This film was based primarily on the writings of Willi Heinrich. In particular, his novel "Das geduldige Fleisch" (the willing flesh). Apparently Heinrich was wounded a whopping five times serving on the eastern front. What is even more unnerving is the fact that his unit, the 101st Jager divison, suffered a casualty rate of nearly 700 percent!!! I believe he also had an excellent novel called "Crack of Doom', which involved a group of German soldiers in a life or death struggle in the Carpathian mountains in late 1944. Highly recommended reading.
I read Crack of Doom when I was in college and it was pretty intense. Did Heinrich also write Devils Brigade or something like that? I read that in High School in the early 80's and it was an eye opener to the realities of war humanized "enemy" (maybe it should have been banned, Ha!) I saw this movie later in the 90's on my way back from New Orleans and I was so tired but it came on as the late movie and there was no way I could turn it off, I tried but would get back up and turn it back on. I had no idea it existed and marveled at the fact that it was the German infantryman's experience.
Thanks for that info, man more books on my to read list. I remember reading a novel called The Cross of Iron and it seemed to follow the plot line of this movie. I am not sure about the author, it maybe Heinch. I remember he was a German veteran. So I was wondering if this was the book the film was based on or did they take things from many of his books ? Also I remember when the film came out. For some reason there was no rating in the newspaper ad. Some how I got my parents to take me to the theatre. My parents let off in front, so as I was waiting in line, all of a sudden my mom shows up. She tells me that she noticed that this film is rated R so I am not going to see it.She said this right in front of the crowd waiting inline. O man how embracing. O I forgot to say I was under age at the time. Almost made it. I saw it later on VHS thankfully. A great film indeed.
This movie has always made a big impression on me since I saw it as a kid. Prior to Saving Private Ryan, this was perhaps the most realistic depiction of warfare. It also shows war for what it is, ugly, brutal, and unspeakably heinous, the only beauty of it found in the comradeship of the men fighting alongside each other.
Fun fact: this was shot in former Yugoslavia, like many other WWII movies of that era,like for example ''Kelly's Heroes''. The reason was: the Yugoslavian Army had still lots of WWII-era military equipment lying around, both from Axis & Allied troops and the regime of Marshal Tito welcomed Hollywood, British & European movie productions, because they brought lots of coveted foreign currency into the country.
Fun fact- working in Yugoslavia was where a young John lands got the idea for American werewolf in London when he saw a burial and they were being buried vertically.
i saw this movie as a kid i read the book a dozen times joined the airborne in 83 the army sucks its true glad to see some interst in this movie back in 78 not much was known about a war with russia it was called the unknown war just ordered the book i will reread it for the first time in 40 years happy anniversary cross of iron
I saw this on the big screen when it first came out (spring 77?). It created quite a shock at the time. The word pivotal comes to mind. It drove WW2 buffs, historians, and neo-nazis crazy. My question is, why has this movie been effectively blackballed from all of television for the last 40 plus years?
you ask the right question and the answer is it shows German troops as normal people , not the butchers of women and children as every other war movie made.
@@ronvk100 Although it shows or implies that a high proportion of German soldiers were prepared to carry out any order they were given, which is accurate.
One of the jarring things in it is Peckinpah's clear implication that the German people as a whole were implicated in Germany's aggression and atrocities, not just the Nazis. He would have been implying the same for other wars too, such as Vietnam.
The image of the trucks rolling over the flattened corpse in the mud has stayed with me since I saw this during its very brief theatric run. Wow, at the UA in Long Beach, which incredibly enough still exists running foreign and art films.
Long before the "tech tricks" that Steven Spielberg enjoyed, this film amazes one with it's attention to detail and realism--I didn't realize until I listened to this review that it was considered a "low budget" film. It certainly doesn't have a low budget cast. And my gosh, what an incredible film...with more quotable quotes than any other film I think I've ever seen, except for "Monty Python and the Holy Grail." A great film, and unfortunately not well known. I can hardly believe that it was made almost forty years ago.
CROSS OF IRON is my favourite war film and one of my two favourite Sam Peckinpah films. The other is THE WILD BUNCH. Beautiful and staggering. P.S. There's more guts and talent in a few frames of this film than a dozen PRIVATE RYANS.
+ARLO999 - Not really. The tanks used in the film were T34/85s which did not see combat before February 1944. The Taman was liberated in Autumn 1943 when the Soviet main battle tank was the T34/76.
One of the cleverest things about it is that even the VILLAIN (the Schell character) isn't a Nazi, and hates having anyone think he is! That's how much it plays around with war movie rules.
True. He isn't a Nazi but happily orders atrocities. Peckinpah's message spreads the guilt beyond just the Nazis. Steiner quotes from von Bernhardi, who before WWI advocated Germany clearing non-Germans out of the eastern lands.
