Yes, The Longest Day was more historically accurate as it was based on fact from the best selling book while Saving Private Ryan was a fictious plot that was more historically correct in uniforms, weapons and very realistic in showing the horror and bloody carnage of combat.
6 of one, half-dozen of the other. Both are great films and we can agree to disagree...
Yes, overlooked Objective Burma as I am sure I missed others.
Okay.
The opening scenes of Saving Private Ryan were very realistic and the most intriguing part of the movie. Generally speaking, however, films are meant to be entertaining. The most entertaining war films ever made have a surealistic quality to them, that left the most horrific parts of human conflict up to the individuals imagination.
Films produced today tend to pass on surrealism, in favor of realism. The younger generation feeds on and enjoys all types of gratuitous violence. The "the horror and bloody carnage of combat" is no different. Sometimes it maybe necessary, but realism isn't always a positive attribute found in Hollywood movies.
If you move away from the initial shock value of a film like "Full Metal Jacket" --- which I think is an excellent example of a VietNam era war movie --- and place it side by side with a film like "Objective Burma", the latter holds up very well. A good example of entertaining and compelling storytelling at its best. The same holds true for "The Longest Day" besting "Saving Private Ryan" as pure entertainment.
Btw, I enjoy the history channel too. Especially their programs that touch on every detail of the aspects of war.