that Saving Private Ryan, a powerful but flawed movie, will be revered as a classic decades hence." Many reviewers focused on the film's two major combat sequences, particularly the opening on Omaha Beach. Focus was on the "horrifying," "visceral," "brutal," "shocking," and "fierce" violence present in the opening battle, described by Owen Gleiberman and Schickel as one of the most revolutionary film sequences ever made. Ebert and Schickel compared it with the energy and dread of similar scenes in the Vietnam war film, Platoon (1986), but with a grander scope depicting masses of men killing each other from afar, drawing the "horror" out of a lengthy, sustained sequence, without the audience being allowed to become desensitized. Some reviewers believed that the scene was so impactful and thought-provoking that it overshadowed the rest of the film. Although there was some criticism toward the realistic violence and gore, Turan believed it was done purposely and dispassionately, conveying the chaos and despair experienced by the soldiers, and not done for the sake of entertainment. Spielberg rejected this criticism, affirming he wanted the audience to understand what real combat was like and what the soldiers experienced, not observe it from afar as spectators. Some reviewers believed the concluding battle in Ramelle was more violent than Omaha Beach, particularly the slow death of Mellish as he is stabbed through the chest. Andrew Sarris criticized the "pornography of violence and cruelty" depicted in severed limbs and rivers of blood. Some reviewers found that, outside of the combat, the script was effective but uninspired and derivative of war films by other directors, such as Oliver Stone, Stanley Kubrick, and Francis Ford Coppola. Others criticized "manipulative" over sentimentality, particularly in the modern day framing device featuring the elderly Ryan. Even so, Salon.com described it as "enormously moving, it serves as a kind of redemption, a necessary if eternally fragile answer to the hell he witnessed." Hanks's performance was generally praised, with some reviewers calling it the best of his career to date. Many reviewers agreed that his everyman persona allowed him to portray Miller with a gentle weariness, empathy, and vulnerability beneath a surface of strength and decency, but also cynicism toward the war. Ebert and Schickel wrote that he offered a quiet reserve "hinting at unspoken competencies" that convince his men and the audience to follow along with him. Turan believed that Hanks's "indelible" performance represented how