# Saving Private Ryan (1998)

### reviewed by
"Average Joe" Barlow

    SAVING PRIVATE RYAN: A REVIEW ADDENDUM
    by Joe Barlow  (August 26, 1998)

Approximately one week after my largely critical review of "Saving Private Ryan" appeared on the Internet, I've become the target of many readers' anger. New mail continues to flood into my mailbox every hour, saying pretty much the same thing: "You don't know what you're talking about! This is the best movie of the year!" etc.

I've responded to the majority of these messages, but since I've basically found myself saying the same things over and over, I've decided to write this public addendum. This will be my final word on the movie: I've moved on to other reviews, and since each lengthy "SPR" reply takes fifteen minutes or more to complete, I must now look ahead or face the possibility of getting behind in my viewing of new films.

Here are some of the more articulate charges which have been leveled at me (some messages have been edited slightly to remove profanity and correct minor typos):

            * By giving a negative review to this film, you are
            spitting in the face of American Patriotism.

            * It is obvious that you don't like the movie because it
            strays from the guidelines imposed by film school
            professors and snooty critics (not unlike yourself). A
            cookie-cutter movie it is not. Maybe that is your problem
            with it.

            * Your review reads so much like a deliberate
            contradiction that it reminds me of kids saying
            "I know you are, but what am I": it sounds not so much
            as an honest opinion as a case of "everybody likes this
            movie, so I won't".

            * On a critical level, you've basically repeated
            yourself for a few paragraphs and then pronounced
            judgement without defending yourself.  If nothing else,
            it's unprofessional.

            * Your reasons for not liking [the film] are few, badly
            backed up, and so profoundly personal that they will apply
            to few, if any, people.  To call the opening scene (or any
            scene for that matter) superfluous and attack something as
            inconsequential as character development (to this particular
            film) seems like the argument of a man grasping for straws.

            * You seem to be so absorbed in intricate plots and
            deep character development that a movie which illustrates
            one simple point is beyond your grasp.

While I regret that my comments have offended so many people, I do not apologize for my opinion. As a film critic, I have to identify the good and the negative as I see them. I am not on a personal vendetta against this, or any, film. One reader accuses me of trashing the movie simply because everyone else likes it, assumedly to draw attention to myself. Not so. I saw the film on opening day, before I'd read a single review or heard any comments. Only later did I discover that my opinion was in the minority. (My exact words: "When so many people disagree with me, then hey, maybe it's just me.") As I said in my disclaimer, which apparently this reader didn't bother to look at, I never had any intention of reviewing the movie. It was only because I received several e-mails which specifically asked for my opinion that I compiled my notes into a critique.

For the record, I didn't hate "Saving Private Ryan." The war scenes are well-done, and as stated previously, Tom Hanks does his usual wonderful job. Is the film significantly flawed? In my eyes, yes. But if the movie fails on a spectacular basis, it's only because it risks so much more than the average film. For that reason alone, Spielberg has my respect.

This doesn't change the fact that the opening sequence is irrelevent to the story line, and that the characters border on caricature. I found the film terribly unfocused, as if Spielberg did not know what he wished to do. Is he trying to show the horrors of warfare? A documentary would've been more effective. Or was Speilberg trying to make a character-intensive drama? If so, the war footage appears intrusive. One reader criticises me for attacking something as "inconsequential as character development." I'm sorry, but character development is an important part of ANY drama. If Spielberg didn't want to develop his characters, I reiterate: he should've made a documentary. By attempting to create both The Greatest War Film Ever Made and a Touching Drama, he has, in my opinion, distilled the effects of both.

In my own defense: the review of "Saving Private Ryan" which appeared on rec.arts.movies.reviews was an early draft; the later version is available on my website. While the criticisms are basically the same, I did elaborate a bit more on certain points.

I will also note that after my review appeared, I spotted two other critical essays about the film. The Raleigh "Independent," a local newspaper, gave the film one star out of a possible five. Another Internet film critic, whose name I didn't catch, gave the film two stars out of a possible five. Both cited many of the same flaws that I did. I'm pleased to learn that I'm not the only one who spotted problems; I was honestly beginning to wonder.

And one piece of information I was grateful to receive:

            * I thought you might like to know that, at least according
            to Stephen Ambrose in his book "D-Day", there was an
            American soldier in the 101st Airborne "snatched from the
            front lines by the Army" after his three older brothers had
            been KIA. His name was Fritz Niland, and his brothers were
            killed on Utah beach, defending wounded paratroopers behind
            German lines in Normandy, and fighting the Japanese in Burma.
            His mother received notification of their deaths on the same
            day. I only mention this because I've encountered several
            people (including you, through the medium of your review) who
            thought this premise was utterly laughable and not the least
            bit believable.(one is an ex Marine) The movie's premise may
            seem laughable, but it's framework at least is historically
            accurate.

(Thanks to Amy Snyder Hale for sharing this with me.)

One reader, however, sent me a message so profound that it has actually given me pause. She writes:

            * You criticize the fact that "Saving Private Ryan" keeps its
            characters at arms-length, but I was grateful for it. There
            is so much death and destruction in this film that I didn't
            want to become attached to anyone. When a character died, I
            was thankful that I didn't know more about him. Spielberg
            made the right decision in keeping people vague and
            undefined. Not only that, but I think real soldiers in the
            trenches would act that way as well. When people are dying
            all around you, it's best not to get too attached to any of
            them.

This is an excellent point, and it's one that I quite frankly had not considered. That's great food-for-thought, and who knows? It may prompt me to significantly re-think my opinion of the movie. Thank you, Linda.

I'd also like to thank those of you who wrote me kind messages, thanking me for not sugar-coating my opinion and for stating how I honestly felt. You're welcome. I will continue to do so.

            If you loved the film, that's great... I'm happy for you.  The
    world at large is on your side.  If you haven't yet seen it, I'll leave
    you to make up your own mind.  See you at the movies!

Copyright (c)1998 by Joe Barlow. This review may not be reproduced without the written consent of the author.

E-Mail: jbarlow@earthling.net Joe Barlow on Film: http://www.ipass.net/~jbarlow/film.htm

If you'd like to receive new film reviews by e-mail, please write to the above address and ask to be put on my mailing list.

The review above was posted to the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due to ASCII to HTML conversion.

Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews