Saving Private Ryan returning to cinemas.

Arghus

lawred2 wrote: »

Not at all. Personally I find it odd to commemorate something that had nothing to do with us.

Others don't. Grand. As someone else said it's a free country.

I've probably seen that movie four or five times myself but just wouldn't go to see it for those purposes. That's all.

The dramatised events of D-Day make up a good chunk of the entire first act of the movie, surely it makes a certain degree of sense to re-release it on that anniversary date rather than any other random date on the calender?

I wouldn't get too caught up on the "commemorative" side of things. Yeah, it's a nod to the history depicted on screen and featured prominently in the film, but at the end of the day it's just a film re-release really.

valoren

Nobelium wrote: »

Filmed on Irish beaches, with Irish Defence Forces reenacting one of the most realistic war film scenes ever. The mind boggles as to why some Irish people would question why it should be re shown in an Irish cinema.

In the summer of 1997 I think it was RTE who dedicated an episode of Nationwide detailing the production at Curracloe. The whole premise was regarding the attractiveness of Ireland as a tax-breaking filming location and given the success of Braveheart this was now vindicated as more big names with Spielberg and Hanks were now here filming. The program mainly involved interviewing the hired defence force extras, who were simultaneously delighted with the generous daily rate but bored at all the waiting around. There were then some scenes of the extras "performing" i.e. An assistant director would shout "Action", the lads would jump up and run, some would comically fall over having gotten shot and the squibs in the sand would go off to simulate the bullet hits. The whole thing looked to be a laugh and a joke for the lads.

I just had a feeling that the whole thing looked ridiculous and distinctly 'Hollywood' i.e. a slick production in town to make a glamorous stars n' stripes old-school depiction of the D-Day landing with people falling over dramatically. That was my expectation going in to watch it but when the opening scene segues from the graveyard in France to the low shot of the waves on the beach and then jump cuts to the Higgins boats bearing down on the beach my misgivings from the Nationwide show were all forgotten about. A grim, nauseating, bloody, adrenaline pumping, traumatising and ear shattering scene. Just like it must have been on the day. After two disappointments from Spielberg (with Lost World/Amistad) he reminded us what a genius he is in that opening sequence and what a brilliant job the extras actually did.

TheIrishGrover

I wasn't gone on the film. I "enjoyed" it (If that's the word you should use) initially but after about a day or so I re-evaluated my opinion (Again, just MY opinion). Watching it again shortly afterwards reinforced my opinion.

The first 20 mins or so showed the raw brutality of war: Guys who had trained for months and been equipped and shipped all the way over were instantly killed without having taken a step off the landing craft. This was no 60's/70's war movie with the group on a mission goin' Nazi huntin'. This was hard to watch slaughter.


But then the rest of the film is exactly that: Men On A Mission type thing with very thinly drawn characters in general. I just thought the rest of the movie went against the grain of the brutal and honest start.

silverharp

The Longest Day is a better movie from an historical perspective, Saving Private Ryan is basically a generic war flick for the most part

Nobelium

lawred2 wrote: »

As an allied forces D-Day commemoration?

Irish cinema's can put it on whatever day they like, and Irish film goers can enjoy it whatever day they like without your permission.

Filmed on Irish beaches, using the legitimate Irish Defence Forces, so you can politely shove any provo/ISIS/Saoradh loving politics up your hole.

lawred2

Charming

Arghus

Nobelium wrote: »

Irish cinema's can put it on whatever day they like, and Irish film goers can enjoy it whatever day they like without your permission.

Filmed on Irish beaches, using the legitimate Irish Defence Forces, so you can politely shove any provo/ISIS/Saoradh loving politics up your hole.

Hey, at least he put the smiley face at the end.

Saved it from sounding like an unhinged rant.

Theboinkmaster

Loved the first half hour but the rest of the film is MEH

Band of brothers far superior

Nobelium

Arghus wrote: »

Hey, at least he put the smiley face at the end.

Saved it from sounding like an unhinged rant.

I'm not the one that has some weird provo/saoradh type issue with people going to see saving private ryan

TerrorFirmer

Nobelium wrote: »

I'm not the one that has some weird provo/saoradh type issue with people going to see saving private ryan

Bit much. The reason the film is being screened here again is that SVP is arguably the best war movie ever made, is widely recognised as same, people would likely appreciate being able to see it on the big screen for either the first time, or again, and it's the D-Day anniversary.

