Six men for the price of one!

Rating: Null/10 (27 February 1999)

SPR is without a doubt one of the most talked about films of the year. I recently went to see it in the theatre to figure out why. It's impossible to judge this movie on a grand scale, since there are so many little intricacies.
Storyline: Less than fresh. Three brothers die, so a team of men is sent to find the remaining brother to take him home. Uh-huh, yeah, that's realistic. This movie basically has no storyline. It's just a bunch of dialogue strung together in the hopes that someone will make sense out of it all.
Casting: While each one of the actors cast in the role did an admirable job (with particular notice going to Edward Burns and Barry Pepper, who were both extremely impressive), I'd be interested in knowing why Spielberg thought he couldn't go within ten miles of reality. I'm sorry, but the average age of a soldier during WWII was not 35. It was 20. It's a sad, sad day when a 22-yr-old Giovanni Ribisi is the closest thing Spielberg has to a realistic soldier.
Emotional Reality: In as far as getting the reactions of soldiers, Spielberg did a fairly good job. Yes, war is Hell, which is what Spielberg showed with his message that war could turn any man into a monster. Too bad he killed it with chain of command. Those officers were just a tad too willing to scream at their CO's.
Physical Reality: There are a lot of complaints about the Americanism of the film. Of COURSE the film is Americanised! The only unit that actually managed to land anywhere near Omaha Beach was American. While it is asking a little much to expect viewers to believe that the troops never ran into troops from any other army, I don't think Spielberg wanted to test his luck. He couldn't get his OWN country's uniforms A-OK, let alone another country's.
Truthfulness: We ALL know that there is absolutely no fact in this movie whatsoever. Spielberg may have originally touted this as "the true story of the Niland brothers", but he recanted long ago, since it's obvious it wasn't. (If it was, they'd have gotten at least one fact in that story right.)
Military Reality: I'm with the experts on this one. A little less flash and trash there, Spielberg, and make an effort next time to get the right kind of weaponry. And BTW, Spielberg, no army would risk losing eight men to get one home, even if he was the president's son.
Cinematic Worth: Excellent. While the direction at times was a little choppy and left something to be desired, this was still an excellent movie.
Most people who are dissatisfied with this movie are probably those who expected to see a true story. Sorry, but you got the wrong war movie of 1998 -- the true story is in "The Thin Red Line", which in itself is an excellent war movie. Now sure, I admit, I spent half the movie hoping Matt Damon's character would get it in the end, but I was still extremely satisfied. (I did have to practically hold my great-uncles, both of whom were at Normandy, down to get them to stay -- both wanted to leave in disgust with Spielberg's Hollywoodization and capitalization on this horrific event.) It was well worth going to see in the theatre, and I don't often do that. I do think, though, that the movie will be highly disappointing once on video, because it's the kind of movie one NEEDS to see in a theatre.
Altogether? It's not the best movie of the year, but it's not the worst. It's an excellent fictional account of what life COULD have been like in WWII for a group of soldiers. If you want reality, watch "The Thin Red Line", but if you enjoy fictionalized war films like SPR, check out any of the films available in the "War" section of your local video store. Well, okay, so maybe "Rambo" isn't the thing to go for, but there are a number of excellent movies out there.