I just saw SPR, and liked it very much. While not quite as
interesting on the character development side as was Schindler's
List, I'm glad that he made this movie in the way that he did.
I'm not sure what people might have said for or against the
shutter effect; my reaction was that it was effective in
communicating the increased adrenaline of battle, the way the
mind jumps when it's on full alert. It was an excellent use of a
very simple piece of craft, as the effect wouldn't require any
post re-touching of any sort.
Having had the chance to sleep on it, I have to say that I lean
more toward Mon's summation of SPR. Every time the movie stopped
to have one of those dialogue scenes over "what this is all
about", the film came to a screeching halt, and cheapened
the stunning battle scenes.
I agree with norwoodr's comment; the film could have easily been
cut to two hours.
Still, I think that Spielberg has done a service to those who
have served in combat. I've read about too many Vietnam vets who,
having been brought up on the John Wayne version of WWII movies,
went to SE Asia expecting to kick Charlie's ass and not get a
scratch. SPR has raised the bar in that regard, and I doubt that
any future war movie will be able to get away with even the most
remote sentimentalization of war.
last night while browsing the
bookstore in the Coconut Grove village square. Seeing as I
couldn't walk the mile home with lightning strikes all around, I
decided to see Saving Private Ryan, again.
On second viewing, I would say that many of the criticisms of the
movie (including some made by yours truly) were unfair. True, the
music by J. Williams is an intrusion, and I kept trying to
imagine the film without it, but all in all I found very little
on second viewing with which I could find any honest fault.
The film captures the chaos and fear of war as experienced on a
personal level better than anything I've seen. The sound design
alone (music excepted) was several cuts above anything before it.
One particularly good moment was the sound of the landing craft's
diesel engines slowing down. That's all you needed to hear to
understand why those poor guys might have soiled their trousers
right then and there, because at any moment they would become an
open target for the German machine gun nests. Also, the sound of
bullets plinking and ricocheting was an important element. And
the sound of the approaching tanks - not just that you heard it
but that it was *felt* - imparted much more fear and suspense
than any cross-cutting of images might have accomplished.
The only things that annoyed me this time around were those few
moments, like when Hanks first confronts Ryan, when Spielberg
relied far too much on traditional, formal,
"Hollywood-type" camera placement (actually, he made
one film-schoolish error in jumping the eyeline between the over
the shoulder CUs of Hanks and Damon and the full shots). When
Damon turned and walked toward the camera in a huff, I felt
myself cringing in the knowledge that he was going to pause
pensively in a perfect CU, right in front of the camera. Such
operatic moments detracted from the overall flow of the movie,
imo.
I would have also cut the scene in which General Marshall reads
the letter by Lincoln. It was both strange and unseemly that this
group of high Pentagon officials would have so little to do only
a day after the invasion at Normandy.
I wouldn't mind seeing the movie a third time, actually. I didn't
feel that way after Amistad, and seeing Schindler's List twice
was about all I could take of Neeson's hysterical breakdown at
the end. I guess that's saying something.