Now if anyone knows otherwise please do correct me but if I am not mistaken, this film was derived from a book that a German soldier wrote and James Coburn was cast into the role because he looks like the German Soldier who wrote it and actually lived it.
dieser Film hat mir bei der Deutschen Bundeswehr sehr geholfen ich war auch so ein kleiner Steiner ich hatte nie sonst so eine Kameradschaft obwohl Wir auch viel Mist gebaut haben aber das gehört auch dazu. Super Film Danke
The authenticity is pretty good in this picture. I first heard about it in an article in PC Gamer of all things back in the early 2000s that praised it in passing. It's pretty impressive considering how many films of the period were cobbled together mish-mashes of exaggerated events and anachronistic equipment (see Force 10 From Navarone, Battle of the Bulge, Where Eagles Dare- Nazi Helicopter and Gestapo officer in SS uniform [?]). The chaotic intercut editing (true Peckinpah style) really drives the battle sequences into the unbearable and even surreal at times. Top-tier performances by Coburn, Warner, and Schell, too. This film was conceived at the height of Peckinpah's alcohol and substance abuse, but unlike Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid, it doesn't feel like an aimless or meandering drinking movie. This and Come and See (1985) are pretty much the essential Eastern Front war movies for me. "DEMARCATION!"
When I was in college I had a weekend job doing maintenance at a local mall. My boss's name was Helmut, and he had been in the German army during WW2 and had fought on the Russian Front. He told me we woulda whipped them Russians if you Amerians hadn't been sending em so many supplies. He said it was so cold in the winter that you'd take a piss and it would be frozen before it hit he ground.
without doubt, one of the best films ever made, and THE best war film ever made. Coburns best role, as the ultimate NCO and his laconic, aware presence dominates the film. cant understand how it took years to be recognised for what it is.
@@gnosticbrian3980 Come and See is a superb movie, but it can't better capture the Eastern Front, because each movie is about a different aspect of that huge conflict.
There was a sequel to this called Breakthrough (a.k.a. Sergeant Steiner) directed by Andrew McLaglen (who was no Peckinpah) starring Richard Burton as Steiner.
I always found it interesting that so many German soldiers who lost in WWII , wound up fighting in SE Asia after joining the French Foreign Legion . That’s what the end of this movie meant to me , when I saw it the first time .
Why are we not surprised that "Cross of Iron" didn't get the respect it deserved for showing the German soldiers of World War II as individuals and Stalinist Russia (our ally-by-accident in World War II) as the enemy (which it became within a year or two after World War II ended). There were reviewers in 1966 who confessed to not liking "The Blue Max" because it showed World War I -- that's right, WORLD WAR 1 -- from the German perspective.
The film works as a study of masculinity, manhood, a common thread with the western and war movie genre but uniquely placed within the ideologies and industrialized slaughter of the eastern front. There is frontier justice that affirm masculinity - a rapist surrendered to his victims, the homosexual portrayed as a degenerate and blackmailed, a murderous plot to rob a soldier of his laurels is exposed. But rather than revenge for the plotting, there is pity: Steiner nearly machine-guns the culprit yet instead decides to challenge him to live up to his ideal and together they bond in battle, Steiner a tragic Alpha male laughing like a boy in a playground, flashbacking a boy-soldier he unwittingly killed trying to save as a Nazi boy's choir sings patriotic songs in the background. As Don Jose said in "Wild Bunch": "We all dream of being a child again, even the worst of us. Perhaps the worst most of all."
Cross Of Iron has always been my favorite war film I remember seeing it reviewed by Barry Norman and wanting to see it but I couldn't at the time it came out 1977 I think I was only nine and it was x rated 18 nowadays I saw it on video about 1983 and recorded it off TV but it had been edited so now I have the DVD its class better than what they make now in my opinion
A reviewer in San Francisco said, "Letting Sam Peckinpah make a movie about the Nazi collapse in Russia is like letting Charles Manson run a massage parlor."
There was a continued film about Steiner who clearly having escaped from Russia is now fighting in the European war. Richard Burton taking on the Steiner role.
OK I'm only 1:33 into this review and I'm going to bring up a couple of points. 1) Pekinpah didn't 'come up' with this movie idea, it's an adaptation the book of the same title by German author Willi Heinrich, and as much as I like the movie, it's a pale shadow of the book. 2)This movie isn't an American production, the production was Anglo-German, Pekinpah and Coburn were the only Americans in the production.
My fave WW2 movie and I believe Peckinpah's greatest film. And a great anti war film ( behind the original "All Quiet on the Western Front" and " Paths of Glory").
