Fury Movie Review (1 Viewer)

...I saw the movie and thought it was a bunch of crap. The 101st Airborne Division didn't have Sherman Tanks, and everybody knows that the 506th PIR were the only guys that fought for the US in WWII. Hell, Brad Pitt didn't mention Toccoa once!

ATW!
Paul
 
While discussing Fury, a buddy recommended me to watch "Lebanon". Is this movie good?

Rgds,Chris
 
The obligatory spoiler alert as going to discuss some plot aspects. However if you have not seen the movie yet and have read all this thread you already know most of the important plot developments !

I did not have any problems with the scene in the apartment. There was some suspense in terms of what was going to happen with the women and also between Pitt and the new guy and the three other crew. I would describe Pitt's character as seething with anger and disgust at the behaviour of the others, particularly the big guy. He is in a major dilemma as wants to protect the women but at the same time this is the crew he has fought with for so long and wants to keep alive and he has a loyalty to them. Makes for an interesting scene.

The big guy certainly not the easiest character to like. After watching the movie my wife said to me she liked the crew. I asked if she included the big guy in that and she said yes. I was surprised but she said it was his apology to the new guy that made up for his previous bad behaviour. Without that apology she would not have liked him as a character.

Interested to see Larry comment about the scene under the tank and the German letting the new guy go. He said "they used it to offer a little humanity to the evil SS". Probably true but since all the other crew are dead by this point it probably would leave us all a bit flat if everybody died (no matter how realistic). Makes for a better ending but lets just say he was lucky it was another young guy who saw him. After seeing so many of his mates killed I am not so sure if a soldier could let a crew member live who had been responsible for such slaughter. Perhaps similar in a way to the young guy in SPR who does not kill the German near the end.

Anyway interesting to read others thoughts on the movie. As others have said hope it does well at the box office as might lead to more such movies.
 
bradleyl30 said:
I saw it with my father on Saturday who is a Vietnam War vet, the reason I study so much military history, have seen so many war movies and of course my all around most significant hero figure.

We both really enjoyed it, but some reviews here and other places that reminded us that there was some "Hollywood" helped me have my suspension of disbelief dial turned way up. Still, the final scene was a disappointment.

I did try to take into account that it is set in April 1945 which means the Germans were in an incredible state of disarray and many units were filled with conscripts and much equipment was unreliable at that time.

I also tried to remember the points about Allied manpower made here as well as the fact that many US divisions had suffered up to 300% casualties at that time.

My last expectation setting is that those of us who are educated on this subject are the minority and that the actual audience it is intended is broader than we are. Which means they have to overplay some points to make sure the average audience member got it. Still, even with these caveats that last scene still annoys me.

Some things that occurred to me were:

Why none of the Pak 40s scored a hit? They closed in on the manual aiming wheel a couple of times in close proximity to the electronic (more advanced) site and aiming mechanism of the Sherman. Maybe that is a point they were trying to make. Still, it would have been more realistic for one of the Shermans to get hit in the tree line scene to me.

I loved the closeups of the MG42s firing, but why are running up to a tank and firing that at it in the open. Were they trying to distract them or keep the crew from firing out of the hatches?

I actually found the drama of the prisoner executions, relations with women and amongst the crew as important parts of the movie. It was not about tactics or strategy, but the human experience.

The jousting of tanks was a little annoying, but my dial was turned up enough to still enjoy it. I definitely got the message behind it - our men were at a disadvantage and over came it thru bravery and intelligence as well as numbers. But that resulted in a huge price in lives and mental/emotional trauma for the crews.

My understanding is that Hollywood gives us a very distorted view of German officers. They always send their men to die, but in much of what I have read (e.g., Steel Inferno, etc.) in fact they usually led from the front to their own detriment in many cases. In many ways the German army was more egalitarian than much of its opponents. Again, what was it like in April 1945 when many of the veterans and field officers were dead and conscripts were being combined with political appointees, staff officers and other rear echelon leadership? Reading the end of Panzer Commander and other memoirs they do describe a great deal of stupidity, fanaticism and other aspects that would have shocked the men who led the "Blitzkrieg."

Lastly, I tried to be open to the final scene by reminding myself the Germans, and especially the SS, were willing to take incredible casualties to secure objectives. They essentially worshiped aggressive attack (i.e., the Prussian Way of War described well in Death of the Wehrmacht) You combine this with poorly trained (at that stage) but fanatical members (not sure how accurate this was this late in the war) and it is a recipe for a disaster.

To sum up my dissertation (really needed a break from the stress at work right now, so thanks for indulging me if you read this far!) I enjoyed it for a Hollywood war movie. I think they got a lot right, and can understand needing to over-dramatize stuff for a broader audience and make some important points. I would have liked the final scene to be more realistic, but I forgave the escape hatch scene when they used it to offer a little humanity to the evil SS (i absolutely believe in aggregate they were evil, but evil is never monolithic.)

