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.
Here we go agreeing to disagree again. IMHO I did not find Full Metal Jacket to be a Vietnam film in tone at all. Yes, the Marine Corps boot camp was vintage and R. Lee was great, but the 'in country' plot played like the standard WW2 film. I think Stanley Kubrick wrote the screenplay in this way because he was such a hermit that he did not know how to portray the Vietnam experience.
I could be wrong but I believe most, if not all Nam vets would say Stanley's opus was only one-quarter to one-eighth jacketed...