years since the movie has been released and I still have not found a moviethat meets it's caliber.The movie has a combination of good story, and a exceptional fightingscenes! Although some errors according to WWII might have been made, it isstill far more accurate than any half-ass movies we've seen after it i.e.WindtalkersBasically an amazing war movie which should be on everyone's Top 10 warmovies list. I'm not exactly Spielberg's greatest fan, but after seeingthismovie my respect for him has been increased greatly.

Judith Egerton 2013-04-30 12:23:21

It's Spielberg at his best, although the movie doesn't match the primal thrills of Jaws or the overwhelming excellence of Schindler's List.

2013-04-28 09:43:53

Greatest war sequence of all time!!!!!

Speilberg is without a doubt one of the greatest american directors to ever live. In Saving Private Ryan he gives us the greatest war sequence ever in the history of cinema.

gdownton 2013-04-27 17:54:18

Great battle scenes in an otherwise average movie

Maybe my summary line was a bit harsh. Saving Private Ryan is not anaveragemovie,but I don't think it's as great as the rest of the world seems to think.Yesthevarious battle scenes are gut-wrenching, but the movie overall wasslightlydisappointing.Firstly, the film is completely US-centric. I think one non-Americancharacter (a Germansoldier who is begging for his life at the time) gets a speaking role inthefilm. There isno indication that soldiers from other countries took part in the D-daylandings. TheAmerican soldiers die horribly, tragically, heroically, dramatically. TheGermansoldiers just die. Bang, grunt, thud: another dead German.We see all of the tension and fear experienced by the Americans, yet noneofthat which must have been felt by the opposing Germans. They were, afterall, oneand the same, merely servants of opposing political masters. Yet themoviecompletely misses the chance to humanise the enemy, to show that they tooare justordinary people in extraordinary circumstances.Saving Private Ryan is, in short, a Hollywood blockbuster, with gorybattlebits. TheAmerican soldiers are the human good guys, the German soldiers are theinhumanbad guys, war is Hell, but we're better at it than you.I didn't *hate* this movie, I just didn't think it was worth all of theplaudits whichit has received. Tom Hanks is, of course, always watchable, the storyrollsalong nicely, the battle scenes will keep you on the edge of your seat (orpossiblyunder it), and the anti-war grittiness does outweigh the pro-American goodvs. bad slant.For the record, I thought the spin-off TV series Band of Brothers wasmarginally better.

sburke 2013-04-25 02:42:22

Let's Get This Straight

For those people who feel "Saving Private Ryan" was nothing but an excuse toput some gratuitous violence on screen, or feel that the violence was "overthe top," I have just three words for you--Read Your History. Read StephenAmbrose's book on D-Day (Ambrose just happened to be the historicalconsultant for the film), and you will learn exactly what bullets, mortars,grenades, etc. actually do to a human being. You'll discover that theviolence that television and other movies have fed us for the last 20-30years is a bunch of c**p.And for those people who have been involved in war, then watch this film andclaim that the violence is excessive and false, then obviously, yourexperiences in wartime didn't mirror those men who's accounts were used inthe book mentioned above and in "Ryan." And they don't mirror those memoriesof countless men who saw this film and left the theater visibly shaken,because their story was finally told the way it should be.Steven Spielberg was not trying to "Out-Gross" "Braveheart." He wasattempting to open our eyes. And if he was successful, then maybe thosetruly gut-wrenching scenes would serve a noble purpose--if not "An end towar," then at least an end to the Romanticism of War. Which is, at least, astep in the right direction.So "Shakespeare In Love" received the Oscar. Is it ever going to bereferred to as " A National Monument?" I doubt it. "Saving Private Ryan"is still getting coverage that refers to it in those terms.So, to sum up, before criticizing this movie based on its level of violence,try accumulating a little background before making such accusations.

2013-04-24 12:45:01

The best movie ever made

Words simply cannot express what you feel during this movie. I dont care that it didnt win the Oscar, yet i admit i was surprised it didnt. Saving Private Ryan has stirred more emotions than any other movie can dream of, including SIL. 100% of the people in the theater had tears in their eyes 5 minutes into the movie. There has never been a movie that made me shed a tear, this is the first.Every single person should watch this movie. It should be shown in schools across America and in schools of every country who's grandfathers and grandmothers faught in this war, or any other war for that matter. This movie opens the eyes of those who only read that war was hell, but never actually lived through a Vietnam, WWI, or a WWII. Hanks was great, but SVP has the best supporting cast ever assembled.

Ben Worthington 2013-04-24 12:30:49

let down by a poor script

The battle scenes in this film, particularly the vivid recreation of a beachon D-Day, are surely the most realistic, vivid and gory battle scenes everdepicted. Spielberg shoots the action as if a camera crew were thereamongst the men. The first 20-odd minutes are extremely powerful andbeautifully shot. Unfortunately, the great technical merit of the action scenes are let downby the rest of the film. The script is flat so the characters are stuck withbeing either the cocky Jew, the medic who loves his mum, er mom, or the wiseguy new Yorker. The scenes in between the action sequences tend to drag,because there's lots of talking, but no one has anything interesting to say.The scene in the church and in the French town near the end seem to last forhours. There's none of the depth of character or analysis of human behaviourthat was apparent in Schindler's list. What made that film so shocking wasits objectiveness and absence of sentimentality. The same cannot be said forRyan. The film has been criticised for only depicting US soldiers in the war, butthis is unfair, since its a film about a squad of US soldiers. Its not aboutthe war Germany, the war is just its setting. But all in all, I would recommend this film just to see its reproduction ofthe horrors of war.

Nick Keane 2013-04-23 18:47:58

One of a kind

I would have to come up with new words to describe how i felt afterleavingthe theater of Saving Private Ryan. You just felt like you were in thewar.Tom Hanks leads the Movie as the Heroic Captian John Miller. Veryemotional and moving movie. Not just for out american causualities, butthestory line in the Movie. Especially the last 10min. Truely Speilberg athis greatest. People should be required to watch this movie. 10/10. Idont give out many 10's. Only to movies like this, titanic, shawshankredemption, forrest gump, etc.Dont watch it unless it comes back to theaters or if you have surroundsound. It wont be the same.