Great to see how much effort they went to in order to make it pretty authentic and appeal to people who will not read the 45 volumes of military history and tactics that I have.

Yours,

Larry
Click to expand...

Well thought out, a very honest appraisal of you and others getting it, that this was not made for the minority of rivet counters , but to a majority of other folks, who pay good money to be entertained and overwhelmed by hollywood magic for a couple hours. I totally dismiss the absolute haters of this movie, because it was not made for just you, so get over it..Michael
 
I did indeed see ‘Fury’ with my good friend Larso. For the first time – and this after a friendship lasting over two decades – he actually arrived somewhere before me. He now knows what it is like to sit around for a quarter of an hour wondering if he has the right theatre.

The movie is certainly very good. The rivet counting goes over my head so I cannot either celebrate the accuracy or inaccuracy of vehicle and weapon types.

I have a few ‘criticisms’ but really just as a way of participating in the conversation. As a warning, however, after watching hundreds of war movies I did have a real sense of being ‘over’ it. I like my books and TS, but sitting in a theatre on a Tuesday night watching tanks drive over people … I just wondered ‘what am I doing here’. It was gritty, realistic and tense, but at my age give me ‘Zulu’, ‘Kelly’s Heroes’, or ‘The Dambusters’. That is just a bit of context that will not necessarily inform other people’s views or even be particularly relevant.

Well … the movie certainly had two parts. The first was a pretty effective interrogation of how war dehumanises people. The ending, however, almost suggested that the director lost faith in the project. After having established that the war had stripped the crew of what we would call ‘civilised values’, the director has them act with nobility and honour in what was clearly always going to be a suicidal and ultimately futile gesture. It would not surprise me if they shot two or three endings and this one ‘tested’ the best. Even Pitt’s concern that Norman would surrender and the Germans would hurt him badly before killing him badly was not accompanied by any awareness that had the positions been reversed, a German crew would have got the same from him.

The scene in the flat was very tense but it moved between two big extremes – were they going to rape the girl or was something else going to happen. In the end, it was two young lovers grabbing a few (very few) moments of pleasure as the world burned around them. The audience laughed during this scene. It did make me smile, however, that their scene was very reserved, a kiss, closed doors, they re-emerge and smile awkwardly and cannot make eye contact. He even promises to write. Yet the decapitation scenes were self-consciously gruesome. Got to love the double standard!

Was there a link between the girl’s death and the fact that Norman was reading ‘For Whom the Bells Toll’?

Nevertheless, people enjoyed it and my criticisms are perhaps more a reflection that I like my movies a bit lighter than my history books. So in that sense, I may well be criticising it for appearing too realistic in parts. I also acknowledge the truth in what reviewers like Michael have said.
 
The Military Workshop said:
The obligatory spoiler alert as going to discuss some plot aspects. However if you have not seen the movie yet and have read all this thread you already know most of the important plot developments !

I did not have any problems with the scene in the apartment. There was some suspense in terms of what was going to happen with the women and also between Pitt and the new guy and the three other crew. I would describe Pitt's character as seething with anger and disgust at the behaviour of the others, particularly the big guy. He is in a major dilemma as wants to protect the women but at the same time this is the crew he has fought with for so long and wants to keep alive and he has a loyalty to them. Makes for an interesting scene.

The big guy certainly not the easiest character to like. After watching the movie my wife said to me she liked the crew. I asked if she included the big guy in that and she said yes. I was surprised but she said it was his apology to the new guy that made up for his previous bad behaviour. Without that apology she would not have liked him as a character.

Interested to see Larry comment about the scene under the tank and the German letting the new guy go. He said "they used it to offer a little humanity to the evil SS". Probably true but since all the other crew are dead by this point it probably would leave us all a bit flat if everybody died (no matter how realistic). Makes for a better ending but lets just say he was lucky it was another young guy who saw him. After seeing so many of his mates killed I am not so sure if a soldier could let a crew member live who had been responsible for such slaughter. Perhaps similar in a way to the young guy in SPR who does not kill the German near the end.

Anyway interesting to read others thoughts on the movie. As others have said hope it does well at the box office as might lead to more such movies.
Click to expand...

I admit I had the same thought about the young soldier at the end. No matter how sensitive or peaceful you are, seeing so many comrades die would have to have a huge impact on you.
 
I've skipped a lot of posts here because I've not yet seen this, but I have a question. I know the realism is meant to be right up there ala SPR, but is the story believable would you say guys??