One of my favourite war films. I've been an amateur 'student' of WWII most of my life and like many interested in this conflict, I find myself yawning at the rubbish attempts to depict what it was really like, in many films. In more recent times it's got a lot better, with movies like Stalingrad and Saving Private Ryan bringing home the horrors of conflict but, when this movie was made, it was normal for battle depictions to be rubbish. The filming of the Russian assault on the German position was absolutely epic, brilliantly filmed, shot to bring home how horrific the Russian front really was for the average soldier and way ahead of its time. The story for once, didn't glorify war. The fact that it was panned in the US upon its release only serves to show how ignorant critics, drunk at the time on war films where American soldiers shoot loads of 'bad guy' Nazis and blow something up at the end, really were.
A very realistic war film and therefore a anti-war film. The only tiny mistake I could find is the rank of Steiner, being a Corporal (Unterfeldwebel), instead Steiner should be senior NCO, like Oberfeldwebel or Stabsfeldwebel (first sergeant or sergeant major).
My problem with the great German - themed war films (and both were fantastic), "Das Boot," and "Cross of Iron," is the obsession with showing the leading characters being noble warriors but uniformly hating Knotsis and / or not having any real animosity toward their enemies. Fuhrer or not, believe me, Germans has PLENTY of animosity toward Soviet Union and thought of Stalin having his way into Europe through their homeland. They may not have had same animosity toward UK and US, but most Germans in uniform in those years would not have been sitting around making snide comments about Reich when they were being either depth charged in the Atlantic or human-waved in USSR during a strategic withdrawal back toward where their mom and dad and kid sister were dodging massive aerial bombardment day and night. There were plenty of Germans like Rudel and Wittman who were totally dedicated and were hardly buffoons like the Schell character in Cross of Iron. Another variation of this theme is the underrated film, "The Eagle Has Landed," where a whole scene is concocted out of thin air to juxtapose Steiner (Michael Caine's role) with the SS general chasing Jewish girl escapee through Polish railyard. Okay, I cheered Steiner and his men in that role and it was very effectively done, and at least Steiner is allowed the likely VERY realistic insight (announced to the blood thirsty general chasing the horrified, doomed teen), "Personally, I don't care for Jews one way or the other,"...and then goes on to call said general and his lackey gutter trash. Of course, this all ties in neatly to the E-boat thing, which in turn is relevant to the plot of the excellent movie. I just think one of two things is in effect in these movies / books: 1) the writer, author, producer wants to make sure they aren't mistaken for someone making Wehrmacht propaganda movies, so they create this array of anti-heroes in grey underneath Stahl helms so as to be able to point to their characters and the dialogue and say that showing Germans killing Red Army doesn't mean I'm a Knotsi. OR...they combine that one with the other practical likelihood: fear that a movie designed (or seemingly designed, more like it) to lead audiences to cheer overall German war effort will be killed in early reviews and thereby killing box office receipts. Its okay to (in 1980, that is; not now) OCCASIONALLY cheer Germans but they better be reluctant warriors who bad mouth the front office A LOT - without having one harsh word to say about UK, US incinerating their families and their cities and their memories and their history; AND no way will they ever bash the brutality of USSR and Stalin and talk about what would happen to Europe if their advance, 3rd Reich or not, into w. eur isn't stopped. I think the latter was more important and more at the front of the avg German soldier's mind than Knotsis. (Granted, they all should've thought of this before they swore blood oath to the man in 1937, but we're way past that in this movie.)
Peckinpah in Cross of Iron makes a strong point that the German people as a whole were invested in Germany's aggression and atrocities, not just the Nazis. Note the quotation from Friedrich von Bernhardi just before the first Soviet attack, and what it implies. Also, the quotation from Brecht at the end. Peckinpah gives short shrift to those who try to argue that the Nazis were primarily responsible for the evil. Rather, he says "No, all of German society was responsible".
This is a great movie. Not only " war movie" but great movie, in any genre. Like a John Ford' s " Searchers" is not only " great western" but a great movie. Peckinpah is forgotten, because everybody ( almoust) was so excited by Tarantino, and afterwards X - Men and Spiderbatman versus Terminator, or whatewer Predator. Peckinpah was original, and contradoctional . Aren't we all.?
Good movie only if the language were on german.Jugoslavian war movie as batlle on Sutjeska batlle on .Neretva and Kozara is one of most realistic war movie with real germans actors speaking german.
..because ..cross of iron is against the flow of the good thinking namely.. the fact that the ww2 is not german against ussr.. but allies against nazis ,,and neither nazi military neither ussr military have not intended .and can t be discussed...only allies and mostly US battles...but it s also a part of the story of ww2..is not it..?.
cant understand weather you show brits yanks or frigging eskimos fighting ,what ever the flipping conflict you gotta get it right why does everyone think just cos you mke a violent war film your gloryfying war ...absolute bollox.
