One thing’s clear: It SHOULD have been Steamboat who killed Mellish! I wish I had never had my ignorance of this matter alleviated! I like the inaccurate interpretation of the movie better. 
AClockwordMelon speaks for us all.
In fact I RENOUNCE this knowledge. (Where’s the highlight and delete button for short term memory?)
Oh sure, and I guess Steamboat Willie was the one who machine gunned the landing craft Miller’s men were in at the very beginning, and was the spotter for the sniper who shot Vin Diesel as well. Just make it into a Mel Gibson movie.
The shot in question is pretty clear in that it shows (from over Willies shoulder) Willie aim and fire at the Capt. who is clearly hit by the shot and then falls forward. One could argue that someone else was also shooting at Miller at the same time AND they fired in unison AND Willie missed but the other didn’t. But that’s contrived to the point of ridiculous. At this point, we’re getting into grassy knoll territory.
They also show Upham witness this act.
Uh, but it was in that same battle…
It’s already a huge coincidence that Steamboat, from earlier in the movie, happened to be involved in the same battle that they were. It wouldn’t be much more of a stretch to have him be the one who killed Mellish and it would provide more motivation as to why Upham snapped on him after the surrender.
I wouldn’t really say that. This happens earlier in the day from when they reach Ryan, right? It would make sense that the first unit that Willie reaches is on their way there. It would have to be somewhat nearby anyway and it appears that the objective of controlling that bridge would be somewhat of a priority for all soldiers in that immediate area.
Alright, you’re right, it isn’t a huge coincidence.
But it was a big coincidence that he happened to shoot Miller. It wouldn’t have been a stretch to change it so that instead of him happening to shoot Miller, it could have been he who happened to kill Millish, which I think would have been more powerful, what with him passing a crying Upham on the stairs.
I would have preferred that is all. I certainly don’t see it as this giant mistake in the movie.
Well, I put mine in a little wooden box on top of my bookshelf.
I said ‘shoot him’ as a roving enemy would only jeopardize me and my men, however, I see no reason why you couldn’t stuff a gag in his mouth and tie him someplace hidden.
Either he chews his way out or gets rescued days later, far too long for his intelligence to be useful, or he dies of starvation in which case you only indirectly kill him.
That isn’t the situation in the film though.
So do you want to shoot him now or wait until you get home?
I don’t think you understand how war works. Here’s a start: Laws of War.
If you are subject to the U.S. Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), and if you surrender to the enemy before you are compelled to do so, you can be found guilty of Article 99: Misbehavior Before the Enemy. People found guilty under this article can be sentenced to death.
Soldiers on both sides are obligated to fight to the utmost, but if compelled to surrender, the other side is not permitted to torture or execute them. Violators of these rules can be prosecuted as war criminals.
After the film was released, didn’t they they interview some WWII combat vets and asked if the film was true in regards to the killing after the surrender of the Germans at Omaha beach. I believe one said the Germans would surrender only after they ran out of ammunition. This is after they had killed their buddies on the beach.