Saving private ryan-possibily the best ww2 film ever made?

"Das Boot" in the original German language is my nomination for best.

 

Downfall for sure. That movie gripped me in ways a movie never has. I was quite astounded at the end when I realized I felt bad for Eva and Adolf, considering the circumstances.

Stalingrad and Das Boot follow up for the emotional investment in those movies, they are what I would call a war movie. With SPR being a flick/movie in my point of view.

 

I can't say I felt bad for them, but I did feel some emotion to their plight. I didn't see Bruno Ganz act as Hitler. I saw Hitler in Downfall. The ones who I do feel bad for are the Goebbels children. They were innocent and didn't deserve to die.

 

Shall we keep on topic gentlemen or is this thread done with ?

 

No. I don't think it was. I agree with the person that mentioned Downfall. That was a powerful movie.

 

Downfall has also contributed to the internet with many parodies...

[Youtube] YouTube - Hitler finds out about the Downfall Parodies[/Youtube]

 

I have to agree with the thinking about Downfall, just a terrific movie. In terms of fictional WW2 movies that I could watch over and over again, and have, I would have to list The Great Escape and The Dirty Dozen. I'm aware the first is an Americanized version of the British film, but what a cast! Good God, does such an assemblage of talent even exist these days? And the same is true for The Dirty Dozen, I can watch it for the acting alone.

 

I would have to say The Big Red One. Sure, there are other movies that depict events more realistically (i.e. appropriate vehicles, gory wounds, etc.), but The Big Red One has a significant advantage in that the director, Samuel Fuller, actually fought with the 1st Infantry Division during WWII. A number of the events in the film are based off of his personal experiences, and the film's novelization (which he wrote) is even more thorough. In addition, Lee Marvin (who starred in the film) was also a vet (he fought in the Pacific, and was wounded in his ass), while the weapons and equipment were more or less realistic (save for the fact that they used Israeli Shermans to play German tanks).

The novelization depicts things more realistically (the film had a rather limited budget): the Germans have Panzers, the Brits have Valentines, the Americans have Shermans, and the language is more realistic (the film was PG, and had no profanity stronger than "*******" or "****," while the book has soldiers using "****" and even worse). If filmed the way the book was written, the movie would have been a good deal gorier, too. The novel also had a surprising amount of strong sexual content which was toned down (sort of) for the film.

Oh, and to the guy that talked about the actor from Revenge of the Nerds (Robert Carradine, who played Fuller's doppelganger), don't forget who else was in TBRO: Mark Hamill (if you don't know who he is, you had better know WHAT he was in).

 

Yes! The Big Red One was a far more accomplished movie than Saving Private Ryan. "You are transferred back to the point" is on my list of all time favorite one-liners.

 

The Big Red One is probably my favorite WW2 movie, much better since it is fact rather than fiction based. Some don't like it since it doesn't have the "gee whiz" of Saving Private Ryan, but it was made way back when language, and realistic gore was much more limited. Still worked, still works.

 

I thought the movie was good and should have been made...my grudge is with the realism. Everything Tom Hanks saw on the beach DID actually happen, but on ALL the beaches, not just his and within sight. They tried to put all the beach stories and events all on one beach and within sight of one person...Ironically, this was what i found lacking in realism. There were some interesting things i'd not previously seen on other war movies though...when an explosion goes off near-by and Tom Hanks goes deaf for a few minutes...read about that plenty of times, but only seen it in SPR.

 

They could (and often did) use a lot of gore and profanity back then (Apocalypse Now comes to mind, although that's Vietnam).

 

Glad to see another person out "there" who has enough brains to see that SPR really wasnt what some think its cracked up to be annnnnnnnd it cant hold a candle to The Big Red One.

 

I think I would have to give 'Saving Private Ryan' the nod over 'The Big Red One'. Lee Marvin kinda had that : "I am just here for a paycheck" quality about him in that movie kinda the same look he had in 'The Delta Force'. Would have been a much better movie is it hadn't been a rehash of over used cliche and if Lee Marvin had brought a little more to the party. I will admit that it, 'The Big Red One' was the Best WW2 movie of that time (1980) when you compare it 'A Bridge Too Far'(1977) it doesn't do as well.

I recently watched "The Big Red One-Reconstructed", The way Sam Fuller meant for the movie to be, and it's pretty damn good; by far the better of the two versions. I even prefer this version to "The Longest day". It's available through Netflix Instant qeue.

