Technically amazing, but the story is just okay

Rating: 8/10 (6 December 2010)

Haven't seen this one since it played in theaters. I didn't think all that much of it then. It actually improved a bit on re-watch, though I still find that my problems with it back then have not at all disappeared. My main problem is (and was) that Spielberg really seems to think this film is some deep anti-war statement, some extremely important existential story, and it's just not. At heart, this is very much like the WWII classics The Story of G.I. Joe and Battleground (both directed by the great William A. Wellman), about a group of fairly stereotypical and not all that well defined soldiers who risk their lives for a greater purpose. Sure, they are constantly asking the question "Is it worth it?", but Spielberg's (painfully corny) wraparound story, with Private Ryan visiting Arlington National Cemetery, answer that question with a resounding "DUH!" Not to mention that the whole existential crisis (why should eight men be sent to die for one?) is a fabricated one, anyway, as it is, after all, fiction. And, during the film's release, we were told over and over again by everyone involved with the film and very gullible film critics that this was an anti-war movie (one of them who could see through that just saw fit to tell us how much more awesome Joe Dante's completely forgotten Small Soldiers was, so he seemed kind of like a crazy homeless person yelling at a wall). Yeah, it's so not that, either. The proof, twelve and a half years later, exists in the slew of WWII themed video games, all very clearly inspired by the film, that have ruled consoles in the past six or so years. I clearly remember Roger Ebert saying that this was the first film that did not make war seem fun, but damned if people aren't having a ton of fun shooting up Nazis on their TVs. I'd guess that Saving Private Ryan has done more to recruit new soldiers than any Army of One commercial ever has.
So, yeah, it misses several of its main aims. However, while you can castigate Steven Spielberg for misunderstanding his context, you can't say a thing bad about his technical work on the film. Sure, the hand-held aesthetic that he uses in the battle sequences has inspired a lot of very dire copycats over the past twelve years (try not to laugh during the big battle at the start of Gladiator), but it was pretty brilliant at the time, and it really puts you right there. War might be fun, but it's also damn scary, and I found myself shaking with some tears in my eyes after the gigantic beach storming that opens the film (I try to forget the Arlington sequences exist) finally comes to an end. The slower, more personal moments aren't the best (partly due to the variable cast, which ranges from fantastic (Jeremy Davies) to acceptable (Tom Hanks) to terribly annoying (Edward Burns and Paul Giamatti)), but they're mostly fine, and always beautifully shot. I love some of the smaller moments of the movie, especially the slap that the little French girl gives her father when the G.I.s are able to hand her back to him, after the extraordinarily tense sniper sequence. All in all, while the film is kind of a mixed bag, I do think that the impressive moments far outweigh the overall ponderous nature of the movie.