Rob
 
Rob said:
I've skipped a lot of posts here because I've not yet seen this, but I have a question. I know the realism is meant to be right up there ala SPR, but is the story believable would you say guys??

Rob
Click to expand...

Rob, I think most would agree that the story of the movie is believable up until the last battle at the end of the movie. Then Hollywood
kicked in......I think if the film was made to be 100% historically and Tactically correct , it would be less appealing to those less
educated on WWII........ A big majority of the movie going public.

Wayne
 
Last edited:
PanzerAce1944 said:
Rob, I think most would agree that the story of the movie is believable up until the last battle at the end of the movie. Then Hollywood
kicked in......

Wayne
Click to expand...

Thanks Wayne and thanks for your review:salute::

Rob
 
I give this movie 2 of 5 stars. I loved the AFVs and grittiness. Talk about weathered vehicles. I didn't like how the Germans seemingly were just milling about waiting to be shot in the last scene. In regard about the young German soldier letting Norman go, may be to contradict Brad Pitt telling Norman in the beginning that you must kill Germans, because they will kill you, when Norman refused to shoot the captive soldier. I actually liked the jousting with the Tiger. I didn't like how the German's were lousy shots with their PAK 40. Nowhere near like the realism of SPR.
 
I think it was inconsistent. The 'reality' in the action and of characters shifted. Some bits really had me nodding, others left me going 'what the?' It is absolutely worth seeing though. I was pleased to see it and largely approved. I had a good chat with Jack about it in the carpark and I've enjoyed reading everyones thoughts here. That's a lot of wins.
 
The Military Workshop said:
Perhaps similar in a way to the young guy in SPR who does not kill the German near the end.
Click to expand...


Upham killed "Steamboat Willie" at the end of the movie and let the other Germans go, which was odd on two levels. He shot a prisoner and then let the other prisoners go.............but it's Hollywood, so they get a pass.........................
 
I wonder if the perceived weakness of the final scene might have been avoided if they had been trapped inside the tank and forced to fight rather than it being such a clear and free choice between survival and death?
 
LTC PaulN said:
...I saw the movie and thought it was a bunch of crap. The 101st Airborne Division didn't have Sherman Tanks, and everybody knows that the 506th PIR were the only guys that fought for the US in WWII. Hell, Brad Pitt didn't mention Toccoa once!

ATW!
Paul
Click to expand...

The 2nd Armored Division did, as the U.S. Tank crews in the movie wore 2AD patches. Did the dismounts have 101st patches ?
 
'The 2nd Armored Division did, as the U.S. Tank crews in the movie wore 2AD patches. Did the dismounts have 101st patches ?'

I think you missed some sarcasm. An online friend mentioned the infantry were the 41st Armd Inf Bn. There may have been a reference in the film? Maybe a unit symbol on a map??

Coincidentially, the author Mark Bando who has written a lot on the 101st also wrote a book on the 2nd Armd Div in Normandy.
 
Saw it this evening after a hard day in the field and enjoyed it for what it was.....a 'war movie'. I have to agree the final scene was nuts, but the one thing that stood out most for me was the sudden change from daylight to night-time at the cross-roads. Overall I'm just pleased to see some tank action on the big scene.
Cheers.
 
larso said:
'The 2nd Armored Division did, as the U.S. Tank crews in the movie wore 2AD patches. Did the dismounts have 101st patches ?'

I think you missed some sarcasm. An online friend mentioned the infantry were the 41st Armd Inf Bn. There may have been a reference in the film? Maybe a unit symbol on a map??

Coincidentially, the author Mark Bando who has written a lot on the 101st also wrote a book on the 2nd Armd Div in Normandy.
Click to expand...

I figured it was a wee bit O' sarcasm...........Just making sure !
 
Hi All,

I finally saw "Fury" last night. It is a very gritty movie and really not suitable for kids. There is a lot of gritty realism, including what is obviously some attention to detail. The tanks looked real but this is for us war buffs. Our local paper here did a small review and referred to Tiger and Leopard tanks..... I noted at the beginning that there was a decent looking Panther tank smouldering in the background.

There are some strange anomalies which perhaps the Treefroggers here can enlighten me:

Why do the Sherman tanks drive so slowly on the roads? This was especially so when they were inviting an ambush by driving so close to the trees and woods.

In the firefights, the lit-up bullets and shells kept reminding me of Star Wars. I've never seen this in other war movies, not even SPR.

The language was very coarse with too many foul words. It doesn't feel like WWII.

The SS troops were fighting like amateurs. Even with so men carrying a lot of panzerfausts, it took them so long to overwhelm a disabled tank?

There are good scenes in this movie as well. Aside from the lightshow, the firefights were entertaining.

Rgds Victor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2024 XenForo Ltd.
Back
Top