Thanks for the recommendation MKelley. Hopefully will be seeing this next Tuesday, really looking forward to this.
Gonna see it regardless. LOL!
I can believe that the Tiger was real was real. The scene with it was great.
Saw it today. [Y][Y]
The Tiger is real, it’s been the topic of many German armor modeling forums. My take on armor used in any war film is that they are simply movie props. The fact that the tank is really a Tiger instead of an ersatz T-34 or even the panzer gray painted M47s from Battle of the Bulge or tan painted M48s from Patton really doesn’t matter to me as far as the plot or entertainment aspect is concerned.
I bet those weren’t even real WW2 soldiers. I bet they used actors!
As a former tanker, I like to see the historical aspect of real WW2 armor being used. Amazed that a 70 some odd year old tank is still running. Glad to see there are armor collectors and museums that have maintained the equipment to running standards.
But you have to realize that depending on the budget of the film, the filming location and the availability of the hardware not every movie that features a Tiger, Panther, Abrams, etc. will be able to use the real thing.
If some Australian film company made a movie about the North Africa campaign, would the movie really suffer because they didn’t have a real Tiger to film and instead used a dressed up panzer?
Saw it this evening. Good movie and yes …it’s a Tiger. And I couldn’t agree with you more about it being amazing that a 70 year old track is still operational.
I caught it at a 4:00 matinee yesterday. (There were five other people in the theater.) I haven’t decided whether I liked it or not.
I’m no tank expert, but I thought the Shermans looked fine and that genuine Tiger was great. (I suspect they all got quite a bit of help from computer graphics, but it was fascinating to watch them in action.) Those who suspected the movie would sugar coat history needn’t worry. It presents a remarkably ugly impression of the last stage of the war in Europe: dreary scenery, perpetually grey skies, lots of mud, and plenty of gore (though none that I’d call gratuitous). The Brad Pitt character is a decidedly unpleasant guy: sour, foul-mouthed, cynical, and brutal. He also has another, surprising side: he speaks fluent German, and occasionally launches into serious forays into philosophy. (“Peace is idealistic. History is violent.” I think I already knew that.) I don’t think veterans will be happy with the movie’s depiction of American fighting men. (“Saving Private Ryan” left me with sympathy and admiration for WWII vets. I don’t think “Fury” will have that effect on many viewers.)
There’s a lengthy sort-of romantic sequence involving the tankers and a pair of German civilian women. I thought that scene did contribute to the movie, but lasted at least twice as long as necessary.
I went into the theater wondering how effectively modern, widescreen photography could put across the awful claustrophobia of the inside of a Sherman in action. I was impressed. What I didn’t think came across so well was the NOISE. In a lot of scenes the sound effects are deliberately turned down.
When I like a war movie I’ll probably go see it more than once. (I saw “Saving Private Ryan” in the theater three times.) i’m not inclined to go see “Fury” again - and I won’t try to talk my wife (a former Marine) into seeing it. I do intend to buy it on video, though, and I’ll recommend it to the students in my American military history course - with the caveat that this movie gives one pretty strongly negative interpretation of the American combat experience in WWII. It should be taken in the context of other interpretations.
I saw it yesterday. I’d rate it a 7/10. The tank action sequences were definitely exciting, and the tedious “fraulein” section was interestingly shot and scripted, but ultimately unnecessary. Would have been much happier with another “tank” scene somehow.
The one part I really didn’t like and thought was a bit of BS was the part right after the engagement with the three anti-tank guns where Pitt’s character tried to “toughen up” the new driver. Totally a war crime, and while perhaps understandable in the context of the era and the day, I would find i hard to believe that this kind of action would have taken place with impunity in front of that many soldiers.
And I wonder if the SS would have spent so much effort on one tank at a crossroads when they could have easily bypassed it or taken it out with panzerfausts. I think the “standoff” in the end was pure entertainment, but hardly realistic. Hollywood wins in this case.
By that stage of the war, old men and children were given a panzerfaust, that’s it, nothing else. You gotta get about 30 yards away and it is probably like trying to hit it with a bottle rocket. Logs on the side and sand bags would have negated the warhead and even if it did hit, there was a greater chance of it caroming off the side than destroying the tank.
Saw the flick today.I would agree that there is many places where artistic license is taken and unrealistic things occur. But overall it gives a good view of a crew in a tight space for a long time. The scene inside the tank were very realistic to those who have spent time crammed in a “can”. It is Hollywood, The acting was good, great fighting scenes. Not for the rivet counter but a good war movie with some scenes that rival the beach in Saving Private Ryan.
Worth seeing
Rounds Complete!!
I agree with Doog’s comments - including what he says about the scene in which the German prisoner gets executed. The sergeant would have been afraid that one of the witnesses would blow the whistle.
On the other hand there are quite a few documented cases of American soldiers shooting German troops - including concentration camp guards - after they surrendered.
It would have been reasonable to note that many of those refugees were trudging westward so they could surrender to the Americans or British rather than the Soviets, who were notorious for behaving far worse.
I’ve been grading papers so long that I tend to rate movies on the ten-point letter grade system. I think I’d give “Fury” about an 83: a low B, but not a B-. “Saving Private Ryan” gets a 94, and Pearl Harbor" gets a 70 (C-). My all-time favorite war movie, “Twelve O’Clock High,” gets a 97. (I don’t give 100s.)
Interesting reviews.
I have yet to see the movie.
I will most likely see it on dvd or Blue Ray due to lack of time to go to a movie theater.
It is well worth the $6 and couple hours out of a Saturday afternoon to watch it.
Thanks for the " Two Thumbs Up " ![:D]
I do have to add that I was literally grinning like a toothless, drooling idiot when the Tiger came on screen, and my heart was almost beating out of my chest. What a great, exciting scene! Glad to see, too that “Hollywood” didn’t have them take it out with a frontal shot, which was obviously impossible. Glad to see that they did their homework on that scene. 
The Star Wars laser beams were my biggest beef with the movie. Although that was a minor issue. Even the 105 mm and 120 mm tank rounds I’ve sent down range didn’t look like that.
Hey doog,
That enter the Tiger scene had me grinning too. I think , unknowingly , I even let out an explicit or two when the initial rounds bounced harmlessly off the Tigers hull. Point blank tank battle encounters were common when engaging a Tiger . I was not aware that it could take place within as little as 10 to 20 yds. as depicted in the movie with no effect. If this was true , then that 's pretty disheartening .
Thursday the 30th !http://static.iobloggo.com/static/img/smiley/megmoticons/popcorn.gif**19:10 hrs.
!http://www.cineloka.co.in/forum/images/smilies/perverted-smiley.gif*[Here’s](http://worldoftanks.com/en/news/pc-browser/21/The_Chieftains_Hatch_Fury/) some interesting info.*
](http://www.cineloka.co.in/forum/images/smilies/perverted-smiley.gif*%5BHere's%5D(http://worldoftanks.com/en/news/pc-browser/21/The_Chieftains_Hatch_Fury/)){kind=link}
Yep, that is Tiger 131 from the Tank Museum at Bovington Camp. Got a chance to see it live in action during Tankfest while stationed in Europe. It is amazing to see it up close, plus all the other rolling stock they have.
Ha ha, that was pretty cool though–I admit, I thought “WOW–COOL!”. [:$]
They put stuff like that in to impress hicks like me. lol. As I said, Hollywood definitely got the leg up on this movie. [:)]