A comment on comments regarding combat

Rating: Null/10 (29 April 2001)

I've seen the movie..and read the comments. A few minor points. To the response regarding the unreality of the "kissing the crucifixes" et. al., as a former Marine infantry rifleman (in Vietnam)about 2/3's of my comrades, and I, carried everything from St Christopher medals to Stars of David..and we DID kiss them, hold them and talk to them. That isn't unrealistic or hypocritical..it's fact. And WWII had a more religious cadre than Vietnam. To the response on how bad the cinematography was, how boring the non combat scenes were, and how grotesquely horrific the combat scenes were; Spielberg was trying his best to show reality. He succeeded. The cinematography wasn't bad..June, 1944 was a miserably cold rainy month..it LOOKED dreary because it was! Periods between combat ARE boring..stupifyingly so. Combat is horrific...the only way Mr. Spielberg could have made it more realistic would have been to pour blood, excrement and puke into the theatres and occasionally step up behind a viewer and whack him across the back of the head when a shell exploded nearby. That's reality people. Good cinematography gives us reality. The comment regarding the ordinariness of the participants..well that is what makes them heroes. WWII was not fought by supermen..it was fought by normal people. Admiral Halsey once commented "There are no great men...there are only extraordinary challenges that ordinary men are forced by circumstance to overcome." Finally, in regard to the complaint that the story was absurd. It wasn't. After the five Sullivan brothers all died aboard the USS Juneau, brothers were routinely separated to avoid precisely this kind of occurrence. That is historical fact. There was a set of brothers involved in Normandy. One died with the 4th Infantry on Utah Beach, one with the 82nd Airborne, one was missing in Burma, and one (presumably the "Pvt. Ryan") was missing with the 101st. The one in Burma and the one with the 101st eventually turned up safe, bless them. But the situation was NOT unheard of. And the generals were not being overly gentle (although contrary to current opinion, WWII generals weren't monsters and could be gentle), they were trying to avoid/prevent what could have been a horrible morale blow to the American people. One set of Sullivan's can be inspiring, two sets can be terribly depressing. It was a legitimate action.
I was wounded twice in Vietnam. I fought and killed. Saving Private Ryan is a truthful movie. The violence is real as opposed to gratuitous. The horror is real, and it's very mundane quality is what made it horrific. The premise is neither ridiculous nor evil. (Read about how Joe Kennedy was killed, and the military theory behind THAT mission ...then come back and explain about absurd theories in war being made up.) It is a great movie..A Schindler's List for the infantryman. By the way..the German's weren't protrayed as that bad. They fought and died just as the American's did. Consider the first battle scene, the American's on the attack and getting pounded. Then consider the last battle scene, the German's on the attack and getting pounded. Attacking isn't easy, nor fun..the odds are with the defense. Not evil...just fact. And regarding the German who was released and then eventually shot Hank's character; from that range and in that situation, it is doubtful he even knew who he was shooting. There was no evil intent. Just bad luck. Another truth about combat. Enough. Thank you for the chance to comment.