Saving Private Ryan Movie
Storyline
TAGLINES
In the Last Great Invasion of the Last Great War, The Greatest Danger for Eight Men was Saving... One.
The mission is a man.
There was only one man left in the family, and the mission was to save him.
I'll see you on the beach!
The movie that inspired to the world to remember
Opening with the Allied invasion of Normandy on 6 June 1944, members of the 2nd Ranger Battalion under Cpt. Miller fight ashore to secure a beachhead. Amidst the fighting, two brothers are killed in action. Earlier in New Guinea, a third brother is KIA. Their mother, Mrs. Ryan, is to receive all three of the grave telegrams on the same day. The United States Army Chief of Staff, George C. Marshall, is given an opportunity to alleviate some of her grief when he learns of a fourth brother, Private James Ryan, and decides to send out 8 men (Cpt. Miller and select members from 2nd Rangers) to find him and bring him back home to his mother...
| Matt Damon | Private James Francis Ryan |
| Edward Burns | Pvt. Richard Reiben |
| Vin Diesel | Private Adrian Caparzo |
| Tom Hanks | Captain John H. Miller |
| Tom Sizemore | Sergeant Mike Horvath |
| Jeremy Davies | Cpl. Timothy P. Upham |
| Barry Pepper | Pvt. Daniel Jackson |
| Adam Goldberg | Pvt. Stanley Mellish |
| Giovanni Ribisi | T-4 Medic Irwin Wade |
| Ted Danson | Captain Fred Hamill |
| Paul Giamatti | Sergeant Hill |
| Dennis Farina | Lieutenant Colonel Anderson |
| Joerg Stadler | Steamboat Willie |
| Steven Martini | Corporal Henderson |
| Dylan Bruno | Toynbe |
| Steven Spielberg |
8.40 out of 10 (192072 votes)
Visitor Reviews
Most Morally Powerful War Drama brought to the Screen
posted on 30 Aug 2009I first saw "SPR" back in 1998 on opening night, and was moved then and still am. I display it prominently in my DVD case, and defend it as the best War movie ever made.What I can't figure out is why people "can't get it". When you observe the two bookend scenes of the old man and his family, and the American Flag--it says much. I think it is a question of values and morals. Far to many people watch Oliver Stone's "Platoon" and can only think that war is evil, and anything that goes back to WWII is graphically irrepressible. While "Platoon" is a great adaptation of the Vietnam War and I'll endorse it for that conflict, and why we should never have been there, all one has to do is see Spielberg's earlier epic of "Schindlers List" to realize why WWII was right for America to be in. All too often these politically correct values that came out of the Vietnam War era seam to go against what often are traditional American Values such as home and family. "Nothing is worth losing one's life for" I think is a bad attitude that has resided in our society for the past three decades or more. "Make Love not War" seams to have replaced any moral values we once had as a society. "The risking of the lives of eight men" to find one is a scenario that troubles those who think in this purely secular way. I'm certainly greatful to those of that earlier generation that were called upon to fight. Something I don't think the later could do even if confronted with such a threat to personal freedoms that Nazi Germany represented at that time.This is a great show for older Teens (14-15 and older). To those who feel this show should have received an NC-17 rating take a look at your thinking as stated above. If the MPAA had a split R rating as most other Nations Ratings Boards have, Mr. Spielberg I'm sure would argue and I would agree that it should go into the lower of the two (MA or M-14). If you're a moral person you'll like this show and the story of heroism, courage and honor it brings to the screen, but if you're a purely secular person with more humanist values you won't. I too feel it was the greatest heist that "Shakespeare in Love" narrowly edged it out for best picture for 1998. But then I'm sure that those with the values opposite to mine felt otherwise ---David Moore
masterpiece - almost
posted on 27 Aug 2009I hate to see a movie like Saving Private Ryan incomplete. It is a masterpiece of a film but it could have been the greatest film ever made. It is not. Spielberg was so close and yet Saving Private Ryan is not quite the movie it should be. Don't get me wrong, it is an impressive film and I'm glad I paid to go see it. The opening sequence on the beach is utterly perfect - there are no other words to describe it, and Tom Hanks actually performs a role that is definitely Oscar worthy (Philadelphia was overrated). But there are mistakes Spielberg makes: The opening and closing shots of the American flag - (didn't Spielberg see Minghella's 'The English Patient'?), the use of the older Ryan attending the graveyard - completely unnecessary - Spielberg should have left it during WWII; and finally the character focus on Ryan - I had more interest in the Corporal Upham character played brilliantly by Jeremy Davies. I felt that at times Spielberg was doing so but then he switched back to Hanks and Damon's characters. It would have proved more effective to use Davies' character as the main protagonist. But enough of the criticising - it is nevertheless still a fine film and I think the only reason I find myself picking at these little things is my disappointment in the fact that it could have been one of the greatest films ever - and fell just a few feet short of it.
