‘Ryan’: More (or Less) Than Reality

That DreamWorks’ publicity department would want to elevate “Saving Private Ryan” to cult status goes without saying. That the L.A. Times would collaborate with them is dismaying and disappointing (“Contending With ‘Private Ryan’s’ Legacy,” by Robert W. Welkos, Aug. 5).

Much is being made of the film’s “grit and reality,” when in fact we’ve seen all the spurting blood, oozing guts, missing limbs and twisted bodies countless times already. They’re a staple of action-adventure films and have been ever since Sam Peckinpah first made a fetish of gore.

Everything else in the film is cliched and conventional, owing more to all those old ‘40s and ‘50s war films than to real life. Even the moral and philosophical question at the center of the film--is it worth it to risk the lives of several men to save one?--is totally false. Nobody’s life is put at risk by the effort to save Ryan. These men would have been in front-line combat facing death anyway.

JOHN CROWTHER, Los Angeles

*

“Saving Private Ryan” is an outstanding movie, but as your article pointed out, there are some inconsistencies (“Taking On Private Ryan,” by Jennifer Napier-Pearce, July 29). I would like to add one more regarding the time frame in which all of the movie’s action takes place relative to the way I recall things.

On June 6, 1944, my age was in single digits and I lived safely on the west side of the Atlantic. However, I do have vivid memories of the conflict. The most vivid was our family being informed that an uncle was killed in action on Nov. 26, 1944, in Europe. The notice was received almost three weeks after his death. The movie would have you believe that the U.S. military found out about the death of Pvt. Ryan’s brothers, informed his family and sent Capt. Miller (Tom Hanks) off on a several-day hunt for Ryan all within a one-week time frame.

STEVE MAGER, Hermosa Beach