Cross of Iron

"Cross of Iron" was Sam Peckinpah's only war movie. It deals with a company of German soldiers retreating through Russia at the close of Hitler's ill-fated Russian campaign. Unusual for a war film, the story is told from the German point of view. Being a Peckinpah film there are explosions and blood-spurting bodies a-plenty. The rough terrain and cramped quarters that the soldiers have to deal with lend well to the declining German fortunes in Russia. As in his other films, notably "The Wild Bunch", Peckinpah utilizes his now famous slow-motion technique to illustrate the violence and show the effects of the destruction. James Coburn stars as the battle wise Sgt. Steiner who has survived the war thus far by his wits. Maximillian Schell plays his aristocratic Captain whose main goal is the pursuit of the Iron Cross, Germany's highest decoration and who will go to any lengths to get it. James Mason is the Company commander and David Warner is his adjutant. Coburn is excellent in the lead who continues to do his duty in spite of the inevitability of impending defeat. Schell is suitably ambitious and cunning as the chief villain and Mason and Warner convey the hopelessness of the situation while maintaining stiff upper lips. "Cross of Iron", in it's uncut version (132 minutes) ranks as one of the greatest of all WWII films in my opinion. One of Peckinpah's best.

I still rate this as the best and most honest war film I've seen. It ignores the Hollywood schmaltz that spoiled Saving Private Ryan and manages to portray the soldiers as human beings and particularly for German soldiers this is an exception. The battle scenes are expansive and very bloody as we follow the German platoon trying to get back to its own lines. The soldiers are heroes in an unheroic war and the film captures the chaos, cynicism and heroism of the German retreat. Well worth checking out.

When Nazi Germany invaded The Soviet Union in 1941 it led to the worst carnage in human history . From June 1941 to the final battle of Berlin in April 1945 the conflict between the Nazis and red army cost the lives of 35 million people. IF you look upon the war between Hitler and Stalin as being separate from all the other campaigns of conflict in the second world war then the campaign in Eastern Europe is the bloodiest conflict in the history of mankind. Something that seems very unlikely to be exceeded . Alas however western film makers seem reluctant to acknowledge this . Off the top of my head I can think of only 3 American / European movies to be set on the Eastern front: ENEMY AT THE GATES , STALINGRAD and CROSS OF IRON.

I first saw CROSS OF IRON in 1983 and have seen it umpteen times since then. This is an intelligent anti war classic and I never get bored with it. James Coburn , star of many a forgettable lightweight caper movie is perfect as the cynical Sgt Steiner. For the first time in his career he shows he has presence and probably gives his best performance in any film . James Mason is also good , though you have admit has Mason ever been bad ? but the best performance award goes to Maximillian Schell as the villain of the piece. It`d be all too easy to have Schell as a goosestepping Nazi , but Schell`s character is a Prussian aristocrat opposed to fascist egalitarianism . He dislikes the Nazis almost as much as Steiner does.

That`s one of many good aspects of the script , it`s so thoughtful and with one exception it doesn`t show any of the Germans as out and out idealogue fascists. But notice the couple of ironic touches in the film where people say the excuse of " I obey orders. It was none of my doing. I was not responsible " Something that has been said a lot of times during the last century , and the century before that , and the one before that. Guess if you travelled a thousand years` in the future we`d still be hearing that. I also find the script perfectly paced, CROSS OF IRON lasts nearly two and a half hours but no matter how many times I watch it I never find it dragging in any way. I sometimes watch SAVING PRIVATE RYAN but I only watch the first half hour and last half hour `cos the middle of SPR is totally tedious. CROSS OF IRON has a much better script.Maybe the battle scenes of SPR are slightly more gory but at best they`re only as good as the ones in this film. I`d say this is Peckinpah`s best film . The editing during the battle scenes are absolutely superb as we see Soviet soldiers in slo mo , Germans in real time, cutting back to Soviets in real time then Germans in slo mo. Then seeing a cross cut with a Soviet and German dying at the same time.

A classic and unforgivably forgotten film set during the worst conflict in history . In my opinion the greatest WW2 film ever surpassing even DAS BOOT

I have to admit that I had some reserves about this movie before watching it. Although my mother told me this is one of her favorite war movies ever (yes I know, it may sound a bit strange, but we have the same taste for war movies), I also saw a rather bad score on IMDb (about 6.6 at the time). Well, now that I've seen it, I can only say that this movie will be in my top 5 of war movies. This movie shows war the way it actually is: dirty, deadly, tragic,... and with plenty of losers, but no winners. In this movie you won't find any glorification of fake patriotism or dying for a good cause that only politicians in their ivory towers seem to know. No, this movie shows the war in its purest and most horrifying form.

It brings us the story of Rolf Steiner, a veteran hardened by the war, who leads his men through every battle and dangerous situation, but who also takes care that they will survive the madness. Than a Prussian officer, who volunteered to leave the quiet, battle-free world of France for the real action in Russia, joins his fighting group. The man thinks of only one thing: to get an iron cross as fast as possible, so his family can be proud and shouldn't see him as a disgrace to their military tradition. This leads to a lot of problems between the two of course and gradually the tension cumulates until it explodes...

I don't know if the story is based on true facts, but the movie certainly gives a good idea of what the war at the Eastern Front was like, especially after the Germans had suffered a major loss in Stalingrad. They had to retread, but had to take care that they didn't get overwhelmed by the Soviet troops when doing so; a lot of the man had lost faith in victory; no prisoners were taken, but were shot at the spot; optimism had made place for cynicism ... It all feels very real and believable.

And the feeling of realism can also be found in the way of filming. Some might say Peckinpah experimented too much with slow-motion, hand-held camera's,... but personally I believe it only gives an extra dimension to this movie, giving it that extra touch that makes it different from so many mediocre Hollywood productions. I really liked the way he followed the action closely, making you feel like you are part of it yourself, but what really sparked my interest was the contrast between the child's voice singing a "happy" song and the images of the horrors of the war at the beginning and the end of the movie. That really made shivers go down my spine.

If I thought about anti-war movies, I always used to name the World War I classic "All Quiet on the Western Front" (the 1930 version as well as the remake from 1979), but from now on I'll have to add one extra movie: Cross of Iron. If you are a fan of realistic (anti-)war movies, than this is a movie you shouldn't miss. I give it a 9/10.

I can't add much to these reviews except to comment that I've found this film to be a great favourite among real soldiers. I once got to deliver the classic line to a Major and a Captain about hating all officers. Luckily(?) they knew I was quoting from the film!

I'm not bothered about the assortment of accents in the cast (that others have mentioned). It seems to me that if you believe in their situation and have immersed yourself in the film, as it was easy for me to do, then you don't even notice them after a while. I would argue that the cast (in terms of dialogue) in Private Ryan is far more of a problem, since these seem to be 1990s guys transported back to 1944 and are far too 'knowing'. Moreover, in Private Ryan I kept stepping back from the film feeling that I was simply being manipulated by the director. COI is far more chilling. I really liked (if that's the word) a scene where an artillery explosion killed both Germans and Soviets. Kind of emphasises the 'war is hell' message without preaching or being manipulative.

I think Steiner is one of the greatest military characters ever to appear on film (for what its worth, Gregory Peck as Savage in Twelve O'Clock High, and Jeff Daniels as Chamberlain in Gettysburg are also up there). I must say I didn't really like the ending, but I can't suggest a better one, but as an alternate "ending" I would certainly recommend that people *do not* see the awful sequel 'Sergeant Steiner' with Richard Burton(!) as Steiner.