Por un soldado perdido

Having lived and worked in the Netherlands and knowing its language, I have been interested in the Dutch cinema as well, particularly if Rutger Hauer or Jeroen Krabbé present. There have lots of films on the WWII been made, nicely versatile ones, as the period was one of the most painful and complex in the country's history. Thus, I was eager to learn how the war era was made compatible with such a sensitive topic like man-boy relationship.

But the latter was not much visible in Voor een verloren soldaat (perhaps in the autobiographical novel of the same title - I have not read that); it was even not clearly visible if there was some mutual erotics at all. What we saw was a 20+ years foreign soldier acting as a caring mentor, showing a boy far from home and family new angles of life; besides, I do not believe that showing affection towards a boy would have been normally accepted by both the religious Dutchmen and militant Canadians in those days...

Anyway, the mood in the film is pleasant, performances realistic, and viewers obtain a nice overview of Friesland under slackening Nazi occupation. But do not try to find any sensationalism, as mentioned, it is a good depiction of friendship - with some affection - during a war period when many things and deeds are perceived in another way.

It's unlikely that a movie like "For a Lost Soldier" would be made today. Some might say we live in more 'protective' times; others might say we live in more puritanical times. I have no intention of getting into arguments over the Me2 Movement or indeed about how cinema and the world at large has become more censorial on what we can see or say or do. "For a Lost Soldier" is by no means an explicit film but its theme is clear. It's about a 12 year old boy in war-time Holland who not only develops a friendship with an older Canadian soldier but also falls in love with him as well and, we are lead to believe, probably experiences something sexual with him, too. The boy grows up gay, (he is played in adult life by Jeroen Krabbe), though I would suggest he was always gay and was simply acting on his nature.

Since the film was made in 1992 the age of consent has gone down and the world in general is thankfully much more accepting of gay relationships in all forms though children are still protected in law from exploitation and rightly so, though someone seeing "For a Lost Soldier" might argue no exploitation takes place while others will argue that Walt, the soldier's relationship with the child is predatory since it is he who initiates the sexual element and may argue that the abuse is at least emotional. Some, on the other hand, will see him as innocent as the boy.

Of course, what the film basically is is a love story; a tale of first love, the difference being that both protagonists are male and one of them is a child. It was controversial when it was made and it's just as controversial now. It discusses issues that most people still find repugnant and it will always be a film that will have difficulty finding its audience. It isn't that well-made; director Roeland Kerbosch isn't the most proficient of film-makers and the acting is adequate at best but it remains a brave and challenging film and ultimately a very touching one. Unfortunately, times being what they are, it's now almost impossible to see.

I have watched this film many times and I recently viewed it again. The only really interesting part of the movie is the relationship between the young boy and the soldier. Everything else that happens in the film is really just to establish why this young man would be drawn to someone kind and caring. What I wish would have been delved into more was how the soldier came to feel the way he does about the kid. He talks a little about his past with his father and mother but never really explains himself personally. He does not look like he would have ever had a problem getting a girl, so his "prediliction" becomes even more a mystery.

I really applaud the fact that the film maker was able to tell this story so sensitively without it being lurid. It is a shame I think that a film like this could never have been made in America, "the land of the free".

VOOR EEN VERLOREN SOLDAAT (FOR A LOST SOLDIER) is a startlingly frank look at a young boy's love affair with a Canadian soldier during the last days of World War II. Thirteen-year-old Jeroen (Maarten Smit) is sent by his parents from his home in Amsterdam to the countryside because of the food shortages in the cities. He is there when the Allied troops liberate the Netherlands, effectively ending the war for the Dutch people. Jeroen meets and is immediately attracted to Walt (Andrew Kelley), one of the Canadian soldiers. The resulting love affair is handled with extraordinary sensitivity and frankness; this story would never have been filmed in the US. Despite Jeroen's being underage, there is no suggestion of child abuse; indeed, at certain points the film makes clear that the young boy is pursuing the older man. Told in flashback, this achingly romantic film has a dreamlike quality that leaves you wanting more.

The many favorable reviews hailing this film as a cinematic delight are well taken. The delicate subject matter of a brief romantic relationship between an allied WWII soldier and a young boy in the occupied Nehterlands received a beautiful treatment. Without becoming lurid or vulgar, it is implied that the innocent "child" and the young soldier engaged in a sex act.

Many layers of sub-plots surround the story. The people in the village setting appear deeply religious, constantly learning how to be proper followers of Scriptural guidance. Sermons given to the locals, amidst the visiting soldiers are both thankful for the liberators' arrival, yet warning the "young women" not to be tempting these men to be lead astray. It was a subtle switch from preaching in Englsih, to the native Dutch that showed who the audience for that particular part of the sermon was.

There are many references to sexual tensions. The teenage boys suddenly notice the physical beauty in teenage girls. Without doubt, there was plenty of "fraternizing" between soldiers and local women. The scene where the young main character is out "exploring" with a slightly older boy is charged with sexual innuendo. The boy's "step father" is quite observant about the "goings on", yet offers no direct objections, only indirect and vague advice.

The question of whether a mere child can give consent to sexual activity with an adult remains. The picture of the soldiers who came to liberate the town is one of men who felt entitlement. They felt they had every right to "have fun" after saving the people from their evil oppressors. Although the young girls, and even our 12 year old main character, were willing participants in any "affairs", the sense that the soldiers felt entitled to receive whatever they desired in exchange for their desperately needed Military help, and the many hand-outs of Life-Savers, Gum, Cigarettes etc. changes nothing about their feeling of power over the situation.

For a grown man, a love affair of a few days can hardly be considered "love", but for a child whose innocence is forever lost, this is an affair they will never forget. Love is something not to be trifled with. A child's innocence should be regarded with no less respect. Whatever the "feelings" of the heart may have been, a 12 year old does well to give it a bit more time before seeking that first love.