No point looking too deeply into it or finding things that aren't there.

It's nothing to do with the fact it was shot here or that it had Irish extras.

Nobelium

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

Bit much. The reason the film is being screened here again is that SVP is arguably the best war movie ever made, is widely recognised as same, people would likely appreciate being able to see it on the big screenf or either the first time, or again, and it's the D-Day anniversary.

No point looking to deeply into it or finding things that aren't there.

It's nothing to do with the fact it was shot here or that it had Irish extras.

Maybe then you should correctly address your concern to posters who took issue with the fact it was being shown and when.

Heckler

While I can understand some criticisms of the movie as a whole the opening sequence is remarkable. As the for the whiter than snow GI's, you have the "Let them burn" pillbox scene, a couple of Germans being shot after surrendering, Upham shooting the German they let go earlier.

I've always had an interest in WW2 and have visited the Normandy beaches a couple of times. Was there by chance to see the unveiling of the Dick Winters statue/memorial. Normandy is buzzing that time in June for a week or so. Be driving down the road next to a convoy of WW2 jeeps and trucks with everyone dressed up in all the gear. Flybys and parachute drops etc especially around St. Mere Eglise culminating with an unbelievable fireworks display around the church in the centre depicting that night in June.

But yeah. Band of Brothers was a whole different league and something that I watch at least once a year.

To quote Stephen Ambrose, "The most important day of the 20th century. Everything before that, led up to D-Day. Everything since has been a consequence of D-Day".

I think even an Irish person can understand how if D-Day went badly things might not be the same here on our little Island.

LuckyLloyd

This is it wrote: »

It's definitely on in the Vue Dublin but there were only a few seats left when I checked, I think it's 6.45 showing

See if this works

https://www.myvue.com/cinema/dublin/film/saving-private-ryan-dday-75th-anniversary/times

Booked two seats there, thanks a million for that. Very excited to see this in the cinema again.

Manic Moran

I agree that SPR is overrated as a war movie, it is fairly clicheed. That does not mean, however, that the opening sequence isn’t some of the best war sequence put to celluloid. It was accurate enough that WW2 vets had bad reactions to it. Which probably should make it mandatory viewing for everyone.

Fury is a weird one. As a war movie, it’s fair. As a tanker movie, it’s absolutely spot on. Ayer flew me to Pinewood/Longcross to have a chat before filming started, it’s interesting to compare the difference between what he intended, and what audiences perceived he intent to be. I had a friend who was a cop, he said that every one of his colleagues loved “end of watch” because Ayer “got it”. Ayer said it was his homage to cops. Similarly, Fury is Ayer’s homage to tankers. I don’t know a single tanker who doesn’t like it, and he got some of the mentality absolutely right. (The Hurt Locker is another one like that, making militarily inaccurate movie scenes, but getting the mental aspect right). The platoon on line supporting the infantry with every gun blazing is exactly why we became tankers. Our tank is our home, and another crewman, not just a vehicle. Almost every thing in Fury both in the movie and deleted from the original script is based on a real-world event, from the tank name to the crewman wearing a top hat. Obviously not everything would have happened to one crew, (Audie Murphy’s beating off a German unit from a disabled vehicle would be enough for one guy, normally) but the film is limited to audience attention over two hours. Similarly, technical inaccuracies were consciously retained for ease of viewing. It wasn’t as if he were unaware that Fury couldn’t fire white phosphorous rounds, I told him as much. But it was retained anyway because US tankers (75mm and 105mm tanks) did use white phosphorous on the enemy, and it was an experience he wanted to put in the movie. A little looseness with reality was a deliberate decision to aid the intent of the movie. If a realistic change could be made without affecting the movie, it was made. If it would, then it wasn’t. I left Pinewood with a new perspective on filmmaking i did not have beforehand.

This is it

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Booked two seats there, thanks a million for that. Very excited to see this in the cinema again.

I had only seen it on DVD/TV, also very excited!

beauf

A lot of war movies are very inaccurate but they are trying to evoke the emotional and cultural context of the time and the experience. While at the same time compromised in having to appeal to a broad audience. Often US bias audience.

kowloon

LastLagoon wrote: »

Thin Red Line which came out around the same time was way better
Yeah the d day landing was done well but most of the rest was muck

Apparently, there's a five hour cut of that sitting somewhere.

beauf

kowloon wrote: »

...
Apparently, there's a five hour cut of that sitting somewhere.