I'm going to do a proper comparison video at some point between the source material and this film.. In my opinion Peckinpah missed the mark in a lot of places. The book is a bleak battle between two massive ego's (Stransky and Steiner), Steiner is not a "Good man", he is an angry, anarchistic young man who has become what he is from a combination of personal tradgedy, indifference and tactical proficiency. The film "Cross of Iron" actually has a much happier ending for most if not all characters compared to the novel. Where Steiner sees the only people he cares about, the only people who keep him in the game get killed slowly around him until he finally snaps. There is no happy ending to "The Willing Flesh", Stransky get's transfered back to France and it is heavily implied that Steiner dies from a random Russian artillery shell after watching everyone in his platoon die in horrible ways (the worst of which is Patersnack getting crushed by a T34 before his eyes. Peckinpah's film ruins some characters and nails others, but the novel he based it on is not really faithfully represented , Sgt. Steiner in Cross of Iron is more a personal representation of Peckinpah than it is of the character in the Willing Flesh.
a lot of one dimensional thinking going on here by the presenter..i never watched a war movie in my life where war was 'glorified'..you are mistaking fighting for a noble cause as 'glorifying' war...I served in the military my entire adult life..been to two wars myself so I know a thing or two about it..people like you like to assume that war movies some how glorify war but over look the fact that they are telling a story..or in some cases several stories rolled into one movie..often based on soldiers' personal experiences..was 'the battle of britain'' glorifying war..'''a bridge too far..'saving private ryan'''... I could go on and on....
I had heard so many "underrated" film comments about this that I went to watch it expecting a lot more than I actually got. I'll admit I think while Peckinpah is a good filmaker, I still think hes vastly overrated. wild bunch is superb though but his billy the kid interpretation drove me to tears of boredom
I thought I was in the minority disliking this film. I have tried twice watching it: the first time I found the dialogue unconvincing and something a bit fake about it and I struggled manfully to get to the end, though I frequently lost concentration. I tried it again some years later, but it hadn’t got better with age: I found myself getting VERY bored after 30 minutes and then gave up !
Hardly. The movie is based on Willi Heinrich's book, "Der Geduldige Fleisch" which was published in 1955. That is before almost all of Hassel's books. Unlike Hassel's false claims, Heinrich actually served on the eastern front/
My father was a German shoulder in Woirld War 2 . Who served on the Eastern Front. When my father saw this movie it made him cry
One of the best war films ever made. Definitely in the top all time five
Where eagles dare was another epic.
@@cps2715 both.Add Guns of Navarone and Come and See.
@@richardscanlan3167 Did you see The Eagle has Landed?
@@cps2715 another good one;))
( Oberst Kurt Steiner).
@@cps2715 yeah but that dosen't make the top 5
This film was based primarily on the writings of Willi Heinrich. In particular, his novel "Das geduldige Fleisch" (the willing flesh). Apparently Heinrich was wounded a whopping five times serving on the eastern front. What is even more unnerving is the fact that his unit, the 101st Jager divison, suffered a casualty rate of nearly 700 percent!!! I believe he also had an excellent novel called "Crack of Doom', which involved a group of German soldiers in a life or death struggle in the Carpathian mountains in late 1944. Highly recommended reading.
Right!
I read Crack of Doom when I was in college and it was pretty intense. Did Heinrich also write Devils Brigade or something like that? I read that in High School in the early 80's and it was an eye opener to the realities of war humanized "enemy" (maybe it should have been banned, Ha!) I saw this movie later in the 90's on my way back from New Orleans and I was so tired but it came on as the late movie and there was no way I could turn it off, I tried but would get back up and turn it back on. I had no idea it existed and marveled at the fact that it was the German infantryman's experience.
Thanks for that info, man more books on my to read list. I remember reading a novel called The Cross of Iron and it seemed to follow the plot line of this movie. I am not sure about the author, it maybe Heinch. I remember he was a German veteran. So I was wondering if this was the book the film was based on or did they take things from many of his books ? Also I remember when the film came out. For some reason there was no rating in the newspaper ad. Some how I got my parents to take me to the theatre. My parents let off in front, so as I was waiting in line, all of a sudden my mom shows up. She tells me that she noticed that this film is rated R so I am not going to see it.She said this right in front of the crowd waiting inline. O man how embracing. O I forgot to say I was under age at the time. Almost made it. I saw it later on VHS thankfully. A great film indeed.
This movie has always made a big impression on me since I saw it as a kid. Prior to Saving Private Ryan, this was perhaps the most realistic depiction of warfare. It also shows war for what it is, ugly, brutal, and unspeakably heinous, the only beauty of it found in the comradeship of the men fighting alongside each other.
A wonderful cast. Well done to everyone who performed and participated in it.
Fun fact: this was shot in former Yugoslavia, like many other WWII movies of that era,like for example ''Kelly's Heroes''.
The reason was: the Yugoslavian Army had still lots of WWII-era military equipment lying around, both from Axis & Allied troops and the regime of Marshal Tito welcomed Hollywood, British & European movie productions, because they brought lots of coveted foreign currency into the country.
