I read four or five pages of reviews for this film on the IMDb boards, and most of them fall into one of two camps - those who felt it was the best, or at least one of the best war movies ever made - and the Spielberg bashers who decry the very fact that America and it's Allies had even the slightest audacity to win the War. Granted, the concept of good Americans versus evil Nazis is a bit too simplistic when it comes to cinematic treatments. Those viewers who want to read so much of that into the picture are missing one of Spielberg's main goals - 'How do you find decency in the hell of warfare'? That question reverberates around the central plot, the mission to rescue a sole surviving brother who's three siblings have all perished in the same war already. For the eight members of the rescue team, the quandary is presented in terms of moral prerogatives - why potentially sacrifice so many soldiers at the expense of just one, who may already be dead anyway?

Moral dilemmas abound in the story. Ed Burns's Private Reiben challenges Captain Miller's (Tom Hanks) decision to release a German soldier on his own recognizance to turn himself over to an American patrol. Private Caparzo's compassion for the young French girl in the bombed out town is seen by the Captain as a life or death threat to his unit, and must decide for the greater good of his men. Even when Miller's Rangers finally achieve their objective and find Private Ryan (Matt Damon),the situation does not play out in straightforward fashion. Ryan resolutely refuses to be 'rescued', instead seeing that alternative as abandoning his own men. By what right should he be so singularly absolved of his duty to serve and protect his country? My summary line above captures the essence of Miller's response and observation, knowing that his duty and his humanity are in obvious conflict.

This conundrum creates another dynamic in the story, reverting back to the character of Private Reiben. When Ryan was anonymous, it was easy enough to dismiss him as some nameless, faceless soldier who didn't warrant any special kind of treatment. Up close and personal however, Ryan proves his value as a soldier in battle, side by side with Reiben in the German tank ambush at Rammel. These perspectives are not typical in your average war movie, and make the film far more interesting than if it had taken a more documentary like approach, as in the opening half hour of the film with the landing on Omaha Beach.

Perhaps the most complex character, and the one I had the hardest time with was Corporal Upham (Jeremy Davies). By virtually all of his responses to battle conditions and enemy encounters, he was an outright coward. His singular moment of bravery was enacted with some measure of revenge against Steamboat Willie, the German soldier who's life was spared earlier in the picture. Willie provided Upham with a reason to overcome his distaste for war, by abrogating an implied trust they shared over a cigarette. Upham had his reason and motivation to kill Willie, while allowing the remaining Germans to escape. For Upham, the war had to become personal for him to take action, and that's no way to survive in conflict.

So for me, "Saving Private Ryan" isn't just a war film, and if you view it through that lens, the film loses much of it's impact, even with the brutality of Omaha Beach and the tank battle at the bridge. To be sure, the picture succeeds at capturing the intense horror of war, but it's power as a film goes deeper when it identifies with it's characters and examines their relationships with each other as soldiers and men. How do you find decency in the hell of warfare? One man at a time.

This is definitely one of the more powerful war films out there, if not the most powerful. I will admit, when I first saw it at school, I found the first half-hour extremely upsetting to watch.

The acting is outstanding. Especially from Tom Hanks and Matt Damon, and the music alongside Schindler's List is John William's most haunting score I've heard.

It does drag in the middle and the dialogue doesn't always flow as well as it should, but what we have is a historically accurate, extremely well made and directed and unashamedly brutal film. I mean, in the stabbing scene, towards the end, my English teacher had to leave the room. It was like watching Frankenstein's monster tearing out Elizabeth's heart.

8.5/10 for a truly emotional and appropriately sombre war-film, that is a little slow at times. But it deserves to be in the top 250, really it is that good! Bethany Cox

I've long been a fan of war films but for some reason it took me eight years to finally get around to watch this, the often undisputed classic war film of all time. Why? Not sure really – I'm not the world's biggest fan of Steven Spielberg, although I'll admit that he's made some good films in his time. Still, it was with some excitement that I sat down to finally watch this lengthy epic of a film, in the best format possible – widescreen DVD, 52" television, and surround sound system. Unsurprisingly, I was blown away by the production.

At the heart, the film recalls dozens of other war films from THE DIRTY DOZEN to THE LONGEST DAY. A squad of men are sent on a suicidal mission, facing almost certain depth. Where the movie excels, however, is in the extra depth and layers that Spielberg adds. The characterisation is strong, the dialogue harsh and heartfelt. Technically, the film is perfect. The colours are faded and washed out and the hand-held camera-work is ten times better than that seen in the LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy. Sound effects are excellent, the best I've heard, especially the incredibly suspenseful sound of tanks approaching at the film's climax. All these technicalities combine to make the battle scenes some of the most desperately realistic I've seen. The opening twenty minutes on Omaha Beach, which show the infamous D-Day landings, are everything you've heard: exhilarating, utterly depressing, disturbing, exciting, and gruesome. This is certainly the goriest war film out there and it's all portrayed in a matter-of-fact way; blink and you really will miss it. People explode, lose limbs, and bleed copiously from wounds; only strong stomachs need apply.

The acting is uniformly great, as you'd expect from the calibre of cast on view. Tom Hanks has never been better as the shellshocked hero, with unforgettable mannerisms – the shaking hand still haunts me. Tom Sizemore arguably steals the show as the gruff sergeant, and his larger-than-life persona is well suited to a role than the one he plays here. Edward Burns and Adam Goldberg put in solid performances but it's Jeremy Davies who the film focuses on throughout – a rookie, green-faced communications officer thrown straight into the hell of warfare. The viewer understandably sees the film through Davies' eyes and the subsequent journey is everything you would imagine it to be. Additionally, the film boasts great turns from actors in lesser roles – especially Barry Pepper as the sniper and Vin Diesel at his best. Lots of familiar faces pad out other roles, some in cameos: Dennis Farina, Ted Danson, Matt Damon, Giovanni Ribisi, Paul Giamatti, the list goes on.

Despite the near-three hour running time, the film never slows up or stops for a minute. Every second is crucial and beautifully crafted. Things culminate in a set-piece climax, a fierce ambush in a bombed-out French town. Our heroes attempt to destroy a brigade of Nazi troops and their vehicles and heavy guns. It's sprawling, explosive, upsetting and, by the last frame of the film, incredibly moving. So, in retrospect, SAVING PRIVATE RYAN is everything everybody says it is. Spielberg's best film by far and one of the best war films of all time.