And the technology we used today to launch skyward today, is substantively identical in form and type to the Saturn V. The CSM and LM are substantively similar to what Russia is still using to put people in low earth orbit. The shuttle arguably was a much more complex platform with very little return.
Comparing 13 missions to 135 missions, and trying to extrapolate from those 13 missions is disingenuous (slide rules or not) - the fact is Apollo 1 did kill 3 people (on the ground) - and almost killed another 3 in Apollo 13.
As much as I disliked the STS - it only had one launch failure (Challenger), due to operating the launcher out of design parameters (which was quite arguably a faulty design) - it had one other failure (Columbia) on reentry which is in some ways is similar to the defect that hit Apollo 13, it was basically a manufacturing defect.
The reason I say technology has not greatly changed is to compare it Orion Spacecraft - which is essentially a modern implementation of the Apollo CSM. Same technology, but with better and more advanced materials. This is no different than comparing a 1929 Model A to a 1969 Ford Galaxie 500.
If the political will was present, we could build another Saturn V Class launcher today - we choose not to, but even the replacements for the Shuttle (SLS and Constellation) have proposed reusing literal technology from the Saturn Era.