Fun fact- working in Yugoslavia was where a young John lands got the idea for American werewolf in London when he saw a burial and they were being buried vertically.
i saw this movie as a kid i read the book a dozen times joined the airborne in 83 the army sucks its true glad to see some interst in this movie back in 78 not much was known about a war with russia it was called the unknown war just ordered the book i will reread it for the first time in 40 years happy anniversary cross of iron
I saw this on the big screen when it first came out (spring 77?). It created quite a shock at the time. The word pivotal comes to mind. It drove WW2 buffs, historians, and neo-nazis crazy. My question is, why has this movie been effectively blackballed from all of television for the last 40 plus years?
you ask the right question and the answer is it shows German troops as normal people , not the butchers of women and children as every other war movie made.
i have watched it on the bbc twice- once in the 80s and recently in 2015
@@ronvk100 Although it shows or implies that a high proportion of German soldiers were prepared to carry out any order they were given, which is accurate.
One of the jarring things in it is Peckinpah's clear implication that the German people as a whole were implicated in Germany's aggression and atrocities, not just the Nazis. He would have been implying the same for other wars too, such as Vietnam.
The image of the trucks rolling over the flattened corpse in the mud has stayed with me since I saw this during its very brief theatric run. Wow, at the UA in Long Beach, which incredibly enough still exists running foreign and art films.
Long before the "tech tricks" that Steven Spielberg enjoyed, this film amazes one with it's attention to detail and realism--I didn't realize until I listened to this review that it was considered a "low budget" film. It certainly doesn't have a low budget cast. And my gosh, what an incredible film...with more quotable quotes than any other film I think I've ever seen, except for "Monty Python and the Holy Grail." A great film, and unfortunately not well known. I can hardly believe that it was made almost forty years ago.
A masterpiece and especially that ending!
CROSS OF IRON is my favourite war film and one of my two favourite Sam Peckinpah films. The other is THE WILD BUNCH. Beautiful and staggering.
P.S. There's more guts and talent in a few frames of this film than a dozen PRIVATE RYANS.
Tom Hanks is nothing but a bargain basement version of James Coburn.
Both of you are idiots.
Thank you.
what about "das boot"? probably one of the best sub movies ever made.
Schell is wonderful in this.
He was a very interesting man
Superb film.....dust galore, accurate tanks for once, great acting, it has the lot.
+ARLO999 - Not really. The tanks used in the film were T34/85s which did not see combat before February 1944. The Taman was liberated in Autumn 1943 when the Soviet main battle tank was the T34/76.
@@gnosticbrian3980 That's a minor quibble. On his budget, Peckinpah was lucky to get even the 85s.
One of the cleverest things about it is that even the VILLAIN (the Schell character) isn't a Nazi, and hates having anyone think he is! That's how much it plays around with war movie rules.
True. He isn't a Nazi but happily orders atrocities. Peckinpah's message spreads the guilt beyond just the Nazis. Steiner quotes from von Bernhardi, who before WWI advocated Germany clearing non-Germans out of the eastern lands.
Josh Olson sure knows how to pick em'! Another great movie!
Great piece of cinema.
After The Wild Bunch, this is my 2nd favorite Peckinpah film...
Now if anyone knows otherwise please do correct me but if I am not mistaken, this film was derived from a book that a German soldier wrote and James Coburn was cast into the role because he looks like the German Soldier who wrote it and actually lived it.
dieser Film hat mir bei der Deutschen Bundeswehr sehr geholfen ich war auch so ein kleiner Steiner ich hatte nie sonst so eine Kameradschaft obwohl Wir auch viel Mist gebaut haben aber das gehört auch dazu. Super Film Danke
Orson wells said this was the greatest anti war film ever made enough said
Wells died in 1985. so from that year and earlier, his word is fine (although I prefer All Quiet on the Western Front from 1931, myself).
Suuposedly Welles telegraphed Peckinpah after seeing Cross of Iron and told him he made the best war film since All Quiet on the Western Front.
I agree- the original all quiet , the new all quiet, cross of iron, paths of glory,
With the most stressful scene in cinema history: "He said yes!" Reminds me of whiplash
The authenticity is pretty good in this picture. I first heard about it in an article in PC Gamer of all things back in the early 2000s that praised it in passing. It's pretty impressive considering how many films of the period were cobbled together mish-mashes of exaggerated events and anachronistic equipment (see Force 10 From Navarone, Battle of the Bulge, Where Eagles Dare- Nazi Helicopter and Gestapo officer in SS uniform [?]). The chaotic intercut editing (true Peckinpah style) really drives the battle sequences into the unbearable and even surreal at times.
Top-tier performances by Coburn, Warner, and Schell, too. This film was conceived at the height of Peckinpah's alcohol and substance abuse, but unlike Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid, it doesn't feel like an aimless or meandering drinking movie. This and Come and See (1985) are pretty much the essential Eastern Front war movies for me.
