The "Saving Private Ryan'' movie thread

Uruk-hai:

Miller's comment about Monty being overrated was a bit of historical trivia thrown in. A lot of U.S. troops felt Montgomery was too cautious, too slow.

Conversely, there was the lamnt of British citizen about American troops stationed there.

"Overpaid, oversexed, and over here!"

Each side had their own pet peeves about the other. Spielberg was just adding a historical 'realism' to the picture.

 

I don't think it was necessary.

 

I wonder if those of you who find the comments about Monty in Saving Private Ryan offensive have seen Patton. Granted, there are cheap shots taken at some people in various films, but most often they reflect the realistic attitude of some of the people of the time period.

On the whole, Saving Private Ryan was excellent. I also could have done without the prologue and epilogue, but it didn't overly detract from the impact of the film. It's amazing, with brilliant combat sequences, realistic characters and brilliant performances from the entire ensemble and a healthy dose of drama from beginning to end. It's right up there next to Platoon, Apocalypse Now and such.

 

Personally, I don't object to the comments about Monty in "Patton", mainly because it's a well known historical fact that Patton and Monty, to say the very least, resented each, and were very competitive.

As for the facts about D-Day and immediately thereafter, Monty did not take his time moving inland - his armoured spearhead ran into heavy ressistance almost from the get-go. It's crap like the slur in SPR that perpetuates the legend of Monty's supposed incompetence. If he was so incompetent, then I might remind people that he succeeded in Norht Africa where two previous generals had failed miserably, and that was without American assistance or intervention. Patton was suffering a mild case of jealousy over the fact that Monty got to have a chance at defeating Rommel.

 

However, Monty's brillant plan to end the war by Christmas failed miserably. Sure Operation Market Garden was a brillant plan and it very well could have worked if Allied Intilligence had been accurate, if it was not all supposed to be on a very strict time table.

Monty's plan called for light resistance in order to declare a victory when in fact Allied Intilligence was completly wrong with their analysis and drops were made into heavily defended zones. Not to mention the fact that Monty had the tendency to butcher his best troops, the Airborne. The 101st and the 82nd were torn to shreds by keeping them on the line for 72 days. He allowed the British Red Devils troopers to effectivly become combat ineffective. Monty would either use the American troops to take the bullets or he would be slow to make any kind of move.

The only reason why Monty even stood a chance against Rommel was because Monty was being given the supplies needed to wage war. Hitler gave the Afrika Corp nothing other than basic materials and the Italian troops sucked. Rommel did a magnifigant job fighting the superior British forces and even managed to knock into Egypt not once, but twice and the second time was after suffering a huge retreat.

Look Uruk, British and American forces did meet during the Normady invasion. The movie is based on an American squad in the 1st Infantry Division which fought on Omeha beach. The First Infanty was not ordered to aid the British in fact Ike's advisors told him to pull those troops off Omeha beach during the invasion. It was not until late-July, early August when the Allies broke out of Normandy and then were they fighting as one once again. How can you expect for British to be portrayed when the movie focuses on a American squad, in an American division, fighting on the planned American invasion corridor to encounter the British?

 

I already said you were right and I'm wrong and Monty sucked and so did the Germans and the USA is the best at everything didn't I?

 

No offense, but I think you're being a bit of a "spoilsport". You have a beef with SPR because it doesn't show any other troops other than American troops... but that's because it's historically accurate. The film isn't saying that British troops didn't put in considerable effort into winning WWII (which they did), but merely that British troops were not involved in the specific events which Capt. Miller's squad involved themselves in. I think by faulting SPR for that point, you're trying to search for something which isn't there. I mean, that'd be like me watching 'Hart's War' and faulting the Nazi commander of the POW prison for being a nice guy (which he was, in the film. He's actually my favorite character. I find him to be the most interesting), because I had a misconception that ALL Nazis were evil people. Well, 'Hart's War' was simply being historically accurate, just as SPR was.

 

Look, Monty's reputation was not deserving of the slander put forth by this film. Although Market Garden failed, it was due to bad intelligence, not the commander who formulated the plan. Responsibility for the plan went all the way to Eisenhower's desk, and he had final say over whether it wnet ahead or not. In the years after the war, Ike claimed that Market Garden was a chance that had to be taken, and was the correct course of action given all the circumstances. The bad intel that caused the failure of Market Garden was the result of a stuff-up on the same scale as the screw-up which resulted in the forces landing on D-Day having no idea about the hedgerows behind the invasion beaches.

As for the victory in the desert, Auchinleck and his predecessor both had the same level of resources that Monty had, and they still blew it.

I'm sorry if I'm going off topic, I'm just spoiling for a good historical debate.

 

Ok, I'll be a spoilsport and tell you SPR was absolutely full of historical innacuracies and tactical innacuracies and whatever else.