Probably a good thing. It's a little unfocused in parts.

branie2

I saw it on the big screen when it first came out, and I thought it was brilliant.

Dades

Big fan of The Thin Red Line, and Fury in fact.

Best war movie for me is Where Eagles Dare (though clearly not the most 'realistic'). Instead the Alistair MacLean source material made for a tense movie with multiple twists.

DrumSteve

Manic Moran wrote: »

I agree that SPR is overrated as a war movie, it is fairly clicheed. That does not mean, however, that the opening sequence isn’t some of the best war sequence put to celluloid. It was accurate enough that WW2 vets had bad reactions to it. Which probably should make it mandatory viewing for everyone.

Fury is a weird one. As a war movie, it’s fair. As a tanker movie, it’s absolutely spot on. Ayer flew me to Pinewood/Longcross to have a chat before filming started, it’s interesting to compare the difference between what he intended, and what audiences perceived he intent to be. I had a friend who was a cop, he said that every one of his colleagues loved “end of watch” because Ayer “got it”. Ayer said it was his homage to cops. Similarly, Fury is Ayer’s homage to tankers. I don’t know a single tanker who doesn’t like it, and he got some of the mentality absolutely right. (The Hurt Locker is another one like that, making militarily inaccurate movie scenes, but getting the mental aspect right). The platoon on line supporting the infantry with every gun blazing is exactly why we became tankers. Our tank is our home, and another crewman, not just a vehicle. Almost every thing in Fury both in the movie and deleted from the original script is based on a real-world event, from the tank name to the crewman wearing a top hat. Obviously not everything would have happened to one crew, (Audie Murphy’s beating off a German unit from a disabled vehicle would be enough for one guy, normally) but the film is limited to audience attention over two hours. Similarly, technical inaccuracies were consciously retained for ease of viewing. It wasn’t as if he were unaware that Fury couldn’t fire white phosphorous rounds, I told him as much. But it was retained anyway because US tankers (75mm and 105mm tanks) did use white phosphorous on the enemy, and it was an experience he wanted to put in the movie. A little looseness with reality was a deliberate decision to aid the intent of the movie. If a realistic change could be made without affecting the movie, it was made. If it would, then it wasn’t. I left Pinewood with a new perspective on filmmaking i did not have beforehand.

I really did not expect Fury and End Of Watch to be as good as they were; Fury was especially brutal (esp the bit when the lad on fire shoots himself).

p to the e

Manic Moran wrote: »

I agree that SPR is overrated as a war movie, it is fairly clicheed. That does not mean, however, that the opening sequence isn’t some of the best war sequence put to celluloid. It was accurate enough that WW2 vets had bad reactions to it. Which probably should make it mandatory viewing for everyone.

Fury is a weird one. As a war movie, it’s fair. As a tanker movie, it’s absolutely spot on. Ayer flew me to Pinewood/Longcross to have a chat before filming started, it’s interesting to compare the difference between what he intended, and what audiences perceived he intent to be. I had a friend who was a cop, he said that every one of his colleagues loved “end of watch” because Ayer “got it”. Ayer said it was his homage to cops. Similarly, Fury is Ayer’s homage to tankers. I don’t know a single tanker who doesn’t like it, and he got some of the mentality absolutely right. (The Hurt Locker is another one like that, making militarily inaccurate movie scenes, but getting the mental aspect right). The platoon on line supporting the infantry with every gun blazing is exactly why we became tankers. Our tank is our home, and another crewman, not just a vehicle. Almost every thing in Fury both in the movie and deleted from the original script is based on a real-world event, from the tank name to the crewman wearing a top hat. Obviously not everything would have happened to one crew, (Audie Murphy’s beating off a German unit from a disabled vehicle would be enough for one guy, normally) but the film is limited to audience attention over two hours. Similarly, technical inaccuracies were consciously retained for ease of viewing. It wasn’t as if he were unaware that Fury couldn’t fire white phosphorous rounds, I told him as much. But it was retained anyway because US tankers (75mm and 105mm tanks) did use white phosphorous on the enemy, and it was an experience he wanted to put in the movie. A little looseness with reality was a deliberate decision to aid the intent of the movie. If a realistic change could be made without affecting the movie, it was made. If it would, then it wasn’t. I left Pinewood with a new perspective on filmmaking i did not have beforehand.