 

A Bridge Too Far is one of the most cliched "adult" war films that I've ever seen, although it strives to work within the cliches, and it does a damn good job at telling the story. Actually, it sort of embraces the cliches in a manner that is both playful and serious. As for The Big Red One, I've never seen the theatrical cut (I only own the reconstructed version), and the reconstruction is only an approximation of what Fuller wanted (since you need the director to assemble a director's cut). According to Fuller's excellent autobiography, A Third Face (which is a thorough account of his life, including his combat experiences), Fuller had wanted to make TBRO in the 1950s, but the studio wanted John Wayne for the lead. Fuller met with Wayne (who wanted the part), and, although he liked Wayne as an actor, didn't feel he was right for the role.
In the 70s, a movie he was going to direct (The Klansman, which starred Marvin) was butchered by the studio before filming commenced, so Fuller dropped out as director, but Marvin couldn't leave because of his contract. Marvin was not pleased about the rewrites, and spent most of his time in front of the camera drunk (as did Richard Burton). When Fuller showed Marvin the script of TBRO, Marvin apparently jumped at the opportunity. He really didn't do it for the paycheck, since the film's budget was only $4 million dollars (back during shooting in 1978, don't know how much that would be today; it was still considered small back in the day, but to Fuller, it was apparently a very large budget). Actually, I don't know if any of the principle actors did it for the money (supposedly Hamill did it because George Lucas thought it was a good gig).

 

Hi B/ I have the reconstructed Fuller version too and liked it much better. ;-)) I guess I just cant stand tom hanks and the boy with a mans body, that much. Also, I liked BRO's cast much much more even though I thought that Ted Danson was a great but too small of an addition to SPR. I think Danson's a natural for action flicks if he chose to do more?

I found that refreshing that it is mentioned Duke was interested in doing the role. I would have loved to see him as the Sergeant. Also, take this as a Duke "item" I had never heard of before.

 

I REALLY don't get why so many people hate on SPR here....It doesn't sound like a single person here understands the point of the movie. It's purpose was not to make a factual movie; it was made for two main reasons: 1. For the average person to better understand what veterans of the war went through so that we don't waste our lives doing nothing (this is the whole movie's theme--when Ryan asks his wife if he's a good man, it is meant that we all ask that of ourselves. Have we lived up to every vets sacrifice? Or have we disgraced them by not accomplishing anything with our lives?) 2. The movie was also made to portray generally what an American soldier in the western ETO went through.

The movie really didn't try to do anything more, or anything less. I think it solidly achieved both those goals, hands down. Most of the people here complain because of things they want to see in the movie to complain about--most of these complaints are not really vaild. Your opinion of liking other movies more is all up to you, but I'm pretty sick of ignorant complaints about SPR.

"Too many people get shot in the beach scene!!!" Whiskey. Tango. Foxtrot. OVER?!?!?! Do you know a thing about what happened there, at all? Like even the slightest incling?? Sheesh. "Where are the Brits in the movie??" First, it's a movie about Americans, not the whole world--get over it. And if you simply read a history book you'd be able to answer that question and also commend the film for actually being accurate in that respect. Make a Brit movie yourself if you don't like not seeing them (a Hill 112 movie would be simply incredible....) I've even heard people complain about how it shows Germans die immediately on getting shot whereas the Amis in the film take a long time to die when hit. If you actually pay attention, there are a ton of wounded Krauts crawling around in the background--an aspect I'm impressed they put in their movie. As for all the Germans having "skin head" looks, how many Germans do you even see in the movie where their hair is noticable? Come on.....why should that even matter while you watch? If stuff like that ruins movies for you, the problem is NOT with the movie, but with you, the viewer. Can't you just relax and watch a good film?? They did a hellagood job! It's not easy to make what they made.

Ok, my rant is over. Not all of you here made dumb comments, so ignore my words if you didn't. I personally thinks SPR is the best WWII movie, but that's mostly because Band of Brothers doesn't really count as a movie, per se--that one is better, but you can't really fairly compare a 10 hour show with a movie that's under 3 hours. B

But SPR has some serious competition for top WWII film in A Bridge Too Far, To Hell and Back, Der Untergang (Downfall), and Defiance. For 1955, I think Audie Murphy's movie is every bit as good as SPR and would easily be better if it were made with today's movie technology. I mean, how the hell do you beat Audie Murphy's story anyway?? Not really possible.

One last thing: I have never understood the fascination with Stalingrad...I didn't really like it much at all, I thought it kinda sucked. :/

 

In truth there probably can never be the perfect or best WWII film. Most have some redeeming feature to them and will appeal to some part of the audience. In the last decade 'Ryan' may be the best overall, but it is all subjective. I liked parts of 'Bulge' and 'Midway' and own copies but they too have their flaws. Perhaps we shouldn't be so quick to declare something the greatest or trash, and celebrate what they did well or got right.

 

I really do not think Saving Private Ryan is one of the best movies however it is one of the better ones. My favorite World War 2 film has to be Das Boot...