A triumph of style
posted on 27 Aug 2009If you like this movie, you like it because of the style. The battle scenes are amazing and some of the best ever put on film. This movie could have been great had someone paid attention to the script.
There are so many problems with it (apart from being quite an average plot) I don't even know where to start. Let's point out the obvious one: the movie is told from the Matt Damon character's point of view -- and he wasn't even in most of the movie! There's no way he can know the story of how Hanks found Private Ryan, because he wasn't there! If you want to know why this movie lost the Best Picture Oscar, that's it.
The underlying structure of the script is so flawed, it undermines everything Spielberg did with the movie. Still, this is a good movie. A very good movie even and it is certainly worth your while. I'm just sorry most people will rent it on video because it really benefits from a cinema experience.
very sad movie and violent.
posted on 27 Aug 2009The movie is basically about the WWII so its very Violent and sad at some parts.Sgt. John H. Miller is ordered to set up a crew and go find another soldier named James Francis Ryan,who had three more brothers who where killed in combat,and the order is to take him out of Normandy and return him home,in the trans curse of finding this soldier two soldiers are killed , one of their murderer a Nazi German soldier is set free by John,which showed weakness to the other soldiers on his command,at the end of the movie Sgt. John H. Miller is killed by the same German soldier who he had set free.At the end older James Ryan is standing in front of a tomb that has the name John H. Miller written on it,in the memorial Normandy cementery in France,his wife comes up to him and he asks her if he has been a good husband,the wife answers of course yes.Remembering the last words that Sgt John H. Miller said to him at the bridge "Earn it".
Numb and angry
posted on 24 Aug 2009I have to say that the criticisms I have read concerning this movie just don't ring true, but some of the praise seems equally wrong.The movie seemingly uses a 'retrospective' method of framing the main action... which turns out to be not quite what it seems (to say more would give too much away). Some have called this cheesy, but I doubt that anyone would be saying that if 'Titanic' hadn't beaten SPR to it. It's effective, and sets you up for a plot twist at the end (If you still don't get it, that's too bad). The characters are fleshed out stereotypes because they are *representative* characters, and in a plot that's largely a cog in the whole symbolism of the thing. The battle of Omaha beach is not relevant for the plot, but this is a movie which steps outside its plot. It's a morality tale, not about soldiers, but about the modern world where some people are safe because others have died (horribly) bringing that about. This is what the seemingly confusing flashback is about, this is what the battle scenes are about and the whole point of the screenplay seems to be to get us to ask ourselves the question that the old man asks at the end of the movie. It's a shame that nit-picking amateur film critics fail to see the big picture.As for the whole goriness thing... that's the way it is. Gory. You are supposed to be horrified, not entertained (someone described the landing sequence as 'exciting'. I don't know what's more frightening, the sequence or that response). And finally we have a film that pulls no punches and has so much moral ambiguity that we can identify with the characters, loathe them, and find no fault in them all at the same time. I would say 'brilliant', except that it's a function of the sheer horrific nature of the circumstances they find themselves in and not something you feel like applauding.All in all, this is a movie that should, at the very least, change the way that the viewer thinks about action movies. Spielberg has done here for the War and Action genres what Eastwood did to the Western with 'Unforgiven': that is to say, completely debunked all the old Hollywood mythos and glorification. With all the tricks in the book Spielberg and co have created a nightmare image all from the perspective of its victims. I've never seen anything like it. Spielberg's battlefield is like the industrial revolution gone horribly wrong: a huge machine of percussive clashes, explosions and fire spitting out buzzing fragments of metal tearing chunks out of masonry, landscape and people. Hell in a can. Anyone who doesn't walk out of this movie in a state of numb denial muttering "never again" is already lost.See it.
