Translating War: The Combat Film Genre and Saving Private Ryan | Perspectives on History | AHA
The bottom line of the positive critical evaluations is this: <em>Saving Private Ryan</em> is a new and different World War II combat film because it finally refutes the dishonesty of previous Hollywood movies of the genre.
WWII veterans who have stated that <em>Saving Private Ryan</em> is the most realistic presentation of combat they've seen.
Spielberg's mastery of sound, editing, camera movement, visual storytelling, narrative flow, performance, and color combine to assault a viewer, to place each and every member of the audience directly into the combat experience.
This opening sequence is a nightmare.
<em>Bataan</em> (1943), directed by Tay Garnett and written by Robert D. Andrews.
<em>Bataan</em>, of course, was shot entirely inside a studio on sets, using matte shots, rear projections, and artificial fog machines. What <em>is</em> realistic (and gritty) about it is the genuine anger it contains. Its propagandistic passion was fueled by the recent fall of Bataan and America's overall failure in the early days of the Pacific war.
This <em>Bataan</em> beheading is one of the most graphic of combat deaths of the pre-sixties period, and certainly one of the most brutal of the era itself. Yet by today's standards, it is a bloodless kill.
Does this mean "unrealistic"? Physically, yes. Psychologically and emotionally, perhaps not.
Filmmakers of the 1940s knew how to create powerful effects for the audiences of their time.
People already knew about the horrors of war in 1943, they didn't need to see spurting blood
<em>Guadalcanal Diary</em> (1943
the United States spent more than $50 million annually on documentary movies.
My research for <em>The World War II Combat Film</em> indicated that the traditional story format contains three basic elements: hero, group, and objective