MovieChat Forums > Saving Private Ryan (1998) Discussion > The mission to save Ryan = the message t...

The mission to save Ryan = the message that war is stupid

posted 4 years ago by redban (6168)
14 replies | jump to latest

No doubt — the actions by the soldiers (like Tom Hanks and Tom Sizemore) were heroic and commendable.

However - we cannot lose sight of one detail: the mission to retrieve Ryan was downright wasteful and idiotic. They might have saved Ryan, but 4 or 5 of them die, including Hanks (who was a captain). Ryan himself didn’t even want to go back when they found him; had Ryan known about the mission, he would’ve told them not to come.

The problem is that the decision to bring Ryan home was made by some big-shot dude in a comfortable office, who read Lincoln’s letter and felt romantic about the situation. The guy was too far from the war to adequately make the decision. The decision should’ve been made by the guys on the ground, who were seeing the blood and guts. And the guys on the ground knew better than to send a team to find Ryan.

Through the sheer idiocy of the mission to Save Private Ryan, the movie effectively conveys the message that war is stupid

[–] Ranb (9595) 3 years ago

Yes, I don't think anyone is going to disagree with you at all. I figured everyone understood this in the first place. :)

[–] redban (6168) 3 years ago

Disagree. The movie renders the heroism of the main characters, the protagonists; and they do save Ryan at the end. Therefore, many might interpret the movie’s message as a glorification of American soldiers in World War 2. In actuality, the message is strictly anti-war

[–] TheDemon (589) 3 years ago

Well, it is an anti war movie, so it's worked.

[–] liscarkat (18373) 3 years ago

Stupid message, then. The Nazis and the Japanese empire were trying to take over their regions of the world, both committing horrible atrocities on tens of millions of people. They had to be stopped. War against them was necessary.

[–] degray9 (1126) 3 years ago

Since when was that ever a credible reason for waging war. So we stopped the Nazis and the Japanese just so that the Soviets and Chinese could go on to wage countless atrocities anyway against even more people. It wouldn’t have mattered anyway because the US would have obliterated Japan and Germany with atomic bombs even if they had conquered all of Europe and Asia.

[–] NGMI (1184) 3 years ago

They were fighting communism from taking over and destroying their regions of the world and when they failed, THAT'S EXACTLY what happened with even worse atrocities and more killed! Had to be stopped, MY ASS!

If the Germans and Japanese ruled the world (or just Europe and Asia), it would have turned out amazing for everyone, including the zionists who used the war to get forever protected status and a homeland that is literally against the teachings of their religion.

[–] NGMI (1184) 3 years ago

In your entire post, you left out one important detail. You mentioned the decision of the ground troops, Ryan's thoughts on it, and the big shot in his office, but you completely ignore the person's whose opinion matters MOST. The Ryan mother, which supersedes all their opinions. She had 3 of her sons killed and if anyone would ask her, you bet your sweet ass she wants Ryan pulled and brought home immediately, and the people did not want to be responsible for adding another folded flag to her mantle. Her family paid more than their fair share to the war and they owed it to her to bring her last and only son back. People die in war, and the two guys who died would probably have died if the mission was different and somewhere else (even though it was Miller's fault Wade died). The rest who died, died to save a bridge, not Ryan.

[–] PaladinNJ (21510) 3 years ago

The real life story didn't quite go this way. They ordered Ryan out and some troops went in and brought him out. Not quite a movie worthy story is it? Also ironically one of the brothers actually turned up alive. He had been taken prisoner and was accidentally listed as K.I.A.

[–] McQualude (4231) 3 years ago

Why is war stupid? What would have been your solution that would have avoided a "stupid" world war?

[–] Interlepos (1807) 3 years ago

Ryan -- I don't know anything about Ryan. I don't care. Man means nothin' to me. It's just a name. But if -- you know -- if going to Rumelle and finding him so he can go home, if that earns me the right to get back to my wife -- well, then, then that's my mission.

[–] NGMI (1184) 3 years ago

I dont know Captain, seems like Ryan doesnt have to earn the right, as hard as we do. What up with dat?

[–] Interlepos (1807) 3 years ago

He better be worth it. He better go home and cure a disease, or invent a longer-lasting light bulb.

[–] NGMI (1184) 3 years ago

He didnt. He just had lots of sex and raised a family of trads and chads.

[–] GoMangoMan (40) 2 years ago

IMO Ryan is us the viewer (not a genius level observation or anything, it's quite on the nose). It's not saying that war is stupid, it's trying to make sure you the viewer understand what was given to you and what the price for it was. "Earn this".

From the point of view of the soldiers who died, do you think they consider you (us) personally worth having given their life saving? Heck no.