“Saving Private Ryan” is not just another war movie; it showed the true horrors of war and all the things soldiers had to deal with during WW2, as to be similarly expressed by Hunter. This movie goes along the lines of a war epic. Stephen Hunter believes that the movie “could be called the last example of that vanishing category, the unit tribute film (1998).” I believe that this film could be a tribute film to WW2 veteran, but it won’t be the last. There always could be another WW2 movie that is just as great and still show gratitude to what the veterans had gone through. None the less the movie gave an in depth persona to how it felt like to be in WW2.
As Hunter talks about the battle on Normandy he says, “Spielberg’s ability to capture the palpable madness of all this borders on the incredible (1998).” He describes the vividness of soldiers being blown up, body parts flying around, and bullets flying everywhere. I cannot agree with Hunter any better. On Omaha beach the allied forces were just being outgunned by machine guns surrounding the entire beach. The immense size and horror of this battle and other battles gave way for what people would do for their country. Hunter and I both agree that soldiers must be willing to die and kill for your country (1998).
Hunter says “It’s mean, terrifying, exhausting and quip less. There’s no spunk and very little humor. Morale is nonexistent (1998).” I also agree with Hunter in that Saving Private Ryan shows aspects of true war. War is not supposed to be fun, when you see people die next to you it creates doubt. To be in war is like hell. Look at Miller, throughout all the battle almost all of his squad and friends had been killed, what treacherous thoughts might have gone through his head. The darkness of war overpowers any kind of good feelings or atmospheres.
Miller’s squad ventures on quest to go find Ryan. “Spielberg expertly configured battle scenes- while at the same time keeping precise track of the overall story situation (Hunter, 1998).” I agree in that the plot never lost track, but I don’t see how it’s any different from other wartime movies. They had an objective and they did it, the same with “Platoon” or “Hamburger Hill”. The wars are what give the raw emotions to the plot. It’s not that the movie’s plot is any better; it’s that the gruesome battles allowed the characters to show more suffering and torture.
The movie’s subject, which is not heroism, is duty (Hunter, 1998). On one hand that’s true, but on the other it could be both. The squad did what they were told no matter the consequences, but also took a lot of kahunas to do what Miller had done, not being a coward. In the end Hunter shows how realistic and terrifying the movie is, but can be overly opinionated about some ideas.
Hunter, Stephen. July 24, 1998. Spielberg’s War: It’s Hell. The Washington Post: National. Retrieved September 3, 2013 from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/movies/videos/savingprivateryanhunter.htm