MovieChat Forums > We Were Soldiers (2002) Discussion > Has the ending been changed?

Has the ending been changed?


Just saw this again on Netflix, and it's still great. But I am a bit confused.

I hadn't seen the film since its 2002 release and I was surprised to get to the end and find it did not contain a scene I thought I remembered clearly from seeing it in the theatre.

The scene I think I remember has Col. Moore sitting down with two guys, one a general and the other a D.C. politico, in Saigon who congratulate him on his victory. But he tells them of the ferocity with which the North Vietnamese fight for their homeland, which he takes as a clue they will never give up, no matter what their casualty rate is.

Just previous to this scene, he has discovered the North Vietnamese officer's red book with the photo of his wife inside and he realizes their tenacity is because they are fighting for their homeland. The other guys don't get this and thank him again before dismissing him.

I remember in 2002 hearing someplace that a scene such as this really did occur between Moore and two guys (one of whom may have been Westmoreland and the other of whom may have been McNamara), except it was in D.C., not in Vietnam.

Did I just dream up that scene for this movie, or did I actually see it in the theatrical version? And if I did, why was it cut?

reply

I remember a deleted scene where he's sitting down with two guys and they tell him something along the lines of "dont worry we'll drive the little bastards home soon enough". To which old Mel replies "with all due respect we're not going to be able to drive the little bastards back home, they already are home!"

I thought it was a great scene and was surprised it was'nt in the final cut.

reply

It can still be found in the deleted scenes like you said; as a bit of trivia, those 'two guys' were supposed to be General Westmorland (the US Commander in South Vietnam) & Robert McNamara (The SecDef under LBJ);

reply

The director said he removed the scene because the wanted the point of the movie to be about the battle, not the politics of the story.

reply

[deleted]