"DEMARCATION!"
Please bring this movie to Blu-Ray.
I own it on blu-ray :/
actlloyd Is the picture/audio quality good?
When I was in college I had a weekend job doing maintenance at a local mall. My boss's name was Helmut, and he had been in the German army during WW2 and had fought on the Russian Front. He told me we woulda whipped them Russians if you Amerians hadn't been sending em so many supplies. He said it was so cold in the winter that you'd take a piss and it would be frozen before it hit he ground.
GREAT COMMENTARY
Great review
Great novel, great film.
This and the full Das Boot in German with english sub titles are my two as well.
without doubt, one of the best films ever made, and THE best war film ever made. Coburns best role, as the ultimate NCO and his laconic, aware presence dominates the film. cant understand how it took years to be recognised for what it is.
Stalingrad from 1993 is also pretty good.
+MrRainjunky - I think Elem Klimov's "Come and See" better captures the war on the Eastern Front.
@@gnosticbrian3980 Come and See is a superb movie, but it can't better capture the Eastern Front, because each movie is about a different aspect of that huge conflict.
The best goddamned film about the indecent insanity that is real war, not the crap that encourages young people to march of to die in.
This is low key the great David Warner's crowning performance - keeping in mind he was Jack the Ripper!
Peckinpah! Peckinpah! Peckinpah!!!
excellent mate
Great movie.Saw it as a kid.
Sam Peckinpah was already being written off by everyone when he released this very underrated movie. Sadly, it didn't help his decline.
There was a sequel to this called Breakthrough (a.k.a. Sergeant Steiner) directed by Andrew McLaglen (who was no Peckinpah) starring Richard Burton as Steiner.
yeah I saw that, it's really bad
Lousy sequel. Andrew mcclagen was a very good director in many of his other movies.
it was terrible ! I forced myself to sit till the end.
Dude the Osterman Weekend was actually really under rated
I always found it interesting that so many German soldiers who lost in WWII , wound up fighting in SE Asia after joining the French Foreign Legion .
That’s what the end of this movie meant to me , when I saw it the first time .
It's hard to believe my father served on the Eastern front as a German sholder Alan speer
Why are we not surprised that "Cross of Iron" didn't get the respect it deserved for showing the German soldiers of World War II as individuals and Stalinist Russia (our ally-by-accident in World War II) as the enemy (which it became within a year or two after World War II ended). There were reviewers in 1966 who confessed to not liking "The Blue Max" because it showed World War I -- that's right, WORLD WAR 1 -- from the German perspective.
This movie, and The Beast, are my 2 favorite war films. I feel this movie is much more moving than SPR, much more emotional, and tragic.
You are norway congratulations so good videos thanks a lot.
Only Peckinpah could make a WWII movie from the German point of view and make it work.
FC Schaeffer Das Boot is pretty good too!
The film works as a study of masculinity, manhood, a common thread with the western and war movie genre but uniquely placed within the ideologies and industrialized slaughter of the eastern front. There is frontier justice that affirm masculinity - a rapist surrendered to his victims, the homosexual portrayed as a degenerate and blackmailed, a murderous plot to rob a soldier of his laurels is exposed.
But rather than revenge for the plotting, there is pity: Steiner nearly machine-guns the culprit yet instead decides to challenge him to live up to his ideal and together they bond in battle, Steiner a tragic Alpha male laughing like a boy in a playground, flashbacking a boy-soldier he unwittingly killed trying to save as a Nazi boy's choir sings patriotic songs in the background. As Don Jose said in "Wild Bunch": "We all dream of being a child again, even the worst of us. Perhaps the worst most of all."
i think this was the first WW2 movie that showed the german soldiers side of the war.
Terrific film!
Cross Of Iron has always been my favorite war film I remember seeing it reviewed by Barry Norman and wanting to see it but I couldn't at the time it came out 1977 I think I was only nine and it was x rated 18 nowadays I saw it on video about 1983 and recorded it off TV but it had been edited so now I have the DVD its class better than what they make now in my opinion
and DAS BOOT !!!A MASTERPEICE g
GREATEST MOVIE EVER MADEEEEEE???????????
A reviewer in San Francisco said, "Letting Sam Peckinpah make a movie about the Nazi collapse in Russia is like letting Charles Manson run a massage parlor."
There was a continued film about Steiner who clearly having escaped from Russia is now fighting in the European war. Richard Burton taking on the Steiner role.
OK I'm only 1:33 into this review and I'm going to bring up a couple of points. 1) Pekinpah didn't 'come up' with this movie idea, it's an adaptation the book of the same title by German author Willi Heinrich, and as much as I like the movie, it's a pale shadow of the book. 2)This movie isn't an American production, the production was Anglo-German, Pekinpah and Coburn were the only Americans in the production.
