As my mini-review of Amazon’s “The Tank” (Der Tiger) has gotten a lot of attention & feedback, I’m offering a brief explanation of the movie’s ending for anyone left confused by the twist.

The crew are forced to stay on the bridge despite their troops evacuating and an impending demolition in an act of madness, as the result of orders from their commander, Gerkens. He knows he is endangering others but is selfish. He orders them to stay because he is bitter and angry about personal loss, and habitually uses “duty” as an excuse. He knows it’s wrong, but thinks he can “get away” with it. All die. The rest of the film depicts Gerkens’ Purgatory (not for his crew, as is shown later). He receives orders from an Oberst “Richter” to locate and retrieve his former friend, Von Hardenburg. To do so will require taking his men – in a single Tiger tank – into dangerous territory with no assistance.

Note: The name “Richter” carries a double meaning here. In addition to being a surname, the word “Richter” also means a “judge” (i.e. richten, can mean to correct something, or also to give a legal judgment, and the word ‘das Gericht,’ means ‘courtroom.’)

If the order sounds unreasonable, it was meant to be. Everyone else knows that, including Von Hardenburg. The “mission” is to give Gerkens a chance to reflect on his actions and show desire to repent. Von Hardenburg is supposed to jog his conscience. The last time they saw each other, Gerkens destroyed Von Hardenburg’s integrity by pressuring him, over his objections, to commit a war crime. Von Hardenburg died shortly after — and went to hell. Throughout the film, memories of when he coerced Von Hardenburg start to come back to Gerkens – but he never stops to think. He obstinately blocks it from his mind and focuses on what is front of him.

Personally, however, Gerkens wants to see Von Hardenburg again because of their past friendship. So, he goes to unnecessary lengths to try to reach his friend even when it becomes increasingly clear that continuing ahead will bring harmful consequences for his crew. Gerkens pretends its about “orders,” but truthfully he does not really care about “the mission.” Gerkens behaves this way because it is what he wants to do. Crew members recognize it and point it out to him repeatedly. He ignores them.

Frequent situations arise giving Gerkens chances to redeem himself. He has many opportunities to show compassion to his crew, who genuinely admire and like him. He does not care. Although he knows them well individually and is aware of their personal struggles, he puts himself first. He also puts his men in extremely distressing and illogical situations for his selfish goals. The men are upset but follow him because they have a bond with him.

During the journey, Latin verses praying for mercy come over the radio, but Gerkens refuses to reflect on this and other strange occurrences. He is wrapped up in himself and his goals. At one point he is confronted with Waffen-SS men burning civilians. The SS commander, Totenkopf on his cap shining in the flames, reminds him of what they have in common – a focus on their “mission,” and the fire they have used to burn people to death. Gerkens pretends not to understand. He simply removes himself and his men from the scene.

Eventually he reaches the place where he finally meets Von Hardenburg – a bunker, the entrance to hell. At this point Gerkens is separated from his crew because this journey was for him and not others.

Now Von Hardenburg makes several attempts to get Gerkens to reflect on his cold-heartedness to others and gives him opportunities to leave. Gerkens refuses. Then he is no longer able to leave. Von Hardenburg reveals that time is up – it was a spiritual journey, and Gerkens has deliberately missed the point. While a logical person would have questioned strange occurrences, and a good leader would cared for his men, Gerkens was blind. He did not want to see.

It is revealed that Gerkens has ruined other people’s lives by getting them to violate their consciences and gambling with their well-being and safety. Von Hardenburg has been condemned after having agreed to burn women and children to death after Gerkens pressured him to do it. The film implies that it was another example of Gerkens cutting corners, claiming military needs but pushing people to meet goals for his own ulterior reasons. Gerkens lost his family in a fire – in Hamburg’s Nikolaikirche, among the most notorious air raid fires that took place in Germany – as a punishment for his actions.

Although Gerkens tries to lie, he can’t escape the fact that he deliberately hurt other people — including his own men — using orders as an excuse. He mattered as an individual. There was no massive bureaucracy dictating his decisions. His value as an individual is underscored by the fact that he was given a chance by divine authority to save his soul. By persistently refusing to consider others and being cruel to them on purpose, hiding behind orders, Gerkens finds himself doomed.

Many are interpreting the film as an indictment of war. But the point of the film is not religious condemnation. Rather, it illustrates the prime importance of personal responsibility in war and how leaders can affect other people. This gives it an interesting and unusual perspective among World War II films.