Just Watched 'fury'

[Wulf]

I know I shouldn't have watched it.  I should have just gone for a walk or drowned some kittens of something - anything but watch the bloody thing  but no, in the end curiosity got the better of me and I watched it - ugh!.  Gee, what a disappointment.  

 

Why in this day and age can we not have a war movie with a realistic plot line?  Is war really that dull and uninteresting that we have to make [Edited] up all the time? I mean, we know nasty things happen in war but was it really necessary for the film's director to portray American tank crews as ill-disciplined, unfeeling, oafish murderers and rapists?  Frankly, I'm really surprised there wasn't rioting in the streets over this.

 

And as for the poor old Germans, OMG, will they ever learn?  They just seem so utterly clueless in these movies when it comes to war fighting.  Maybe before the next war someone should tell them :

 

• not to attack tanks with MGs and small arms fire;
• that their PAK 75 anti-tank crews should be re-trained to operate their weapons at rates of fire at something in excess of one round every 5 minutes or so;
• that it's not smart,  even for a Tiger tank, to charge a formation of enemy tanks, (not even M4s) when you have the capability to destroy them all at long range and remain completely invulnerable while doing so; and finally, 
•  when you come across an immobilized tank with no infantry deployed in support of it; don't assault the tank again and again and again with infantry armed only with rifles and grenades when you can just cook the thing up in an instant with a panzerfaust.    

Sorry, maybe I shouldn't tell them the answers but seriously, judging from the movie, there's no chance they'll ever learn so I think we're safe.enough for now.

Edited March 14, 2015 by Bearcat
Profanity

[AbortedMan]

ALL of this and the fact that only like three people took the time to fire their weapons through the sights.

 

Thank you. I thought I was alone.

[Mikey]

they were shooting tank with rifles and hand grenades LOL thanks for your review...it bothers me too when the technical details in historical movies are all wrong

[Guest deleted@13284]

This should have been a great movie. I say should because it had all the right ingredients.The actors,the vehicles but no.Hollywood as usual f****d it up. I put off seeing it because I kind of knew what would happen but like Wulf,curiosity got the better of me.

 

I much preferred 'White Tiger' even though it had a mocked up Tiger (the replica they were making for it wasn't ready in time).

 

[Tyberan]

Fury is one of the worst war movies i've seen. 

 

The fact that they went to the trouble of getting all the props correct. They used a real Jumbo sherman, and a real bloody Tiger (the only working one at Bovington) only to use them in a ridiculous and inaccurate ways was a pure let down.

 

Avoid this movie if you can. 

[Feathered_IV]

Red Tails set the bar for awful war films for me. So when I saw Fury a couple of weeks ago, it wasn't quite so bad as that. Apart from the very valid flaws above, I did find it refreshing to see movie where the soldiers didn't stop to cry and share and learn and grow at every opportunity.

[Jade_Monkey]

This is probably a better place to discuss it: http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/forum/19-free-subject/

 

This post has nothing to do with this game.

[1./KG4_Blackwolf]

Red Tails..ugg what a movie   ..yeah I did the pay per view for Fury and I didn't like it. All the hype and it was just bad. 

[AwesomeSprawvy]

Red Tails...sigh .  I really, really, wanted that one to be good, but alas.  Anyway, I was curious about Fury and probably will still watch it, but I'll lower my expectations further.  Thanks for a the heads-up!

[SOLIDKREATE]

I know I shouldn't have watched it.  I should have just gone for a walk or drowned some kittens of something - anything but watch the bloody thing  but no, in the end curiosity got the better of me and I watched it - ugh!.  Gee, what a disappointment.  

 

Why in this day and age can we not have a war movie with a realistic plot line?  Is war really that dull and uninteresting that we have to make [Edited] up all the time? I mean, we know nasty things happen in war but was it really necessary for the film's director to portray American tank crews as ill-disciplined, unfeeling, oafish murderers and rapists?  Frankly, I'm really surprised there wasn't rioting in the streets over this.