Saving Private Ryan really affected me
posted on 18 Aug 2009I saw Saving Private Ryan the other day and I was shocked at how realistic it was, and how affected I was by it. That night I could barely get to sleep because every time I closed my eyes I pictured Wade asking for his mother or Caparzo(?) holding the letter to his parents.I also have to say that one of the reasons this movie was so great was the power of the performances, not just Tom Hanks, but Ed Burns, Adam Goldberg(Mellish), Jeremy Davies(Upham), and Giovanni Ribisi(Wade).
moving, lingering,superb
posted on 18 Aug 2009Saving Private Ryan is something quite special in the 1990's pantheon of Hollywood movies- it stays with you long after you have left the cinema and truly makes you reflect on what you have just seen. Artistically it is a triumph- the cinematography is breathtaking, shot as it is with a handheld documentary style and the performances too are superb..with naturalistic dialogue and astoundingly realistic battle scenes. It works so well because it defies the cliches laid before it as a genre which even FULL METAL JACKET and PLATOON fell unwittingly into...SAVING PRIVATE RYAN acknowledges that death can come to all or any of the characters at any time, brutally, even when you expect the characters you admire the most(through careful development) to survive. And that is how it should be, because that is the nature of true conflict. The only downpoint is the portrayal of the Americans as having been the sole Allied forces involved in the war and beach landings when this was clearly not the case.Saving Private Ryan is moving, powerful and thought provoking. One of the best WORLD WAR II films ever mad and can stand proundly next to the classics of that genre.Highly recommended, though traumtic.
Technically brilliant, but disappointing all the same.
posted on 15 Aug 2009There's no doubt in my mind that 'Saving Private Ryan' is technically one of the best films ever. Janusz Kaminski should be congratulated for his cinematography, especially in the opening sequence. The sound effects are amazing, and I for one was particularly impressed by the part where the sound of raindrops on leaves imitated the sound of guns firing.It's no understatement to say that Tom Hanks is brilliant. He has proven himself to be the most versatile actor in Hollywood, without exception. If the hype is true that 'Saving Private Ryan' is up against 'The Truman Show' to sweep the Oscars, and Hanks is up against Jim Carrey for Best Actor, then 'Ryan' and Hanks should win hands down.Yet all the same I felt severely disappointed, maybe even cheated, by the movie. Beneath the main plot, a sort of sub-plot developed in which the audience is given glimpses into the internal emotions and mental turmoil of all involved, especially Captain Miller. At least, that's what I perceived the shaking hand and the "I'm a schoolteacher" bit to mean. The audience is sucked into thinking that, regardless of how many die, and whether or not Ryan is saved, this sub-plot is going to lead to Spielberg's big thematic message, his conclusion, his comment, at the end. But that resolution never comes, and there seems to be no point to the film, nothing it's trying to say. While that in itself is not disappointing, as many films have no message, what is frustrating is being led to feel as though a lesson is coming, and then not getting it.In terms of the violence, I don't think the Omaha beach landing sequence is particularly gruesome, at least no more graphic than the part in the middle where Miller's men apply pressure to a stomach wound, and you feel the victim suffering as he turns white and dies.And, not being an American but an Australian, there has been a lot made of the so-called Americanism of the film, how no black American soldiers seem to be mentioned, and how the other Allied troops are forgotten about, but I tend to think that's no more than pedanticism, taking a stereotypical swipe at a film where such bias has no glaring impact.So in short, 'Saving Private Ryan' is technically brilliant, but it still left a very hollow feeling. 8 out of 10.
Definitely the best war movie you will ever see.
posted on 15 Aug 2009This is by far best WWII movie i have ever seen and in general on of the best movies. It is thrilling emotional funny and shows all the folly and tragedy of war. Within the first 5 minutes of the movie there are scenes of intense realistic combat. This movie is truly a work of art. Everything about it is real. The bloodshed, the style of guns, the talk,the gore, absolutely everything. Except for the storyline, which i won't go into, everything about this movie is 100% realistic and accurate. Not once in the movie did I say to myself "that wouldn't happen in real life." The action scenes are incredible. You'll see classic WWII weapons being used like the BAR, M1 Garand, classic bayonets etc. The violence is so real and that often you will wonder whether or not the actors are actually dead. This movie shows all forms of combat. Guns, flamethrowers, sniping, tanks, planes, and of course several sequences of up close and personal/bloody.The scenery may very well be the best in annyyy movie I've seen, not just war movies. While watching I was shocked to think how much time was devoted to this. Crumbling buildings, destroyed tanks, dead cows, cratered land; everything. Every step of the movie you will be thinking that they went back in time to those areas, because it will be so hard to believe that most of it was filmed in a studio.This movie won a deserving Oscar for cinematography, and for good reason. I can only surmise how many camera's were used in making this film. Because of professional cinematography, the action doubles. Everything is done so well. Explosions are shown from several angles at such a fast pace that you'll once again think that this must actually be happening.The acting is great in this movie. Most of the soldiers act like typical grunts who enjoy seeing a German killed, while show true sympathy and sorrow if/when any of their comrades die or during a breakdown when all the fighting gets to them.To cut this review short, because there are about a dozen other topics to touch upon this incredible movie, this is a true classic, great drama, terrific directing and keeps you involved and not bored during this 2hour and 35 minute movie.
Saving Private Ryan, almost a masterpiece.
posted on 12 Aug 2009Over the last 20-odd years Speilberg has provided us with some of the most memorable moments in the cinema. From Jaws through Close encounters, E.T. Indiana Jones and most of all Schindlers List. Now he has added another milestone, Saving Private Ryan.This film in the first half hour must come as close to showing the full brutality of war as anything ever seen before. Despite an occasional soggy middle section, in the opening sequences he fully makes up for any short comings that the film may otherwise have.With his track record now, I await the time when he makes his true masterpiece and ditches his more saccharine elements. In the meantime there is still plenty to appreciate.P.S. I liked Amistad as well!
Was this a joke?
posted on 12 Aug 2009It's the World War II era ... and nobody smokes.There's only one person in this movie who opposes war .... his "cowardice" winds up costing lives.For a moment, it seems there's ONE nice person in the nation of Germany. The merciful American soldiers let him go. This turns out to be a huge mistake, as he returns, days later, with a group of his friends to kill them all. Lesson learned - there is not even ONE reasonably nice German.The movie ends with a salute to the American flag and blasting, inspiring music.Was this movie made for two-year-olds?When it comes to subject matter as complex as war, I think simple-minded movies like this do more harm than good. I'd recommend a movie written at a more grown-up level.
