the films that matter

**emjen** · May 18th, 2004, 04:29 PM

1: I didn't fucking care. The movie had great characters, friendship etc. Things that are universal.

2. I know what you're getting at. Of course it's not realistic. Its a mans interpretation of a war he didn't even experience. But what was supposed to be realistic about SPR were the battle scenes. How every human being was shot down like an ant under a glass. What was also 'realistic' were the emotions of the characters. No rambo's or heroes, but real men with fear who cried for their mamas. Putting a few frenchman here and there wouldn't help at that.

3. The film was supposed to be about the Americans in the first place.

4. It probably isn't historically correct, but it's a movie, telling a great story. (my humble opinion)

**Kev Owens** · May 18th, 2004, 04:39 PM

4. It probably isn't historically correct, but it's a movie, telling a great story. (my humble opinion)

True, and of course your opinion is quite right, but what I'm getting at is...

...and round and round we go. [img]wink.gif[/img]

**twister!** · May 19th, 2004, 08:10 AM

Did anyone else see Terrence Malick's 'The Thin Red Line'? Unfortunately it was released at almost exactly the same time as 'SPR'. Given the choice between the two movies most people decided to see only Ryan (probably due to Spielberg's name and a more mainstream cast list). 'The Thin Red Line' was a superior film. Anyone else see it?

**eidde** · May 19th, 2004, 10:30 AM

Wanna learn some history?
Read a book.

**Kev Owens** · May 19th, 2004, 12:26 PM

By jolly you're right Eidde old chap! I should just pretend that the good old US of A once again grabbed all of us Limeys by the scruff of our skinney necks and saved us like a true all american hero (again!). After all, it's only a movie! Rather!

How ridiculous of me to assume that films based around very important historical events should bother to allign with what reality! I forgot to turn off my brain again when I watched you see! What a silly old blighter! Perhaps I'll even watch Pearl Harbour again... jolly- o!

Now gents, whose up for some pimms and cucumber sandwiches? Oh, and anyone got a good history book? Or how about some Michael Moore?

**miker** · May 20th, 2004, 03:30 AM

people forget that SPR is an american film made for an american audience. american culture is just so dominant that we forget to make british films.

why is there no americans in "Soldier of Orange" ?!

in fact, if you take the time with world cinema, there's a whole treasure trove of american-less cinema.

**eidde** · May 20th, 2004, 07:48 AM

> How ridiculous of me to assume that films based
> around very important historical events should
> bother to allign with what reality! I forgot to
> turn off my brain again when I watched you see!
> What a silly old blighter! Perhaps I'll even
> watch Pearl Harbour again... jolly- o!

?
um..yeah, ok.
Dont read one book, read a few.

Journalism is subjective - in fact everything is subjective, a film makers opinion is subjective.

A film like SPR costs too much to make to risk it lacking basic entertainment requirements (which might be to have Good Ole American Boys kicking ass and saving the world) - Its an American film - so why not?

I guess all it can do is open your eyes wider to the subject (which is what this thread is about) and if you care enough to find out more - which may involve reading a book (or two)

**miker** · May 20th, 2004, 09:08 AM

the truth about the second world war is in the many interviews with veterans, from all sides.

i recommend "Hell in the Pacific" for particularly harrowing viewing.
Region2 DVD from play.com

**thelaughingduck2001** · May 20th, 2004, 05:16 PM

If you're looking for Spielberg's name AND superior war, look no further than Band Of Brothers.

Wuality acting, action, AND SIMON PEGG!

**Kev Owens** · May 20th, 2004, 09:50 PM

Originally posted by eidde: Journalism is subjective - in fact everything is subjective...

I'm afraid not, a fact isn't subjective. Only the way it is projected can be subjective.

Here's a fact- America did not fight WW2 single handed.

My point was that Spielberg was indeed subjective and didn't reflect the above fact in SPR- I'm not trying to state that all films should be factual and 'teach' us about the world, my point was Spielberg spoiled the film for me by not reflecting this whatsoever.

So in essence your argument against what I said about SPR boils down to:

Originally posted by eidde: Its an American film - so why not?

I repeat my original sentiment:

Originally posted by Kev O.: Unfortunately for that it is another addition of American film-making seeming extremely ignorant.

Of course some people don't mind, fair do's, that's up to you, but this is MY opinion.

[ May 20, 2004 06:51 PM: Message edited by: Kev O. ]