Next to Sam Peckinpah's masterpiece, The Wild Bunch, this is my second favorite of his films.
My fave WW2 movie and I believe Peckinpah's greatest film. And a great anti war film ( behind the original "All Quiet on the Western Front" and " Paths of Glory").
brilliant film showing the madness of war and the stupidity officers will go to for glory and medals even though he was a gutless coward.
One of my favourite war films. I've been an amateur 'student' of WWII most of my life and like many interested in this conflict, I find myself yawning at the rubbish attempts to depict what it was really like, in many films. In more recent times it's got a lot better, with movies like Stalingrad and Saving Private Ryan bringing home the horrors of conflict but, when this movie was made, it was normal for battle depictions to be rubbish. The filming of the Russian assault on the German position was absolutely epic, brilliantly filmed, shot to bring home how horrific the Russian front really was for the average soldier and way ahead of its time. The story for once, didn't glorify war. The fact that it was panned in the US upon its release only serves to show how ignorant critics, drunk at the time on war films where American soldiers shoot loads of 'bad guy' Nazis and blow something up at the end, really were.
This movie is really never showed on tv, when it is its cut to hell..TCM should put it on their station
Φαινεται οτι υπαρχει συγγραφεας απο πισω.ο σαμ πεκινπα ενας κλασικος συγγραφεας ταινιων δρασης ,γουεστερν κτλ.εχουμε συγκρουση χαρακτηρων,εχουμε αντιπολεμικα μυνηματα και ενα πολυ καλο καστ.απο της αγαπημενες μου πολεμικες ταινιες.ο πεκινπα στηνει σκηνες ντοκυμαντερ με το αδπρομαυρο και τις φωτογραφιες ,ακουγεται παιδικη χωροδια καθως παρακολουθουμε φρικτες αληθινες φωτογραφιες ,ο αδολφος και οι θαυμαστριες του κτλ.μοναδικο εργο τεχνης .καλες ερμηνειες.αξιοθαυμαστο.
His second war film, if you buy into critical interpretation that the wild bunch is a metaphor for Vietnam.
Hey, I liked THE OSTERMAN WEEKEND!
A very realistic war film and therefore a anti-war film. The only tiny mistake I could find is the rank of Steiner, being a Corporal (Unterfeldwebel), instead Steiner should be senior NCO, like Oberfeldwebel or Stabsfeldwebel (first sergeant or sergeant major).
this was a German production?... my 2nd favorite Peckinpah film after The Wild Bunch...
Well, American, Belgian, British, and German. As well as several Canadian actors.
Nathan Peterson good cast...
@@peterson7082 Max Schell was Austrian-Swiss. ;o)
The coolest ww2 film ever.
My problem with the great German - themed war films (and both were fantastic), "Das Boot," and "Cross of Iron," is the obsession with showing the leading characters being noble warriors but uniformly hating Knotsis and / or not having any real animosity toward their enemies. Fuhrer or not, believe me, Germans has PLENTY of animosity toward Soviet Union and thought of Stalin having his way into Europe through their homeland. They may not have had same animosity toward UK and US, but most Germans in uniform in those years would not have been sitting around making snide comments about Reich when they were being either depth charged in the Atlantic or human-waved in USSR during a strategic withdrawal back toward where their mom and dad and kid sister were dodging massive aerial bombardment day and night.
There were plenty of Germans like Rudel and Wittman who were totally dedicated and were hardly buffoons like the Schell character in Cross of Iron.
Another variation of this theme is the underrated film, "The Eagle Has Landed," where a whole scene is concocted out of thin air to juxtapose Steiner (Michael Caine's role) with the SS general chasing Jewish girl escapee through Polish railyard. Okay, I cheered Steiner and his men in that role and it was very effectively done, and at least Steiner is allowed the likely VERY realistic insight (announced to the blood thirsty general chasing the horrified, doomed teen), "Personally, I don't care for Jews one way or the other,"...and then goes on to call said general and his lackey gutter trash. Of course, this all ties in neatly to the E-boat thing, which in turn is relevant to the plot of the excellent movie.
I just think one of two things is in effect in these movies / books: 1) the writer, author, producer wants to make sure they aren't mistaken for someone making Wehrmacht propaganda movies, so they create this array of anti-heroes in grey underneath Stahl helms so as to be able to point to their characters and the dialogue and say that showing Germans killing Red Army doesn't mean I'm a Knotsi. OR...they combine that one with the other practical likelihood: fear that a movie designed (or seemingly designed, more like it) to lead audiences to cheer overall German war effort will be killed in early reviews and thereby killing box office receipts.
Its okay to (in 1980, that is; not now) OCCASIONALLY cheer Germans but they better be reluctant warriors who bad mouth the front office A LOT - without having one harsh word to say about UK, US incinerating their families and their cities and their memories and their history; AND no way will they ever bash the brutality of USSR and Stalin and talk about what would happen to Europe if their advance, 3rd Reich or not, into w. eur isn't stopped. I think the latter was more important and more at the front of the avg German soldier's mind than Knotsis. (Granted, they all should've thought of this before they swore blood oath to the man in 1937, but we're way past that in this movie.)
Peckinpah in Cross of Iron makes a strong point that the German people as a whole were invested in Germany's aggression and atrocities, not just the Nazis. Note the quotation from Friedrich von Bernhardi just before the first Soviet attack, and what it implies. Also, the quotation from Brecht at the end. Peckinpah gives short shrift to those who try to argue that the Nazis were primarily responsible for the evil. Rather, he says "No, all of German society was responsible".
Best anti war film ever made
This is a great movie. Not only " war movie" but great movie, in any genre. Like a John Ford' s " Searchers" is not only " great western" but a great movie. Peckinpah is forgotten, because everybody ( almoust) was so excited by Tarantino, and afterwards X - Men and Spiderbatman versus Terminator, or whatewer Predator. Peckinpah was original, and contradoctional . Aren't we all.?
Hmmm, a T-34 . . . .
2:11 Chris Evans
War is a worker with a bayonet at both ends. KM
If Kirk Douglas can be French, James Coburn can be German.
1 film du côte allemand très bien fait malgré le régime nazis les allemands aussi en ont souffert
Name me a war movie that "glorifies war" and I'll prove that it really doesn't.
Good movie only if the language were on german.Jugoslavian war movie as batlle on Sutjeska batlle on .Neretva and Kozara is one of most realistic war movie with real germans actors speaking german.
its an English language movie.
@@mikem9001 In yugoslav war movie german soldiers spoke german
@@pinklady2151 That's great if the audience understands German.
@@mikem9001 They translate german dialog.
..because ..cross of iron is against the flow of the good thinking namely.. the fact that the ww2 is not german against ussr.. but allies against nazis ,,and neither nazi military neither ussr military have not intended .and can t be discussed...only allies and mostly US battles...but it s also a part of the story of ww2..is not it..?.
cant understand weather you show brits yanks or frigging eskimos fighting ,what ever the flipping conflict you gotta get it right why does everyone think just cos you mke a violent war film your gloryfying war ...absolute bollox.
yh this film is awesome check out my review
I'm going to do a proper comparison video at some point between the source material and this film.. In my opinion Peckinpah missed the mark in a lot of places. The book is a bleak battle between two massive ego's (Stransky and Steiner), Steiner is not a "Good man", he is an angry, anarchistic young man who has become what he is from a combination of personal tradgedy, indifference and tactical proficiency. The film "Cross of Iron" actually has a much happier ending for most if not all characters compared to the novel. Where Steiner sees the only people he cares about, the only people who keep him in the game get killed slowly around him until he finally snaps. There is no happy ending to "The Willing Flesh", Stransky get's transfered back to France and it is heavily implied that Steiner dies from a random Russian artillery shell after watching everyone in his platoon die in horrible ways (the worst of which is Patersnack getting crushed by a T34 before his eyes. Peckinpah's film ruins some characters and nails others, but the novel he based it on is not really faithfully represented , Sgt. Steiner in Cross of Iron is more a personal representation of Peckinpah than it is of the character in the Willing Flesh.
Generation War.
a lot of one dimensional thinking going on here by the presenter..i never watched a war movie in my life where war was 'glorified'..you are mistaking fighting for a noble cause as 'glorifying' war...I served in the military my entire adult life..been to two wars myself so I know a thing or two about it..people like you like to assume that war movies some how glorify war but over look the fact that they are telling a story..or in some cases several stories rolled into one movie..often based on soldiers' personal experiences..was 'the battle of britain'' glorifying war..'''a bridge too far..'saving private ryan'''... I could go on and on....
I had heard so many "underrated" film comments about this that I went to watch it expecting a lot more than I actually got. I'll admit I think while Peckinpah is a good filmaker, I still think hes vastly overrated. wild bunch is superb though but his billy the kid interpretation drove me to tears of boredom
Russian woman in hot tubs?
The Finns used to construct saunas close to the front line.
It was an awful low budget film, with all the actors far too old for their characters.
I thought I was in the minority disliking this film. I have tried twice watching it: the first time I found the dialogue unconvincing and something a bit fake about it and I struggled manfully to get to the end, though I frequently lost concentration. I tried it again some years later, but it hadn’t got better with age: I found myself getting VERY bored after 30 minutes and then gave up !
I liked the movie.it me interested in military history.
A RIP OFF OF SVEN HASSELS BOOKS
Hardly. The movie is based on Willi Heinrich's book, "Der Geduldige Fleisch" which was published in 1955. That is before almost all of Hassel's books.
Unlike Hassel's false claims, Heinrich actually served on the eastern front/
All this is bullshit.