MovieChat Forums > The Young Lions (1958) Discussion > They are war criminals!

They are war criminals!

posted 13 years ago by ianprl
8 replies | jump to latest

There is discussion in several threads about changes from novel to film and why.

I my opinion (humble, of course), the many incremental changes result in a very basic difference in outcome. The consensus of this forum is that Brando did not wish to be a baddie so changes were made.

In the novel, Diestl the Brando character, starts out good but gradually changes into an evil man. He is determined to survive the war by any means. At the end he gets a bit greedy and decides he can kill 2 more americans before he deserts and hides. Just for the hell of it really. This doesn't come off and he is killed himself.

In the film, he smashes his gun and walks toward the americans, unarmed and without trying to conceal himself. He does not offer any threat.

The two americans do not behave as if threatened (they do not take cover). They are not in the heat of combat. He is casually shot dead without being called on to surrender.

Frankly, this is murder. It probably did happen that way at the time but violated the conventions of war and was not always condoned, as Captain Richard Winters of the Band of Brothers recalled in his memoir.

[–] jsrrtzjr10 12 years ago

Arguable. Notice it was done by the character played by Dean Martin who I found shallow and immature. Not the Jewish guy played by Clift whom I noticed was somewhat upset but didn't say a thing. And yes, it can be considered "murder". But keep this in mind: soldiers can act recklessly in any war.

[–] moewadle 11 years ago

In my opinion the killing of Christian was made to look spontaneous and understandable and far, far from murder. The two American soldiers are in territory where they have been fighting the Germans. The are walking down a road...yes, the are not in battle right at that time. But they are aware that German Soldiers could be around. They see a German Soldier coming out of the trees and instinctively, one American shoots. It would have been an instinctive, self-protecting thing to do. Think about it. What would have gone through his mind? Do you think if you were a battle-hardened soldier who days before had been shooting at Germans who were shooting at you that if you saw that German soldier you wouldhave stopped and thought..."Oh, there is a German soldier. He doesn't have a gun. Gee, he must be all alone with no other Germans with him. I better put down my gun and see what he wants." No, the instinctive thing to do is raise your weapon and fire.. because in the back of your mind what really is happening is that your instincts react to seeing that German and the first thought he is with other enemy, that is enemy, soldiers. So, analyze this a bit and do not be so quick to call it murder.

[–] FeloniousMunk 11 years ago

I've read all the Stephen Ambrose books about the ETO, including "Band of Brothers" and "Citizen Soldiers"...as well as "Beyond Band of Brothers" by Dick Winters himself. They'd have probably taken cover and shouted "Hande hoch!" and the German would have either ignored them and been killed, or else raised his hands in surrender.

He'd have been searched and then he'd have either been taken prisoner...or shot. Depends on who was doing the searching.

Somebody who'd just lost a buddy, or was furious about what he'd seen in the camp, or was just in a bad mood, would have had no problem blowing yet another "Kr@ut" away...and would have just killed him.

It would have also depended on how their prisoner behaved after being captured. Or his rank, or how old he was, or whether he'd acted defiant and maybe started spouting Nazi nonsense.

If they were going to change everything anyway, they should have had Ackerman, the Jew, kill him. Or maybe have Whitacre decide to take him prisoner and suddenly have Ackerman decide to off him instead. Maybe even say something Hollywood, like: "That was for my Uncle Shlomo!" And then they walk away.

The bubbles in the stream are a nice touch. Saw this movie on the big screen when I was still in grammar school, and I've always remembered that.

HONK if you love Jesus...
TXT if you want to meet Him...

[–] Cosmonican 10 years ago

I have read that after "A Streetcar Named Desire" came out, that Brando had a standard clause in his contracts, that no matter how bad his characters were, they would all get beatings or get killed, to make them more sympathetic. I think this fits that category.

[–] mike-848 10 years ago

The Americans were alerted that something wasn't right when they heard Diestl hollering and breaking apart his gun on a log.

Diestl didn't have his hands up nor a white flag. He was also marching at a fast pace towards the two American soldiers and was almost in line with two large trees so they could only get some glances of him but could see (as we the audience could) that it was a German uniform coming towards them.

I think Dean Martin had every right to protect himself and shoot him.

[–] kenny-164 10 years ago

Agree with Mike. I thought the camera angle, serving to indicate how Martin's character saw the event unfold, made it look like Diestl was maybe hiding behind the two trees, and it would not be clear that he did not have a weapon. Failing to yell I surrender! or hold up his hands or both made it look instead of murder like it was a suicide.

[–] Alfriend 10 years ago

You should put spoiler on your subject line for one.

But Michael(Dino's character) doesn't shoot Brando in the wide open, he's partially hidden by the trees. Martin is a brand new soldier in the field and he overreacts like some soldiers did and still do when inexperienced and feeling a threat. The editing could have a bit better in that scene, but for me that was part of ironies of both the book ending and the film.

In each circumstance Christian in killed by Michael. The saavy war experienced combat officer(sgt. in the book) is shot by a new totally inexperienced novice in the field. This death probably would be the only soldier Michael kills and he also kills the man who nearly had an affair with his girlfriend.
Christian's death in the movie is all the more pathetic all around as there is no glory in his death or in Michael killing him. IMHO that all shows the tragedy of war. No glory, just death and often in the most ignominious ways.

The conventions of war in WW2 were sadly violated by both sides and most especially by the Germans. That is why the Russians were so brutal when they were beating the Germans back. 20 million Russians died in that war, a large portion murdered civilians as well as soldiers murdered. You'll note as well the blatant murder of all the wounded British soldiers when Christian is in North Africa. That happened often as well.

BTW Brando's decision to alter the ending had nothing to do with him playing a "baddie". It was all about trying to portray Christian more humanely. He was not the only one to agree to that. Having read the book, I always have had mixed feelings about that.

[–] aim4 9 years ago

The Canadian army shot an entire battalion of Fallschirmjaeger after they surrendered in early 1945 according to a doctor that served with them. When you have a lack of manpower to guard prisoners, critical supplies like food are in short supply, and when you cannot relocate prisoners to a rear echelon area, this was a lot more common than the average person knows about, even by the good guys.