From the plastic bags that were shown to the felt tip pen writing on the soil tins there are many historical innacuracies. Edith Piaf was an unknown in America before the war but a schoolteacher from middle America knows the lyrics to an obscure song of hers. The US troops called German weapons by the exact German name, which wouldn't have happened, P51's didn't fly close cover missions at that time of the war, a Captain in the airborne at 50 years of age would not happen, the sniper fires too many shots from his rifle without reloading, the Tiger tanks were actually Russian T34's and the passwords the rangers used were backwards.

The miltary tactics employed by a squad of rangers in enemy territory are all wrong.

The patrol methods didn't exist, they acted like they were having a Sunday stroll through hostile territory. They attacked an entrenched machine gun nest head-on with four combatants. The medic would not have been involved in a frontal assault. The P-51 bombs the tank on the bridge whilst heading directly towards the US positions, it would have come in parallel to the bridge for fear of dropping it's payload on the US troops.

Miller didn't use his hand grenades during the final battle, but did use mortar shells which are heavier and more difficult to prime then throw.

But oh no, let's be accurate about not having a British troop anywhere and let's throw in a little dig at the British leadership while we are at it. All for the sake of historical accuracy you see.

 

Yes I'm aware of it that the movie is full of historical innacuracies.
I can't comment on those millitary tactics innacuracies because I know very little about WW II tactics. But I think you're wrong about a couple of other things ...

Edith Piaf was an unknown in America before the war but a schoolteacher from middle America knows the lyrics to an obscure song of hers.

First of all it wasn't Miller (who was the schoolteacher) but it was Upham that translated the words from French to English.
Translated, which means he didn't knew the lyrics he just simply translated the words of the song for the men. I don't think any of them knew the song or lyrics...Upham may had heard about Edith Piaf before (because he mentioned her name) since he spoke French fluently and he seemed like a guy that was intrested in other peoples culture. Or maybe he simply got her name of the record they were playing.

The US troops called German weapons by the exact German name

Example ?

a Captain in the airborne at 50 years of age would not happen

Who are you talking about ??? I don't remember a 50 year old captain in the movie.

the sniper fires too many shots from his rifle without reloading

I don't remember him fireing more then 5 shots after eachother. But I could be wrong...have to check that.

the Tiger tanks were actually Russian T34's

Yes, unfortunatly there aren't any good working WW II era German tanks left. So they had no other choiche then to use a tank that looked like a Tiger tank.

The medic would not have been involved in a frontal assault

I doubt that all what medics did was taking care of wounded, especially when they were on patrols or a mission.

But oh no, let's be accurate about not having a British troop anywhere

It's an American movie about American soldiers in an area were only American soldiers were at the time. There is absolutely no point in putting British or any other soldiers in the movie. Just because they may were inaccurate about a couple of things shouldn't mean they have to be inaccurate by putting British soldiers in the movie.

let's throw in a little dig at the British leadership while we are at it.

I'm sure that if it was a British movie the movie would criticize the Americans the same way. Not because it sounds like fun to do but because it's historical accurate.

 

Okay, all the errors about Ranger tactics in SPR can be written off and blamed on Dale Dye, the military advisor for the film. His experience is as a Vietnam-era and beyond Marine. US small unit tactics changed quite dramatically after Korea, and Dye would likely have known little about the specific methods used.

In fact, he also advised on Band of Brothers, and I recall that when the veterans of Easy Company saw the film, their main criticism was all the hand-waving that the actors did. In WW2, there was very little hand signalling in the US Army - it was largely a special operations invention in Vietnam.

As for the tanks, there are no operational Tiger tanks outside of museums, but seeing as the props department got the Marder III tank destroyers close to accurate, they could have put a bit more effort into the Tigers.

One glaring mistake that sticks out for me is the attack on the machine gun nest. It is fairly easy to find out the exact complement of a German rifle section, the smallest tactical formation in the WW2 German armed forces. It was based around one machine gunner (MG-42 or MG-34), a loader, a squad leader, assistant squad leader, and up to 6 men detailed to perimeter security. In a situation which allowed a Heer unit to set up such an ambush, where would the rest of the squad been? It was quite a lavishly equipped post, not something set up in half an hour rather hastily, but a nest set up with a lot forethought and planning. Then the field commander goes and strips the machine gunner of his security detail? I don't buy it. Period tactical doctrine called for the machine to be protected at all costs by the rest of the rifle squad. If the squad's machine gunner was killed, another member of the squad took over.

 

man,who needs history class when ya got the JCC?

 

Not only that, but why the hell would a German machine gun nest be out in the middle of nowhere? Almost always a gun emplacement is defended by more than two people, not too mention it is an outpost along the MLR (Main Line of Resistance). So when the Germans started firing, help should have been sent (in the form of a squad) to investigate the firing and definatly after the assualt was over and radio contact was destroyed between the outpost and the CP.

