Fury (2014)

But, But, you are talking about Brad Pitt !!!!!! Only Angilena Jolie ( sic) can muss up his hair ! I suspect he would have looked a bit like Frankenstein .

 

I went and saw the movie Sunday with my sons. It was a decent movie. Kind of depressing. There's been a lot of talk of the tracers being overdone, not! Machine gunners use their tracers to walk their rounds on target and they actually did that in the movie. The fight scenes prior to the last fight were well done. I found the lack of discipline exhibited by US troops on several occasions a bit disconcerting, but it is a movie.

Gaines, good point about the M24 Stielhandgranate being an offensive, concussion type grenade vs the US frag type.

Edit: BTW, my sons both thought the movie was well done also.

 

Thank you.

 

In the scene where the unit is in a village (where they met the girls) there is a shot showing the unit markings on a tank--2 AD, 66 Armored Battalion.
The tankers would give names of the tank beginning with their company designation; so they are in "F" Company of the 66th.

There are many little things that I've read about or was told by armored veterans that was picked up in the movie. For instance, running over dead bodies' "we tried to miss the Americans if we could", burying Germans in mass graves with dozer tanks, the way raw replacements were treated (the Germans would pull a unit out of action and train the replacements with the veterans before putting them back in--the Americans would just throw them in the ranks on the front lines and hope the make it), The pure hate for the SS ( I sent the book "Breakout at Normandy" by Mark Bando to a friend who served with my brother in the 67th. He was completely blown away by how much was written about that #blankedy/blank SS Bastard Christian Tychen and continued for three pages what the SS did during the war). The absolute fear of being burned if the gasoline caught on fire.
Like KB said in one of the posts, somebody did their homework.

 

I was hoping someone who had seen the film would have figured that out. As for doing their homework, as I mentioned in post #2, they brought in some "ringers":

 

I sort of had this feeling as I left the theater as well. There was nothing upbeat about it, so I consider this production definitely right smack dab in the anti-war movie category. Sort of a similar feeling after leaving the theater after seeing "Saving Private Ryan".

 

Yes - despite being a concussive grenade, the Steilhandgranate contained 7oz of TNT ( quite a bit ). 2 of these exploding in a very confined space would certainly create significant 'flash' at the very least.

However, this is of course Hollywood and I guess the average 15-year old girl would choke on their popcorn to see Brad Pitt's face looking rather like the Pilsbury Doughboy, eyeballs hanging down on cheeks, etc.......

 

I can hear it now, a massive collective "ewwwwwwwwwwwww" going up from the crowd.

 

Think remember reading the kill radius was 15 feet.
http://www.militaryfactory.com/smallarms/detail.asp?smallarms_id=431

 

I don't know. It didn't stop them from showing that 1/4 of the dead crew members face laying n the tank when Norman had to clean it out.

 

Which means it was a good portrayal because war is a depressing endeavor. I've always been of the opinion that some of the best "war" movies were at the same time "anti-war" movies. Not BS like Tom Cruise in "Born on the Fourth of July" or Jane Fonda's "Coming Home" but, the original "What Price Glory" or "All Quiet on the Western Front", movies of that type. It's not easy to portray the dichotomy of war, how it can be at the same time the most beautiful and the ugliest thing. How it can fascinate and repulse simultaneously. How you can never feel as alive or powerful as you can surrounded by death. The great General R.E. Lee described it best when he stated at the Battle of Fredericksburg; "It is well that war is so terrible, otherwise we should grow too fond of it."

 

Hollywood. They want everyone to see the movie. So it gets watered down. Love interest, barf. Make movies for chicks, or for guys. The two don't mix, and ruins the end product.

 

I thought chicks and guys mixing is how we all got here

 

I took the bus.
Ugh. Sorry. Trying too hard. Figure I'm batting about 250. Over a lifetime, that may not be terrible.

 

Somehow I think that the final scene (that was a bit over the top) was inspired by the last scene of "The Wild Bunch" and maybe the last scene of "Extreme Prejudice". No much realism in any of them, but dang good shoot'em ups they were!



Poppy, go clean out your inbox. It's choc full of old PMs that need to go in order to make room for new gossip.

 

Will call the cleaner.

 

I agree with USMCPrice about the nature of war films. If remotely true to life then they are bound to be ugly and gory, then in the anti-war category. I really like "Paths of Glory" and "Breaker Morant" They are not glorifying in the least..

Now as to the honorable men who fought and fight in wars for a good cause, perhaps WW2 being the best example' I can think of, no one deserving praise more than them; but war itself is by it's nature anti-war , at least at the time it occurs. I have only seen a single person die from a gunshot and cannot imagine loosing one's buddies in a squad or platoon, certainly not is a tank hit by a AP round or on fire. . Same for a naval crew or bomber.

I find it strange that I feel compelled to read about it or watch films of such. Must be inside of all animals.....

Gaines

 

My problem with Fury ,aside from the last fight, is not that it's ugly and gory. It's that it aside from 5 minutes in the apartment has few to no positive moments.

The crew came off as PTSD poster children. Aggressively against the new guy. It made sense as explained in the movie but it was just one more negative in a long list.


Patton was declared a great pro war movie and a great antiwar movie. It showed both the good and the bad. This movie was a really shitty day in the life of a tanker. Due to the lost gunner and the new replacement you saw little camaraderie in the crew and that was really missing.

 

Oooh, I'd forgotten about "Paths of Glory" an excellent example of a war/anti-war film. Good one Gaines.

I also like the point you made that anti-war has nothing to do with not respecting the sacrifices of those that fought. Anti-war is not some sheltered, self-absorbed turd yelling baby killer and spitting on a soldier, which is the image that comes to mind when the word is used. It is another dichotomy of war that the youngest, strongest, most fit, the best and brightest, are the ones that are sent to fight and die.

My older son, a combat veteran of Iraq, thinks that the reason war, and the tools of war are so fascinating to us is because they are so elemental. He thinks ships, planes, tanks, weapons, etc. are so attractive is they are designed purely for function. The designers are not interested in the styling, but only in how best to maximize it's ability to perform it's task. Also, much military equipment is massive, heavy, and exudes power. These features attract us on a primal level.
Look at animals, a lion, a shark or an eagle are all fascinating and beautiful because they have evolved over millenium into near perfect killing machines. Their primary function is as a predator, everything about them is optimized for the accomplishment of this task. The coloration of a lion or shark, the shape of an eagles beak, the placement of their eyes, their musculature. They exude power and menace, but also beauty and elegance.

 

And based upon what they'd seen, were seeing, their current situation and probable future, they should have been.

And that was/is not uncommon. The new guy was an unknown quantity. He was taking the place of someone that they were close to. They owed him nothing, and in fact his mere presence reminds them of their loss and his lack of experience is a real threat to their chances of survival. (That being said, I really despised the Jon Bernthal character, until right near the end.)

I don't know that Patton should be regarded as great in either category.

I would say that is an accurate description, but then again it is also accurate for the period depicted.