Good comment.

Can I ask what you feel is cliched in Saving Private Ryan? Not being an ass, just curious. I think there are movies that make use of a lot of what was first seen in SPR so may feel cliched by this point.

TerrorFirmer

Fury was a pretty exceptional movie until the last 20 odd minutes when it fell off a cliff edge. It's like two different productions pasted together in a ham fisted manner. I was so disappointed in that movie, far more so than most other run-of-the-mill forgettable war films due to the squandered promise. When I think of good war movies, Fury doesn't even come to mind unless someone else mentions it.

Sad Professor

I think SPR is a fine film once you accept that it's a homage to WW2 propaganda movies. It was an very influential film that totally redefined the visual aesthetic of Hollywood war films and what audiences considered "realistic" depictions of combat. My only problem with it is that it was sold/praised at the time as an anti-war film and the most historically accurate depiction of WW2 - when it's neither.

Church on Tuesday

lawred2 wrote: »

Can't for the life of me see why Irish cinemas should be showing this for an anniversary of D-Day.

Celebrate it as fantastic piece of cinema and an an excellent movie fine but D-Day anniversary celebrations are not really something I think we should be getting involved in.

A lot of the opening scenes were filmed in Wexford at Curracloe Beach.

Blacksod Lighthouse in Mayo provided weather reports for the Allied forces for D Day.

Acosta

Heckler wrote: »

But yeah. Band of Brothers was a whole different league and something that I watch at least once a year.

And I thought I was bad! I need to give that boxset a rest for a while.

I do feel that the best thing about SPR is that it paved the way for Band Of Brothers. Good film, but I've only watched it a couple of times.

Band Of Brothers would be my favourite allied focused WW2 series/movie. Downfall being my favourite from the German perspective.

goldenhoarde

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

A lot of the opening scenes were filmed in Wexford at Curracloe Beach.

Blacksod Lighthouse in Mayo provided weather reports for the Allied forces for D Day.

Was lucky to make the cut and spent 6/7 weeks down there on the allied side!!

50 to a platoon (250 down for the 6 weeks and another 750 down for one week)

We had to do a swim test to get selected for the full duration - a couple of lengths of a pool fully clothed with shoes

First ten in a platoon got real guns and we also got blanks throughout the filming the rest got plastic/foam guns

It was a blast and we got paid 55 a day seven days a week but it was hard work (4:30am start till 7/8 some days) apart from the days the wind blew the wrong way meaning no filming just us eating ice-cream on the beach

Church on Tuesday

goldenhoarde wrote: »

Was lucky to make the cut and spent 6/7 weeks down there on the allied side!!

50 to a platoon (250 down for the 6 weeks and another 750 down for one week)

We had to do a swim test to get selected for the full duration - a couple of lengths of a pool fully clothed with shoes

First ten in a platoon got real guns and we also got blanks throughout the filming the rest got plastic/foam guns

It was a blast and we got paid 55 a day seven days a week but it was hard work (4:30am start till 7/8 some days) apart from the days the wind blew the wrong way meaning no filming just us eating ice-cream on the beach

Heh, sounds like it was good craic!

A relative of mine worked on the set production and I got a prop from the film, an ammo container. Must have a look for it.

Tabnabs

Manic Moran wrote: »

I agree that SPR is overrated as a war movie, it is fairly clicheed. That does not mean, however, that the opening sequence isn’t some of the best war sequence put to celluloid. It was accurate enough that WW2 vets had bad reactions to it. Which probably should make it mandatory viewing for everyone.

A family friend from Scotland, who is now deceased, was part of the British forces to land on Sword beach. He confirmed that it was unnervingly accurate and brought back a flood of emotions to him and was difficult to relive, but no question of leaving.

goldenhoarde

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

Heh, sounds like it was good craic!

A relative of mine worked on the set production and I got a prop from the film, an ammo container. Must have a look for it.

Some of the guys walked away with full sets of uniforms. One lad had his van parked across the road empty when he arrived but full to the brim on the way home.