 

And as for the poor old Germans, OMG, will they ever learn?  They just seem so utterly clueless in these movies when it comes to war fighting.  Maybe before the next war someone should tell them :

 

• not to attack tanks with MGs and small arms fire;
• that their PAK 75 anti-tank crews should be re-trained to operate their weapons at rates of fire at something in excess of one round every 5 minutes or so;
• that it's not smart,  even for a Tiger tank, to charge a formation of enemy tanks, (not even M4s) when you have the capability to destroy them all at long range and remain completely invulnerable while doing so; and finally, 
•  when you come across an immobilized tank with no infantry deployed in support of it; don't assault the tank again and again and again with infantry armed only with rifles and grenades when you can just cook the thing up in an instant with a panzerfaust.    

Sorry, maybe I shouldn't tell them the answers but seriously, judging from the movie, there's no chance they'll ever learn so I think we're safe.enough for now.

 

 

A lot of these soldiers were drafted. So, they didn't really care about discipline. In my country (USA) you have to remember that this is Hollywood. They will always put the minimum effort forward to gain max profit. Look at 'Terminator Salvation' for example. To me the movie seemed unfinished and too short. If you want quality, may I suggest 'Band of Brothers' and 'The Pacific'. You will not be let down.

Edited March 14, 2015 by Bearcat

[IIN8II]

Nothing is worse than Red Tails lol.

 

Fury was disappointing in a lot of ways. I thought that the acting and sound fx were great. I really like Ayer's style but his lack of experience with war flicks showed too much with fury.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Unsurprisingly it was appalling rubbish...

 

Didn't pay for it just wasted hours :/

[AbortedMan]

I hear Tom Hanks and Spielberg are making an USAF version of band of brothers about the mighty 8th. I don't want to jinx it, but it should be great.

[SharpeXB]

Yes, Fury was just super awful. I can't believe they premiered that film in DC with a bunch of real WWII vets. The movie made the U.S. soldiers look no better than the SS, executing prisoners just to make the new guy prove how tough he is. WTF? That deed would earn a one-way ticket to Leavenworth for Wardaddy.

[Cybermat47]

I hear Tom Hanks and Spielberg are making an USAF version of band of brothers about the mighty 8th. I don't want to jinx it, but it should be great.

Hopefully after that, they'll make a miniseries about a USN submarine in the Pacific

[Wulf]

Yes, Fury was just super awful. I can't believe they premiered that film in DC with a bunch of real WWII vets. The movie made the U.S. soldiers look no better than the SS, executing prisoners just to make the new guy prove how tough he is. WTF? That deed would earn a one-way ticket to Leavenworth for Wardaddy.

 

 

Yeah, the scene was just beyond ridiculous.  There was Pitt, 'the hero', who somehow thought it would be appropriate to bully, humiliate and belittle an impressionable young recruit by forcing him to participate in the grotesque murder of an unarmed prisoner, while a mob of baying oafs stood around cheering him on.     

 

It left me wondering if the director had originally planned some sort of post- apocalypse street gang initiation movie that went terribly, terribly wrong at some point.  Certainly the principal actors looked and behaved more like gang members than soldiers.

[Finkeren]

Why in this day and age can we not have a war movie with a realistic plot line? Is war really that dull and uninteresting that we have to make shit up all the time?

Given that one of the very best war movies of all time (Das Boot) focused primarily on being bored out of your mind, I think you might have a point here. I've talked to a few people who have been to war (ranging from the Spanish Civil War to Afghanistan) and they've all explained that being in a war is mostly about moving stuff around and sitting on your ass waiting for something to happen. One guy also said, that the 'moving stuff around'-bit was better, because it took your mind away from the constant state of fear and tension.

 

As a side note: I'm actually having some hopes for the movie 'April 9th' that has just come out here in Denmark. It's about the German assault on Denmark in 1940, a war that lasted only a few hours (and was something of a tactical failure for the Germans who suffered losses almost ten times those of the Danish defenders, even though the defenses were quickly overrun)

 

The manus is written by Tobias Lindholm ('R' and 'Kapringen') who writes incredibly realistic fiction composed solely of elements that have happened IRL and employ some non-actors who have a real life connection to the films topic for major roles.(and for some reason Pilou Asbæk always stars in a leading role in his movies)

 

I hope this is as strong as his other movies.

 

http://youtu.be/EV72_eDiU40

Edited March 14, 2015 by Finkeren

[D_Konig]

As far as soldiers executing POWs, sorry to shatter your bubble but yeah, it happens all the time on all sides. Sanity is the first thing that goes out the window.

