Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I really liked Fury. There were certainly weak elements, and the final battle let the film down, but it did a lot right well elsewhere.

Personally I really the take on morality in the film – while it showed the immorality of war it wasn’t as simple as a straight up anti-war movie. Consider that while the veteran crew of the tank were largely shown as brutal and brutalised men, the most honourable thing they did was deciding to fight when they had every excuse to flee. And consider that while the film was largely the story of one man’s journey in to becoming a violent killer in the end he is saved by an act of mercy from a German soldier – a member of SS that he had been taught to hate above all else. I think there’s enough complexity in those elements that Fury deserves to be treated as a really interesting take on war.

If none of that floats your boat and all that worries you are the various inaccuracies, well consider that war films that feature tanks are pretty rare, ones that use the right tanks even rarer than that… let alone ones that actually use real, working tanks. So maybe the Tiger should have moved through the situation differently, and the Shermans definitely shouldn’t have advanced in front of infantry when clearing out the town. But then they also got a whole lot right that’s been missing from Hollywood depictions of tanks – finally instead of tanks being rolling coffins we saw their firepower on display, performing a job no other weapon of war could do.

 Barksdale wrote:
I saw it a couple of weeks ago. I liked it. Not great but not bad. The last fight scene really wrecked it. Way too ridiculous.

One thought I had during that last scene is that it would have made a lot more sense if the German unit had been Volksturm, or perhaps even Volksturm led by a handful of SS troops. Then the disorganised attacks and commander’s orders that felt more like political rallying calls would have made more sense.

I can see why, for the sake of the film, they wanted to make the fight against elite troops because it wouldn’t have been very heroic to die while mowing down hordes of children and old men, but the end result showing SS troops acting like an untrained rabble just didn’t work.

The movie was alright. I'd say of all the characters the 'transformers' and 'indiana jones and the crystal skull' guy was the worst of them. The big characters were the leader of the tank and the rookie. The other two guys manning the tanks also had some decent moments with the rookie. The 'transformers' guy didn't really have a big role other than being #2 of the tank. That guy just doesn't work with a beard. I'm guessing they just rubbed dirt on his face or something.

Oh and this movie won't be 'saving private ryan' no matter how hard it tries.

---------

Not sure if it's true but way back when on the history channel they showed that part where they would hang people with the sign on poles about 'being cowards that tried to flee instead of fight'.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

Oh and this movie won't be 'saving private ryan' no matter how hard it tries.

I don't think Fury tries to have the same story or moral as SPR...

 d-usa wrote:

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

Oh and this movie won't be 'saving private ryan' no matter how hard it tries.

I don't think Fury tries to have the same story or moral as SPR...

Agreed. This felt much more like a simple war film. WITH TANKS!

Let me rank the modern war films(series) I like.

Saving Private Ryan
A Bridge to far
Band of Brothers
The Pacific
Full Metal Jacket
Letters from Iwo Jima/Flags of Our Fathers
The Big Red one
Midway
Das Boot
Tora Tora Tora
Patton
Platoon
Apocalypse now
Enemy At the Gates

Fury doesn't come close to any of the above movies/series.

GG

 LordofHats wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:


I loved it. There is a story of a Russian T34 in 1942 in a natural chokepoint by a river that held off a regiemnt sized force for a day, because they couldn't kill it.

This was a K1, not a T34. And it wasn't a Regiment. it was the entire 7th Panzer Division*. And yes. It is one hell of a tale. In 1942, the K1 was literally unkillable by anything the Germans had. Artillery, tanks, satchel charges, nothing could pierce that armor.

*Technically, they weren't holding off the division so much as making it impossible for the division to move. The K1 actually broke down at that position, and proceeded to fire on any Germans it saw. Just so happened those Germans were fuel trucks for the 7th, who couldn't move because they didn't have enough gas.

KV-1.

The K-1 is a T-34/85M using the Vietnamese designation. (Alternately, the K1 is also a Korean MBT.)

My correction got corrected XD

@generalgrog: Which is funny because i really liked 'enemy at the gates'. The story of a soviet sniper in world war II during some of the most brutal battles in the war. It was pretty awesome.