Bits of everything, if it wasn't nailed down he had it LOL

Church on Tuesday

Tabnabs wrote: »

A family friend from Scotland, who is now deceased, was part of the British forces to land on Sword beach. He confirmed that it was unnervingly accurate and brought back a flood of emotions to him and was difficult to relive, but no question of leaving.

We owe everything to these people.

Nobelium

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

We owe everything to these people.

can you imagine trying to get the SJW / keyboard warriors to do any of it now

Church on Tuesday

Nobelium wrote: »

can you imagine trying to get the SJW / keyboard warriors to do any of it now

Lol, no chance, we live in very much a snowflake world now.

salmocab

Nobelium wrote: »

can you imagine trying to get the SJW / keyboard warriors to do any of it now

I imagine before ww2 people thought the youth wouldn’t be able to do what they had done in the First World War.

pixelburp

Some 'old men yells at clouds' going on here, about that dang youth who are too soft to fight? I daresay a lot of WW1 veterans were saying the exact same of those who had grown up in the peaceful 20 years between wars. Or those young baby-boomers who grew up 'soft' in the 50s, only to be shipped off to die in Vietnam.

War is sh*t, and I wouldn't wish it on anyone as some kind of teaching mechanic. If the youth behind us are becoming more empathic and less prone to anger, intolerance, whatever - that should be celebrated and nurtured.

As Manic Moran says, people should watch that beach scene from Saving Private Ryan as a salutary lesson about the horrors, inhumanity and indignity of war.

beauf

pixelburp wrote: »

...... If the youth behind us are becoming more empathic and less prone to anger, intolerance, whatever - that should be celebrated and nurtured.
...

There wars almost constantly being fought in the world. Human nature is flawed enough that you will always have power crazed people and violent people that you have to defend against.

Even in our tiny island some people are always trying to make war, Rob or steal.

pixelburp

Undoubtedly, but doesn't mean you stop trying, or stop encouraging people to be something better than those who came before. 'Human nature' is a work in progress, not an immovable concept. I don't buy into the "it was bad for me, why should you have it better?" mentality.

beauf

pixelburp wrote: »

U...I don't buy into the "it was bad for me, why should you have it better?" mentality.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Of all the reasons that wars happen that wouldn't be in my top 10.

Lots of oppressed people and people in terrible conditions. Lots of rising and coups, and border wars all over the place.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_armed_conflicts

I'm not sure you would call those people a snowflake generation.

We are not immune to conflict on this Island either.

pixelburp

beauf wrote: »

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Of all the reasons that wars happen that wouldn't be in my top 10.

That was a bit tangental on my part, but I wasn't saying that was a cause of wars, more just speculating on the "snowflake generation" begrudgery from earlier comments.

beauf

I think if the situation required it there would be no problem. People adjust to what the situation demands.

Dades

beauf wrote: »

Even in our tiny island some people are always trying to make war, Rob or steal.

goldenhoarde wrote: »

Some of the guys walked away with full sets of uniforms. One lad had his van parked across the road empty when he arrived but full to the brim on the way home.

Bits of everything, if it wasn't nailed down he had it LOL

Indeed.

FireOne

p to the e wrote: »

Good comment.

Can I ask what you feel is cliched in Saving Private Ryan? Not being an ass, just curious. I think there are movies that make use of a lot of what was first seen in SPR so may feel cliched by this point.

SPR has a stunning opening which undoes the long history of Hollywood war movies sanitizing war in many respects, stripping away the clichés and making you feel like you are watching a whole new cinematic take on war.
But then the clichés are laid on with a trowel towards the end, the whole 'lets all hold them off this bridge together like Spartans' idea, with their home-made sticky bombbs and all. And Tom Hank's death scene with a few wise words before he slips away, is quite a contrast to the medic's death in the first half. Real Hollywood stuff.

branie2

I have the film on Blu-ray as well

vriesmays

Have you got Beach red?

branie2

No

Church on Tuesday

Dades wrote: »

Indeed.

TBF the props are only going to be chucked in the skip anyways.

TinCool

This is it

Very excited

LuckyLloyd

That was immense. The big screen truly does justice to a truly special piece of cinema.

This is it

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

That was immense. The big screen truly does justice to a truly special piece of cinema.

Fantastic stuff, really enjoyed it.