I never understood why Wade was ordered to attack in the first place. The Medic's primary job is to tend to the wounded even on patrols. They are the most respected men as they are always there when you need them. The one thing you don't do is risk having your medic being KIA/WIA/MIA in a needless assualt. If they needed the medic he could easily run a few yards to get to the injured man.

 

that particular scene made me so mad at Upham.he wanted the German to survive, not understanding that in war victory comes first, not mercy.later Upham just acted lkike a coward while that nazi killed Mellish.i don't think he Upham should have survived.

 

I can understand why it was put in. It was to show that even in war man can display some humanity towards others, including the enemy.

Like you I was mad as well, that was not the spot to show humanity. You don't capture a POW next to the enemies MLR, have the POW dig a grave or two and let him walk. You capture the POW and then you execute him. A small patrol can't take prisoners and you certainly can't have them dig graves next to their lines and then release them.

Though, I must say I liked the irony in the end where the German kills two Americans, when they were the two who wanted to kill him in the first place.

 

i also didn't like the fact that that particular german is the one who shoots Miller.

 

Steamboat Willie (the guy Upham saved) is not the German soldier who kills Mellish. The German who killed Mellish was an SS trooper wearing a completely different uniform. Steamboat Willie was wearing a Heer (German Army) uniform both times we saw him, and he killed Miller on the bridge, which resulted in Upham killing him.

 

For me, the most moving parts of the film are the bookend scenes at the Normandy Beach cemetary with Ryan's family. When the film opens, you have no reason to understand why visiting this place causes this old man to fall to his knees and be so overcome with emotion. You do not realize at that time that he has returned to France where historic and very personal events had taken place.

Then the bulk of the movie transpires and young Ryan morphs into the old man and it's all beautifully tied together.

I love this film and think it's one of the greatest films EVER.

The ending scene with old Ryan powerfully conveys how profound the impact on his life
that his war experiences were...even FIFTY years later. (This is often true of war veterans of course.) He knew what John Miller and his soldiers had sacrificed and it was extremely important to him to feel that he had justified their sacrifice on his behalf, that he know that he had led a good, productive life. At that age, and under those circumstances, that is incredibly important to a person, especially to someone who had not one, not two, but THREE brothers killed in the same war that Ryan was rescued from. He was very appreciative and very aware of just how lucky he had been.

I am deeply grateful to Steven Spielberg for making this film and bringing these events to generations who had no idea what had been done on behalf of their freedom, long before they were born.

John Williams is always great with his music...but the music near the end of the film and during the credits has an incredible effect on my emotions.

 

First of all it wasn't Miller (who was the schoolteacher) but it was Upham that translated the words from French to English.

No, Miller knew it too, he was telling Ryan why she sounded so sad, something about seeing er ex-lover's face everywhere. Miller couldn't speak French, he didn't communicate with the French people in the village.

The US troops called German weapons by the exact German name

Ryan calls a German weapon a Panzershreck. Doubtful, he would have called it by the generic bazooka. Also in reference to the German machine gun, the US troops refer to it by it's exact model number. They would have called it a spandaux.

Who are you talking about ??? I don't remember a 50 year old captain in the movie.

The character played by Ted Dansen (sp) was a Captain in the Airborne. Not at his age, he wouldn't, maybe he's not 50 but he's damn close to it.

No way known would a medic have been involved in a frontal assault on a fortified machine gun nest. He wasn't carrying a weapon for a start. It's actually doubful that a medic would have been a part of a squad on a mission like that anyway.

That whole machine gun assault was incorrect. Firstly the Germans would have had spotters, so Miller's men would never have gotten as close as they did without being seen. Secondly attacking an entrenched and fortified machine gun from front on is suicide. They would have flanked the nest and attacked from the rear high ground. How the hell did 5 men over-run a machine gun nest with at least three defenders and only suffer one casualty?

There are flaws galore with SPR.

 

But does that REALLY degrade the quality of the fim?

 

No it doesn't, but people got pedantic about accuracy when I suggested two areas of the film I thought could have been improved, so I thought I'd be pedantic back.

 

<looks ''pedanitc'' up in dictionary>
ooh, ok

 

No need to be facetious.

 

Actually, I think the attack on the machine gun degrades the quality of the film. It's a war movie, it should be reasonably realistic and there is no way they could have taken that nest from a frontal assualt, as mentioned previous times.

 

The scene that really made me cry is when the government car pulls up to home of Mrs. Ryan in Iowa to tell her that three of her sons were killed. Spielberg films it from inside the house looking out the door as she goes to meet them. The army men don't even say anything yet but she already knows something horrible happened and as she collapses on the porch you see a picture of the four Ryan brothers in the house on the right side of the frame. Just a really sad moment.