 

As for the movie - I didn't think it was too bad until the last 30 minutes or so that were just utterly ridiculous.

 

Like someone else already mentioned, theres plenty of good world war 2 stories that are TRUE that are just as or more dramatic that would have made a great film but no, we are left with this brad pitt vs a Regiment of SS soldiers for some reason in an immobilized medium line tank in the middle of an intersection..... dumb.

 

The tactics of the SS soldiers were mind boggling and forget any sort of military training - they defy even basic human logic for survival. Once the first, second, third and fourth human waves of bodies and small arms charging point blank at the 12 oclock of an armored vehicle are cut to ribbons, what do you suppose they would do? Charge again. Why not. Hollywood.

 

I literally laughed out loud in the theatre, at one point a German dramatically threw down an MG34 and started firing at the tank hull like anyone on earth anywhere was expected to believe that was a reasonable course of action.

 

Stupid.

 

I was okay with it up until that point.

[IRRE_Belmont]

You're watching a [Edited] action movie,

not a documentary/historical movie,

Quit crying over the historical details.

Edited March 14, 2015 by Bearcat
Profanity

[6./ZG26_Custard]

Fury......Ohh dear. One word for this pile of cack. "Cack"  I have seen some cack in my time but this sits on the top of the cack pile!

 

Historical accuracy.....To hell with that, believability and creditability, well that went out the window very early on too. Oh sweet Jesus it was dire. 

 

The Pittmeister and his ridiculous crew would have lasted about 5 seconds in the finale. I can't even believe I made it that far tbh!

 

The Panzer grenadiers just threw tactics out of the window and frontally assaulted "good ole" Fury with small arms! 

They just completely forgot about the large number of panzerfaust that we had seen them carrying and in crates in a previous scene. It was no good, at this point I cried out in the cinema "what are you doing" and got promptly shushed, but several people laughed too. That summed this film up ....laughable.

 

If you want to see a relatively  descent film about a tank and crew, I would suggest The Beast of War (1988) about a Russian tank crew in Afghanistan. (not WWII I know)  but while that film didn't win any major awards and will not appeal to everyone, it blows Fury apart.

Edited March 14, 2015 by OriginalCustard

[FlatSpinMan]

I'd really been planning to watch this, and I don't mind a bit of artistic licence in war movies (or any movie for that matter), but poor infantry tactics really bother me, and I'm not even particularly knowledgable about them.

 

If they don't have quite the right tank, or the markings aren't totally realistic, fine. But when people disregard such obvious things as advancing to cover, spreading out, not making a frontal assault on a superior, sheltered force in broad daylight, etc it really ruins the moment.

 

- Star ship troopers (I know, I know! But did they really have to walk along the valley in massed ranks? Especially given that the book actually influenced the real military. )

-Batman -the last one. All those police walk right up to the bad guys en masse in broad daylight?

 

Not the best examples, just two that came to mind readily.

[Yakdriver]

Fury......Ohh dear. One word for this pile of cack. "Cack"  I have seen some cack in my time but this sits on the top of the cack pile!

OmG... Thanks! CACK!...hysterical laughs here....

 

agree on the general comments...

but that word... "cack"

 

dayyyym... stomach hurts from laughing....

have a +1!

[Rjel]

The biggest problem with movies now, besides the obvious inaccuracies, is they can't tell us a story where you actually care about the characters. Most films use the actor as a bridge to the next car chase, explosion or some other visual special effect. In the past it was the opposite. Story lines are secondary now. Intelligent dialog is a joke too. In a lot of cases the actors themselves aren't much good either. Most look good, not much more.

 

The audience has changed too. No longer are most audiences fixed on watching the film in near silence. We're too busy carrying on conversations with our companions or talking on cell phones. Next time you're in a theater pay attention to the volume the audio is played at. Never was it that loud in the past. It's mind numbing sometimes. More and more, I'll wait for a film to hit video or cable.

[Cybermat47]

I haven't seen the movie, but I did read a synopsis.

 

Apparently, Pitt's character kills a German PoW.

 

As someone posted above, this did happen. War breaks people mentally, and in a far worse way than it breaks them physically. I doubt the US Marines who took body parts from dead (and sometimes still living) Japanese troops as trophies would do so if they hadn't experienced war.

