Saving Private Ryan1998

87/100 What I consider Spielberg's second attempt at a "war" film, that is, one focusing on the war itself alongside the effect it has on people, and a spectacular but flawed success. First off, the film is very realistic, with shocking amounts of blood and gore which I helped illustrate the point. I consider "war is hell" movies very simplistic, and it's no different here, but I can't deny the illustration itself is effective. I also enjoyed the great lengths went to for this realism, including time-accurate tanks and jets. This realism extends to the way the soldiers combat each other: for example, the use of terms like "defilade" or even the practice of shooting surrendering Germans. I do like how both sides are depicted as "monsters if allowed" in a sense for this film. This realism no doubt stems from the fact that this, like Spielberg's many other war films, is based on a real story, if with a few details and names switched around. This, I feel, is another element I liked, as it's always nice to watch a story and learn which of the events actually happened. Spielberg's direction here, however, is a mixed bag. On one hand, as I noted previously, he handles the war scenes with an amazing realism, especially the opening scene at D-Day, which was just amazing and easily the best scene in the whole movie. So many minute touches make you feel like you're actually watching as a soldier. The sound design is also immensely intense, and I feel it's the best I've seen in any of these war movies so far. On the other hand, however, the direction still has its rough edges in terms of direction. Mainly, I feel it falls short in that Spielberg once again leans into his sentimentalism where it is unneeded. This score, I feel, is a rare miss for John Williams, especially because so many scenes would be stronger if it wasn't for his score coming in trying to tell me how to feel. Another issue is the characters. Now, this also isn't a complete loss, but rather just a very flawed component. I'll give credit here, Tom Hanks is very good as Captain Miller. I felt he was distinct from the action heroes this genre tends towards, and as the protagonist he is given the most pathos, and as such is the only character I enjoy. As for the rest, however, I didn't feel invested in any of them. The attempts at pathos really are handled well here, and there's multiple moments I enjoy with the characters. The cast is also trying their best, and giving really good performances. However, I feel there's not enough of these scenes and more pointless nonsense than necessary. Furthermore, we have a lot of characters which look a lot alike, to the point where a random no-name soldier looks like one of our leads Upham. More egregious is the Willie and some random comrade of his, which I switched up while watching the movie, leading to a complete misread of what was happening. I think this is the most harshly I've criticized a movie I love, and I don't want to come off as hating it. When this movie peaks, it peaks hard, but that just makes its flaws more recognizable by comparision. That doesn't change the fact it's one of the best war movies ever made.