Saving super screenplays

What is interesting about "Saving Private Ryan," though, is not its explosion onto the big screen, not its big bad cast, with its big bad director, because these all speak for themselves.

What shocks me, is its amazing similarity to "Titanic." Both have great special effects, amazing cinematography and feature fantastic direction. The score is decent, and the acting works in its own special way.

And both, surprisingly, suffer from a severe lack of plot.

Now, wait a minute. Before you start shooting out a nasty comment like a screaming "what" and an unhappy "You don't have any clue what you are taking about," please, allow me to explain.

Kristin Long Daily Arts Editor

"Titanic" was a landmark film, I question that not at all. But what is really irksome is that this masterpiece, in all its creative ingenuity and obsessive attention to detail, thought that it could simply sail by us without maintaining a new and inventive story. It was the pioneering force in inventing what I will call the "Titanic" illness.

Let's be realistic for a minute here you unsinkable fans of "Titanic." The story was old, nothing new, it broke no new ground in the screenplay department. Its dialogue was also less than spectacular; you have to admit, "I'm the king of the world," is just the type of lame fluff that can make one cringe or vomit, whichever applies.

Yes, it won a bunch of Oscars, but none for Best Screenplay.

It's tragic. It's an illness. And it's spreading.

Moving on.

"Saving Private Ryan" is probably one of the best films I've seen in the past year. But every now and then I wonder if I just might have enjoyed it more with no sound. In total silence I would have been spared the epic's lack of story. Peculiar, isn't it?

The camera angles, the facial expressions, everything in that department, let's call it the "Titanic" department, was right on the money. The initial scenes of the film were spectacular. Even the mere shot of the good ole' American flag in the first five minutes brought tears to my eyes.

But as the film progressed, the story stopped. Sure its premise was about the struggle of a group of soldiers to decide whether the life of one man is worth the risk of six or something, but there was an essential element missing here.

Take this image: It's like making a peanut butter and jelly sandwich and forgetting to spread the p.b. and j. to the edges of the bread. As a result, despite the beautiful sandwich that you made, your last bite is now simply dull, dry bread. Nothing to it.

Let me make this clear, my dislike of the plot of "Saving Private Ryan" has nothing to do with my gender, or any other bizarre excuse that fans haven gave me. I just missed something that I am convinced never existed in the first place - namely, a story.

In the overall scheme of things, I am really concerned about this "Titanic" illness that has become a trend in the Hollywood industry. I don't know who movie makers are trying to kid by throwing us these megafilms, sans plot.

Visually the films are enjoyable and entertaining, but any kind of story that just hits you, and makes you really stop and think is on the verge of extinction.

While I know that many found the war theme in "Saving Private Ryan" phenomenal, and I have heard the action is realistic. It seemed to me, however, that "Ryan" only touched the surface of the story, thereby failing to dive into something that could have made everyone stop and really ponder what they just witnessed.

I suppose that by looking at the box office records, audiences are loving it. But on the other hand why shouldn't they? They too suffer from the "Titanic" illness. The stars are generally talented, nice to look at and most have great reputations, but how long is this phenomenon going to persist where the visuals are priority, everything else is secondary and if the plot suffers, it's no big deal?

I read an article recently in "Entertainment Weekly" that reported that many plot-fueling scenes from the Miramax release "54" were cut because the scenes might have bothered the audience too much. It seems the executives in charge wanted to make the film more marketable and a leaner film was one quick-fix. Again, this is screaming "Titanic" illness.

Having just seen "54," the lack of story in it now makes perfect sense. The best parts of the plot were left on the cutting room floor or somewhere never to be seen. So let's think: If we take out a bunch of important plot scenes, then those that are left probably won't fit together as nicely as before. But hey, if the actors look good, and everything else comes out OK, then who cares, right?

Sure it's to each his own, but this wave of big budget, big blockbuster, big stars, weak plot movies is almost insulting. It's as if the industry is telling us that a decent story is too much for our little minds to handle.

Hopefully, change will occur sometime soon. There is always hope in the upcoming holiday season for a cure to come through. Hollywood has the potential to make the movies that stun us with amazement; we know they've done it before.

I haven't given up on movies quite yet. It's far too early, and there is too much potential still out there. But I do wonder, what is it going to take to squeeze out a profound plot - throwing the rest of the stuff in there too, to make an all-around great film.

This illness has become an epidemic, but then again, I suppose there's always video.

- Kristin Long can be reached via e-mail at klong@umich.edu.

09-17-98