Nice, but sentimental and historically flawed
posted on 12 Aug 2009Summary Saving Private Ryan a good movie, but it is a times painfully sentimental, American centred and, while suggesting realism, historically flawed.Sentimental because the movie is laden with strong emotional moments. The most marked of which is the one when the aged Ryan drops to his knees at the grave of a the captain who saved him exclaiming, "did i do good?".American centered because, while the us characters are lifelike all others are not. Most absurd are the Germans. For instance the climax of the movie sees the us cast being attacked by SS men. SS where no that old(average age of SS rank and file was between 17-21)but they where also not bald. Nor all that ugly. Nor that inept(front assaults with what is obvious a 20 mm gun is a laugh, tiger tanks where general deployed in groups, not in single instances, tanks where usually covered by infantry to prevent them from being ambushed by enemy infantry etc.) But most of all: there where no SS at that moment in time at that place. The SS units moving up to Normandy which could have intervened where delayed by an exceptional campaign of sabotage and interdictions. The airborne where in fact opposed by regular infantry and the unreliable ost-truppen most of the time. The only crack units that crossed swords with the airborne in early June where the fallschirmjaeger unit's near ST Lo. These did not posses tiger tanks. The story while breathing an air of being historically true is in fact mostly true to the American part, all the others are just to embellish the story. In this movie the US cast had to fight the SS equipped with tigertanks because in the US mind frame that was the best the Germans had to offer. (ironically: an inquiry among us soldier what they feared most put the tiger tank at the top of the list, it's ironical because of the 1350 odd produced tiger tanks 2/3 went to the east-front, 1/3 to the south and west front. What reached the Normandy front(running the gauntlet of interdictions and sabotage) where mostly deployed against the English sector and not the US sector(yes more than 50% of the forces landed where non us). The chance therefore that the us airborne would have been facing tigertanks in the early days of the invasion was equal to zero. And then the strange plot twists. The main characters land on Omaha beach, giving birth to one of the most intense movie scenes every filmed. It had to be Omaha because it was the hardest fought for. But then comes the weird part: the heroes are charged with saving Ryan who could have been better reached with less hassle by starting from Utah beach, which was closer to the drop zones and less opposed by the Germans. No the logical move would be to be shipped to the other beach but instead the story let's the saviors take a round-abound trip of 30 odd kilometres through enemy held territory without any explanation given. The movie wasn't aiming to be the historically accurate, it was a movie which made heroes of soldiers who did their job, despite misgivings and in the face of adversity. I somehow feel that the way the movie display heroism is wrong, that it is detracted in the way this movies tells the story. The stories main emotion is exemplified by the sentimental looking guy who looks at the stars thinking of home, murmuring something about the cakes his mother made for him when he was ten. Investigations into the mindset of the average soldier paints another picture. Home was another planet, there was no time to look at the stars, if you had that time, you went to sleep, for there was always a lack of sleep. If you didn't sleep you ate or drank. Instead of creating a band, veteran soldiers shut themselves of from others because most of those others would be dead within a months time. There might have been a band, but it wasn't one of brothers. It was a band of survivors. Like Letters of Iwo Jima it isn't an overtly political statement, but it is historically flawed and overtly sentimental to the point of being untrue. Nevertheless it is still a good movie that should be looked at as being fiction and the sentimental part can be skipped and the historical vaults forgiven.
The best war movie ever made
posted on 06 Aug 2009flawless. That's the one word i would use to describe this film. I've never seen anything like it, it was definitely written by someone in the war and with respect for those who served in World War II. The acting is perfect and every bit of it is exactly how my grandparents describe war. If your seeing this not for the storyline, but for the violence, then shame on you. I am rarely touched by movies, but this touched me, especially the ending. Every battle scene is brilliantly played out and every actor does a brilliant job. If you haven't seen this movie, then you better get off your computer and run out and go see it. It is by far the best war movie ever made and a classic.
SAVING RYAN'S PRIVATES....now THAT would have been a good movie!!
posted on 03 Aug 2009I think this movie is a good first step towards making more realistic war movies, but it hasn't quite reached there yet. I felt that wimpy translator guy would have been a better old man than Ryan at the end. Besides, he was there for more than 1/3 of the time, unlike Ryan. There are a few areas of improvement. Firstly, they need to cut out all that sentimental and bonding crap, and find other ways of developing characters rather than just a few silly laughs while retelling old times... Secondly, acknowledge that the enemy (in this case, the Germans), were at least partially human, and experienced some of the same emotions those heroic Americans experienced. (F*** Hitler? Man, I would like to hear some of the Americans say that about their leaders). Thirdly, link those excellent battle sequences with the plot of the movie. Oh...and most importantly, don't glorify the war by making all the dead characters look like such big heroes. I thought this movie was supposed to be anti-war. And I can't believe how Ryan was so emotional at the end. He had only met Miller and Co. a few hours before the big battle, and he barely knew Miller or what they went through to save him, except that two of their men died (and I believe that people dying was rather common during that time). Oh, but I guess it was still pretty good.
It is the most uplifting movie I have seen in a long time.
posted on 03 Aug 2009"Saving Private Ryan" is the most uplifting movie I have seen in a long time. I never felt better about being an American than at the end of the movie. The scene where Private Ryan returns to Capt.Miller's grave with his family and asks, "Tell me I am all right. Tell me I led a good life." stirred me deeply. All of us have a great debt to the Private Ryans and Captain Millers who fought in World War Two and our country's other wars. I congratulate Steven Spielberg and the cast for reminding us of this in such a sensitive and touching way.
One of the best war films ever.
posted on 31 Jul 2009When I first saw this film a year ago, I was completely blown away. I knew people who had seen it said the battle scenes were pretty intense, but it was nothing like I expected. I was in a state of shock as was everyone else at the screening I attended. The two extended battle scenes that open and close the film are, simply, the greatest battle scenes ever recorded on celluloid. The primary reason is because they show absolutely everything.
Blood, body parts, gore, you name it. This is easily the most violent film I've ever seen. Can you imagine what the reaction would've been like if this movie came out at the same time "The Wild Bunch" did? I was somewhat surprised that this film sailed through with an "R" rating. The film tells a fairly straightforward story of a platoon of soldiers led by Tom Hanks who are assigned to find and bring back a young soldier whose three brothers have been killed in action. The characters are sharply and simply drawn, the editing is phenomenal, the cinematography is excellent, and the score is appropriate. This is Spielberg's fourth WWII movie, and arguably his best film ever. The only complaint I have about this film is its continued absence on DVD. Please, please, Mr. Spielberg, get this masterpiece out on DVD real soon.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 62
- 63
- 64
- 65
- 66
- 67
- 68
- 69
- 70
- 71
- 72
- 73
- 74
- 75
- 76
- 77
- 78
- 79
- 80
- 81
- 82
- 83
- 84
- 85
- 86
- 87
- 88
- 89
- 90
- 91
- 92
- 93
- 94
- 95
- 96
- 97
- 98
- 99
- 100
- 101
- 102
- 103
The "ANTI" in the expression "Anti-War-Movie" and why SPR is not one.
posted on 30 Aug 2009First of all, I consider this movie a very good war movie.But, after all, it IS a classic American war movie resembling other classic war movies like Bridge On The River Kwai etc. What disturbed me, is the general view of this movie being an Anti-War-movie. The origin of this categorization is without a doubt the acceptance of Steven Spielberg as a sophisticated director. If another director had created a movie with such realistic scenes as featured in SPR, the movie would probably be seen as violent and war-glorifying. Spielberg does SPR and it is automatically an Anti-War-movie, that `realistically displays the cruelty of war, showing us what never may happen again'. How can it be otherwise? It is a Spielberg movie. In my eyes ridiculous and unfair to the directors who are not as established as Spielberg.In a movie against war the first thing that should be dropped is Patriotism in order to reflect on war objectively. SPR starts with an American flag waving in the wind. There is hardly more Patriotism possible. An objective movie does not require clichees like the evil Nazi soldier who cold-heartedly shoots American soldiers even after they spared his life. Despite of the indubitable fact that the Nazi regime was one of the most gruesome periods in world history, we also have make the assumption, that in battle all soldiers are the same: Humans fighting for a country.By the way, the only movie I have seen that definitely could tell a war story without sticking to just one side was The Thin Red Line. The problem was that Terrence Malick is not Steven Spielberg.So, again, in my eyes a really great movie. But let us see things as they are: Just because Spielberg made it doesn´t make it a sophisticated Anti-War-movie.