Brad Pitt's WW2 tank movie 'Fury' review ...

Speeddemon651 · **Joined:** Tue Jan 25, 2011 2:03 pm **Posts:** 235

WW2 films are probably my favorite, always have been. With less and less of these movies being made now as the distance from the greatest era grows, authentic WW2 military hardware and props get harder and more expensive to find and use every year. Not every movie can be a 10 part series (Band of Brothers) or have the same budget as Saving Private Ryan.

This movie did something I can't recall many other movies doing, it filmed an entire movie in and not further than 50 feet from a tank. It's an experience and essence of something not many other movies have captured and as gritty as some of its characters were, it captured good and darkness in people in a war along with the American spirit and drive to win of that era.

As someone who is 29 and wishes this country could rediscover and and embrace everything that made the USA great generations ago, I think it was a great movie, one that every person in this country should see along with Saving Private Ryan and the Band of Brothers series.

sandiego89 · **Joined:** Mon May 21, 2012 12:28 pm **Posts:** 1161

ErrolC wrote:

Sounds promising, and probably worth a rare trip to the movie theatre.

The publicity about 'Fury' reminded me that I never got around to editing most of my photos from Classic Fighters 2013 Airshow in NZ. errolgc, on Flickr

Omaka13_4071flr by errolgc, on Flickr

Neat Natter! Thanks for posting. I looked at your flicker link and was pleased to see they actually built that replica Natter with the fuselage break for the pilot separation. Well done.

Baldeagle · **Posted:** Sat Oct 18, 2014 9:18 pm

I will echo Mark and Jim, Fury was OK, but far inferior to Saving Private Ryan, which had a better story, better acting, and less "Hollywood". Budget didn't seem to be a problem, but Fury has a little too much cliche, and a little too much music coming to a crescendo at "just the right time", and so on-

-

JDK · **Posted:** Sat Oct 18, 2014 9:45 pm

Interesting what Mark Allan M said earlier, as that confirmed my suspicion of the film...

Baldeagle wrote:

... a little too much cliche ...

The trailer linked earlier guaranteed I wouldn't bother wasting my time with it.

It could be in a 'how not to write script' class with the entire narrative arc of the film in (dreadful, predictable) cliche.

You can write up, and inspire, or you can play safe and pander to the thoughtless demographic. It's a choice.

Regards,

Milmart Militaria · **Joined:** Tue Jun 10, 2014 12:10 am **Posts:** 59

ErrolC wrote:

Omaka13_5312flr by errolgc, on Flickr

Nice - postwar Chinese CJ750 bikes not WW2 but popular with re-enactors

kalamazookid · **Posted:** Mon Oct 20, 2014 6:34 am

Saw it expecting to be entertained, and I was. If you're expecting a documentary (it's a movie, so I don't know why you would expect that anyway) you'll be disappointed. It was a typical war movie- full of cliche's and overly heroic, but still very good. I'd spend the $7 to see it again.

Quote:

This movie did something I can't recall many other movies doing, it filmed an entire movie in and not further than 50 feet from a tank. It's an experience and essence of something not many other movies have captured and as gritty as some of its characters were, it captured good and darkness in people in a war along with the American spirit and drive to win of that era.

As someone who is 29 and wishes this country could rediscover and and embrace everything that made the USA great generations ago, I think it was a great movie, one that every person in this country should see along with Saving Private Ryan and the Band of Brothers series.

I second all of those comments. Well said.

L-4Pilot · **Joined:** Tue Jan 18, 2011 10:35 pm **Posts:** 616

Saw it Saturday..................Good but not great.

p51 · **Posted:** Mon Oct 20, 2014 10:20 am

After seeing it, I'm expecting a backlash from people saying something like, "Nobody in the 'Greatest Generation' did stuff like this..."

L-4Pilot wrote:

Saw it Saturday..................Good but not great.

Fair enough.
Saw it Friday night, really liked it but wasn't blown away like I was by Private Ryan.
Will be buying it on DVD as it'd be good to pass over several scenes you only need to see once or twice... Loved the scenes of the tank fights and still can't get over a real Tiger I finally got used in a film under its own power.
People kept talking up the movie ahead of time about how authentic it'd be. I agree it was, but 'Red Tails' got most of the detail stuff right and look what a turkey that film was.

L-4Pilot · **Joined:** Tue Jan 18, 2011 10:35 pm **Posts:** 616

We had some great tanks and vehicles at Florala when I was flying top cover for the Allied forces. They are pretty awesome up close, love the sound.

https://plus.google.com/photos/10337410 ... 0615753051

SaxMan · **Posted:** Mon Oct 20, 2014 10:51 pm

I think what made Saving Private Ryan so amazing was that Hollywood had never filmed anything that realistic before, especially the first 30 minutes of the movie with the Omaha Beach landing. Band of Brothers picked up the torch from Saving Private Ryan. Now, if we could only see an aviation movie of this kind of scope and realism. Probably the closest so far (IMHO) are "Twelve O'Clock High" and "Battle of Britain" in my books...both done long before the era of CGI and overdone special effects.

Scooby · **Joined:** Sun Apr 13, 2014 2:45 pm **Posts:** 142

[url=http://warbirdinformationexchange.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=539811#p539811]
People kept talking up the movie ahead of time about how authentic it'd be. I agree it was, but 'Red Tails' got most of the detail stuff right and look what a turkey that film was.[/quote]

I did enjoy the movie and I thought the acting was great.

The battle scenes were not authentic though, nor we're the tactics. The tanks would have never moved unsupported without infantry, there were no shortages of tanks at that period of the war, they would have flanked the Tiger, although it would have never been at those depicted close quarters for battle.

When the tank was disabled and alone, they wouldn't have done what they did that late in the war with the outcome all but decided. They wouldn't have proceeded alone to begin with.

Saving Private Ryan and Band of Brothers are still the most realistic.

Milmart Militaria · **Joined:** Tue Jun 10, 2014 12:10 am **Posts:** 59

I've seen it twice, mainly for the field gear aspect, and give it a 7/10, not woeful / bad just not "great". I agree with the comment about the Loader - OTT representation and pretty vile character.

I have to say I was pretty under whelmed with the Tiger sequence which was much hyped leading up the film release. I thought ended up being lame and predictable, unlike real tank vs tank combat

Mark Allen M · **Joined:** Fri Feb 03, 2012 1:48 pm **Posts:** 7558

Yah! I was thinking I was being too critical and jaded but I'm reading similar posts stating similar observations. Again the problem with many of us is that we pretty much know the reality and facts as to how things were back then. There were too many instances in the movie where I was put off by what I saw as overly unrealistic. For me these unrealistic scenes were a distraction to actually sitting back and just trying to enjoy it for what it was. That's the drawback, for me at least, in being an enthusiast of our passion I tend to be far too critical. The bomber stream comes blatantly to mind as well. I'll never understand why the CGI guys have to completely fill the screen with far too many airplanes. Haven't I posted enough B-17 formation photos for those guys to emulate? Lol

We hardcore enthusiast type guys are less than one percent though so overall I bet the consensus was a great action film. All I can say is who's up next in Hollywood to take on a WW2 project. Still waiting to be impressed.

M

Bear · **Posted:** Tue Oct 21, 2014 9:51 am

SaxMan wrote:

I think what made Saving Private Ryan so amazing was that Hollywood had never filmed anything that realistic before, especially the first 30 minutes of the movie with the Omaha Beach landing. Band of Brothers picked up the torch from Saving Private Ryan. Now, if we could only see an aviation movie of this kind of scope and realism.

I believe this may have been mentioned here before, but here you go.

http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=36234

p51 · **Posted:** Tue Oct 21, 2014 9:58 am

Milmart Militaria wrote:

I have to say I was pretty under whelmed with the Tiger sequence which was much hyped leading up the film release. I thought ended up being lame and predictable, unlike real tank vs tank combat

I agree that the tanks were WAY too close, a Tiger would picked off those Shermans from very far away. A Tiger could take out an entire tank platoon and none of the crew ever knew where the fire was coming from. That happend plenty of times in WW2. 'Fury' shows what tankers like to refer to as the classic, 'knife fight in a phone booth,' but even closer.
As for tanks going in alone or unsupported, well, I've talked with tank vets in the past and I have heard of this happening. When you get a mission, you go. You sure don't pull out the TM and say, "Sir, it says here our doctrine is to never go in without dismounts..." And yes, I was in heavy mech in the Army myself. I saw individual tanks tasked for things without what we refered to as, "crunchies," meaning the infantry support. Not saying it was common or a good idea, but there's no doubt that it did indeed happen from time to time and still does.

Warbird Information Exchange

Brad Pitt's WW2 tank movie 'Fury' review ...

Who is online