 

But later on, Pitt's character apparently protects a German Woman and her Daughter. This proves wrong an above post, which said that the film presents American troops in the same light as the SS. We all know what the SS would do in such a situation.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lr2GIHjR_yg

 

As for the OP saying that it's not smart for a Tiger to charge a tank formation, this could be seen as being realistic. After all, the film is set in 1945, and we all know that German troops in those days were generally just random people with a uniform slapped on them.

 

But still, it is annoying that war films aren't as accurate as we'd like them to be. It doesn't usually bother me, but some are so painfully inaccurate (I'm looking at you, U-571) that, when it comes to military hardware, there are TV shows about High School that are more accurate!

 

Seriously. There's some weird stuff out there.

 

At least it seems that the guy who wrote Fury has improved since U-571. He's not angering the British Prime Minister this time.

Edited March 14, 2015 by Cybermat47

[Trooper117]

I certainly didn't expect historical accuracy, it is Hollywood after all.
As an 'action movie' set in WWII it was ok. Watchable if you aren't a super rivet counter set on perfection, lol!

[6./ZG26_Custard]

I certainly didn't expect historical accuracy, it is Hollywood after all.

As an 'action movie' set in WWII it was ok. Watchable if you aren't a super rivet counter set on perfection, lol!

Hollywood movie, yes indeed, but frontal attacks on a tank with Kar 98's and MG34's! Merciful Zeus nooooooooooooo!

[mb339pan]

bad war movies, watching you l 'impression that Americans are fighting versus idiots, save only the special effects / sound and direction, the rest forgettable

 

 

This movie is definitely better

Edited March 14, 2015 by mb339pan

[Finkeren]

Lebanon is the 'Das Boot' of tank movies, and it's quite great and very haunting.

[Feathered_IV]

I hear Tom Hanks and Spielberg are making an USAF version of band of brothers about the mighty 8th. I don't want to jinx it, but it should be great.

 

I'm a little worried about that.  The Pacific was decidedly below par in acting and script writing, and it almost makes me wonder if Band of Brothers was a fluke. 

[Finkeren]

The Pacifics worst problem IMHO was the script with its disjointed story archs that ended up in a great big nothing.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Hollywood movie, yes indeed, but frontal attacks on a tank with Kar 98's and MG34's! Merciful Zeus nooooooooooooo!

That's a great tactic actually. Make them shoot the turret and let the bullets rain until the gunner is deaf. Than he can't hear the commander's firing order and you can deal with it safely

 

Haven't watched it but from the reviews I've read it's a shame that this is the only movie a real Tiger participated in (yet).

[6./ZG26_Custard]

it almost makes me wonder if Band of Brothers was a fluke.

 

 

The Pacifics worst problem IMHO was the script with its disjointed story archs that ended up in a great big nothing.

I wonder if it was also something to do with the source material that each series was taken from?

 

From a personal viewpoint, Stephen E. Ambrose has written some fantastic books, where as Robert Leckie, although a very good author is not in the same league in my humble view. Of course, it does all depend on the script writers and the actors. I could never get over how many British actors played Americans in BoB's!

Edited March 14, 2015 by OriginalCustard

[9./JG27golani79]

I'm a little worried about that.  The Pacific was decidedly below par in acting and script writing, and it almost makes me wonder if Band of Brothers was a fluke. 

 

I think The Pacific is at the same level as BoB - it just had a different focus and I guess that´s what most people don´t like about it as I could imagine they expected it to be more or less the same as BoB.

 

 

Fury I think I´ll watch sometime in the future on netflix / BluRay / or whatever but I´ll pass on it for now.

[NachtJaeger110]

After watching Fury I had the feeling of watching two completely different movies.

 

I loved it until the crossroads battle. Nothing until then happened that was complete bollocks. The attack on the paks was cool (hey, its april 45, could have been unexperienced old men and kids manning those 75s... They just missed, fine. That ricochet... Man that was cool. Stupid sound though, but cool. And the velocity and the looks of the tracers were about right. The attack on the village was cool, too. The director didn't know that the term "willie pete" only came up in the vietnam war, but hey...