Btw where do you rate that movie about the soviet nuclear submarine that gets captured by the usa after it's about to be destroyed. I think it was called 'k-19: the widow-maker'.

Vasily Zaytsev has over three hundred confirmed kills. he would have seen every single one, can you imagine that, knowing you've taken over three hundred lives?
I need to watch 'enemy at the gates, maybe they'd have it at the market.

Same with the finish guy, I think he even killed more than Vasily. White Death.

I think whats worse being a Sniper back then, was the means employed to kill the enemy. Luring them into "safe zones" and other nasty tricks.

to paraphrase fullmetal alchemist: brotherhood "A foot soldier can just aim and shoot, never being sure who they've killed. a sniper though, a sniper sees every single man he kills, and the aftermath of those actions."

I saw it a bit back.

I thought it was ok. but definitely could of seen more tank on tank action.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:
@generalgrog: Which is funny because i really liked 'enemy at the gates'. The story of a soviet sniper in world war II during some of the most brutal battles in the war. It was pretty awesome.

Btw where do you rate that movie about the soviet nuclear submarine that gets captured by the usa after it's about to be destroyed. I think it was called 'k-19: the widow-maker'.

Actually one of my least favorite Harrison Ford Movies.

It was ok...but not great.

I'd rather watch it then Fury though. LOL

GG

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
During filming, they annoyed people in England with German troops marching around of remembrance day. It never really recovered from that bad PR.

I will wait for the DVD release.

I never heard that and I live in the town where the production was based. Brad Pitt and Angeline Jolie came into the shop where my wife works to buy cards and books.

Another good one out there is Sahara. It is a remake of the Humphrey Bogart 1943 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahara_(1943_film)] one of the same name with James Belushi in 1995 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahara_(1995_film)]
The Bogart one was better in my opinion, but both were from a technical point very well done.
The Real Star of both was an M3 Lee Tank.
That and the Bogart one also has the distinction of being the only war film with no Female Cast Members.

 generalgrog wrote:

 flamingkillamajig wrote:
@generalgrog: Which is funny because i really liked 'enemy at the gates'. The story of a soviet sniper in world war II during some of the most brutal battles in the war. It was pretty awesome.

Btw where do you rate that movie about the soviet nuclear submarine that gets captured by the usa after it's about to be destroyed. I think it was called 'k-19: the widow-maker'.

Actually one of my least favorite Harrison Ford Movies.

It was ok...but not great.

I'd rather watch it then Fury though. LOL

GG

Really? You can't think of a worse Harrison Ford movie XD Like, that one where he's trying to save his family, or that one with the terrorists on a plane, or that one with the crystal skull? Or the one with cowboys and aliens

I did say "ONE of my least favorite" not THEE least favorite.

GG

I liked it, it wasn't perfect, lacked much of a meaningful narrative but it was nice to see more conventional effects and actual tanks. The sound and effects were fantastic. The sagging middle and the end battle were a let down, especially the end battle considering there's a shot of all the ss marching and it seemed like every other guy had a panzerfaust (as others have mentioned). I was happy it wasn't a "ra ra murica" thing and enjoyed that they pulled no punches in terms of the brutality. I had a hard time believing they'd all willingly stay instead of fleeing, there needed to a bit more in the way of established consequence if they failed in holding the germans.

 sebster wrote:

 Barksdale wrote:
I saw it a couple of weeks ago. I liked it. Not great but not bad. The last fight scene really wrecked it. Way too ridiculous.

One thought I had during that last scene is that it would have made a lot more sense if the German unit had been Volksturm, or perhaps even Volksturm led by a handful of SS troops. Then the disorganised attacks and commander’s orders that felt more like political rallying calls would have made more sense.

I can see why, for the sake of the film, they wanted to make the fight against elite troops because it wouldn’t have been very heroic to die while mowing down hordes of children and old men, but the end result showing SS troops acting like an untrained rabble just didn’t work.

Exactly my thoughts. I still think they could have pulled it off better. I mean, I really enjoyed the rest of the film. That last scene was just so poorly executed it really took me out of the experience.

I loved the movie, no complaints.

BTW you all owe me some thanks for the Tiger Tank, because I put £50 into the Tank Museum's charity fund for keeping it operational.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
BTW you all owe me some thanks for the Tiger Tank, because I put £50 into the Tank Museum's charity fund for keeping it operational.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
BTW you all owe me some thanks for the Tiger Tank, because I put £50 into the Tank Museum's charity fund for keeping it operational.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
BTW you all owe me some thanks for the Tiger Tank, because I put £50 into the Tank Museum's charity fund for keeping it operational.

 sebster wrote:
So maybe the Tiger should have moved through the situation differently, and the Shermans definitely shouldn’t have advanced in front of infantry when clearing out the town.

Someone already mentioned the issue with the former, but what was with the latter - how is that supposed to work? I don't know much about WW2 tank combat.

 LuciusAR wrote:
Saw it a couple of weeks ago. Considering the film had being heavily pushing its self on its ‘realism’ largely based on the fact they managed to get a real Easy Eight Sherman and Tiger tank involved, it then they then seem to squander it by completely getting the actual battles completely wrong. Most of the battles scene where ludicrous and made Saving Private Ryan look like a detailed documentary in comparison.

The Germans never make any attempt to hit and run, as they were doing at that stage in the war. Instead they seen to throw themselves fanatically onto American bullets. The climactic battle scene in particular has the SS charging Fury’s machine guns like depressed lemmings. They don’t even breaking out the panzerfauts until after about 15 minutes into the fight.

Didn't you know that Hollywood has a strict "Dead Nazi" quota they have to fill anytime a movie has Nazis in it?

Its a function of how long the movie is. (Length-# of bad guys/# of heroes)^2= required # of onscreen nazi deaths

 Anpu42 wrote:
Another good one out there is Sahara. It is a remake of the Humphrey Bogart 1943 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahara_(1943_film)] one of the same name with James Belushi in 1995 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahara_(1995_film)]
The Bogart one was better in my opinion, but both were from a technical point very well done.
The Real Star of both was an M3 Lee Tank.
That and the Bogart one also has the distinction of being the only war film with no Female Cast Members.

Fury pretty much was a cross between Sahara and The Wild Bunch.

 Ouze wrote:


Someone already mentioned the issue with the former, but what was with the latter - how is that supposed to work? I don't know much about WW2 tank combat.

A tank advancing with no infantry support is basically a dead tank. Contrary to how films may display, a tank alone with no support is not that hard to destroy. they're loud, slow, and no matter how armored, they can be blown up (unless you're a KV-1 in 1942 ). EDIT: Not to mention their extremely limited field of vision. A group of experienced infantry, in reality, would not generally be challenged taking out a lone tank with no other support. This is especially true in closed quarters, like a town, as a single guy waiting around a corner with a good shot is going to disable that tank. In other words, mother fething corner campers.

Properly, the infantry would advance in front of the tank, spotting any dangers, as they are far more mobile than the tank is, and making it difficult for the tank to be flanked or surrounded.

So in real life it's a lot like Battlefield 4, is what you're saying? Disappointing.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:
Another good one out there is Sahara. It is a remake of the Humphrey Bogart 1943 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahara_(1943_film)] one of the same name with James Belushi in 1995 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahara_(1995_film)]
The Bogart one was better in my opinion, but both were from a technical point very well done.
The Real Star of both was an M3 Lee Tank.
That and the Bogart one also has the distinction of being the only war film with no Female Cast Members.

Fury pretty much was a cross between Sahara and The Wild Bunch.

The Wild Bunch with or without the Battle of Bloody Porch?

Rubberanvil wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:
Another good one out there is Sahara. It is a remake of the Humphrey Bogart 1943 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahara_(1943_film)] one of the same name with James Belushi in 1995 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahara_(1995_film)]
The Bogart one was better in my opinion, but both were from a technical point very well done.
The Real Star of both was an M3 Lee Tank.
That and the Bogart one also has the distinction of being the only war film with no Female Cast Members.

Fury pretty much was a cross between Sahara and The Wild Bunch.

The Wild Bunch with or without the Battle of Bloody Porch?

Both are as about Bloody as the Original Halloween.

 Ouze wrote:
So in real life it's a lot like Battlefield 4, is what you're saying? Disappointing.

Tankers would actually refuse orders to advance into built up areas without infantry support around them.

Also I like this: