A good Hollywood movie; but not such a great War movie

Rating: 4/10 (1 October 1999)

The first half hour of this movie blew me away. I couldn't comprehend how a movie could put so much realism.
It wasn't until the conflict of "Saving Private Ryan" that I became a little disappointed; because at this point, we move out of Europe to a little town called Tinstletown.

The problem I have with this movie is that people accept this movie as a documentation. Is this a true war story? I think its more of a true patriotic idealistic propaganda. So here's the lay out: hundred and thousands of men go to war to "save their country;" this part is good. Yet out of a midst of war, would the government really save a soldier for the spite of the mother? 3 of her sons die; but it's supposed to be ok because they "laid their lives down for their country (at least this is supposed to be the theme of the movie)." So what's wrong with the forth son; he's doing the same. It contradicts the theme. Secondly, what about every other soldier; they all have mothers, families, & pregnant wives, too. It just doesn't happen that way. Thirdly, one woman wouldn't recognize that 3 brothers died out of thousands of deaths she's writing up; and she wouldn't ask a man to save the 4th son with him executing it. "Ryan" welcome to Hollywood.
The movie as a movie is good. It is excellent. But its nothing more or nothing truer than what actually did happen to these soldiers in war. I've noticed many people I've discussed this movie to, take this movie so literally that it makes me agitated. Sometimes the only way we like to deal with war is to believe some of the things we see; that it was good to save Ryan by killing the enemy, that war means so much patriotism. But this is just one aspect; it isn't the embodiment of war. There are too many other things that war has to tell. (Oliver Stone made a trilogy based on 3 different sides/aspects about war).
I know some men who fought in war. They watched the movie shocked by the first half hour, they were literally sweating. The next moment they were thinking and remembering their time in war. They all thought the storyline was a bit dreamy. And the response I got was this: "I don't recall anyone who was like Tom Hanks. We were all Matt Damon's, who didn't know between right from wrong."
I mean at the end of the movie when old Private Ryan goes "was it worth it?" The camera starts showing his loving wife, his children and grand children (by the way . . . what was up with the big chested triplets?) and of course the audience is going to be all teary eyed "yes it was worth it." Come on 10 other individuals could have been alive if it weren't for him, but I forgot, we need patriotism in these movies. I'd suggest anyone to read books on war, by people who've been there, like Tim O'Brien, because those books actually make you think.

As a Hollywood movie, I give this movie 9/10; But as a true war movie, I give this 6/10; the first half hour "10/10"