The tiger battle was cool,too. Real tiger after all! Remember the holland scene from band of brothers? Watch it again after fury, it feels so cheap and the guns feel weak. Fury is the first movie in which you felt the pure violence of a ww2 era cannon.

 

All has been said about the battle that followed... Absolutely nothing there makes sense.... Not in the slightest way. The stupidity is downright insulting for any viewers with the slightest knowledge about tactics.... It even tops the end battle of Ryan... As if the director just forgot everything he was aiming for in the first 2/3 of the movie. I still just can't believe how different it became and how implausible the characters suddenly acted... Wardaddy, after all well-versed in the bible?? come on...

 

But until before then, In my opinion, the movie is one of the best and most realistic on the subject. After all, I did not see a single wrong piece of equipment. This is worth a lot for me.

[Bearcat]

Red Tails set the bar for awful war films for me. So when I saw Fury a couple of weeks ago, it wasn't quite so bad as that. Apart from the very valid flaws above, I did find it refreshing to see movie where the soldiers didn't stop to cry and share and learn and grow at every opportunity.

 

It was bad.. imagine how disappointed I was.. The script was horrible.. the acting was wooden .. thew sets and scenery was good.. the best thing about it was seeing all those lanes .. but even the character development was horrible...  Raygun?!! Really... and the cliche German with the scar was too much.. I was waiting for him to pull out a monacle .

 

I hear Tom Hanks and Spielberg are making an USAF version of band of brothers about the mighty 8th. I don't want to jinx it, but it should be great.

 

Hopefully.. The Pacific was ok... but like some have said.. I think the story arcs were just different.. The main character in BoB was just so different from the main character in TP..

 

Fury......Ohh dear. One word for this pile of cack. "Cack"  I have seen some cack in my time but this sits on the top of the cack pile!

 

Historical accuracy.....To hell with that, believability and creditability, well that went out the window very early on too. Oh sweet Jesus it was dire. 

 

The Pittmeister and his ridiculous crew would have lasted about 5 seconds in the finale. I can't even believe I made it that far tbh!

 

The Panzer grenadiers just threw tactics out of the window and frontally assaulted "good ole" Fury with small arms! 

They just completely forgot about the large number of panzerfaust that we had seen them carrying and in crates in a previous scene. It was no good, at this point I cried out in the cinema "what are you doing" and got promptly shushed, but several people laughed too. That summed this film up ....laughable.

 

If you want to see a relatively  descent film about a tank and crew, I would suggest The Beast of War (1988) about a Russian tank crew in Afghanistan. (not WWII I know)  but while that film didn't win any major awards and will not appeal to everyone, it blows Fury apart.

 

I think calling Fury crack is a  misnomer...  crack is addictive.. While at face value and as an action flick Fury was ok...  I have no desire to see it again.. unlike say.. Inglorious Basterds .. which took extreme license .. but because we knew that going in.. it was an entirely different ball game.

 

I certainly didn't expect historical accuracy, it is Hollywood after all.

As an 'action movie' set in WWII it was ok. Watchable if you aren't a super rivet counter set on perfection, lol!

 

Yuppers....

[6./ZG26_Custard]

 

 

I think calling Fury crack is a misnomer... crack is addictive.. While at face value and as an action flick Fury was ok... I have no desire to see it again.. unlike say.. Inglorious Basterds .. which took extreme license .. but because we knew that going in.. it was an entirely different ball game.

 

 

It certainly wasn't addictive Bearcat, but I'm afraid it was my Britishness coming out.

 

UK definition of cack:

noun

[mass noun]

1 Excrement; dung:

 

I should of just said it was bloody awful

[SCG_Neun]

My father was in the tank destroyers during the war and nothing in this movie related to anything we had discussed. I was thoroughly dissapointed with this movie....Too Hollywood for me

[SYN_Mike77]

For me, Fury did one thing very well:  it showed the claustraphobia  of living and fighting in a tank.  Has any movie really done that before? 

[Finkeren]

For me, Fury did one thing very well: it showed the claustraphobia of living and fighting in a tank. Has any movie really done that before?

Lebanon did. And did it much better.

[SOLIDKREATE]

I hear Tom Hanks and Spielberg are making an USAF version of band of brothers about the mighty 8th. I don't want to jinx it, but it should be great.

 

 

Yes, it is called "The Mighty Eighth".

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnpVgYHTvPE