Jump to content

FURY looks good


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

They should have used the proper model Tiger for the time the film covers.

When this happens in films the results can be fantastic. Check out these Tigers from the old 60's flick 'Battle of the Bulge'. Not a smoke launcher in sight!

BattleoftheBulgeMovie-Still4.jpg?partner=allmovie_soap

Sorry, but these "Tigers" are M48 Walker Bulldog, if I am not mistaken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Grenade down the barrel, one arm blown off, cigar clenched in teeth, turning to wink at his men as fireball engulfs him.

And as soon as I read that I thought "one of your men, surely !"

They we're omitted from production starting in June 1943. The Nahverteidigungswaffe replaced them starting in January 44.

...

And I saw the Nahverteidigungswaffe working in-game for the first time ever just yesterday.

Bunch of Russian infantry ran up to my Tiger in the woods which couldn't back away fast enough due to the terrain. Cue little flying grenades and pops on the ground. Totally ineffective of course, one landed on a Russian infantryman's foot and he wasn't hurt ! :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They get the ONLY actual working Tiger, In. The. World., f

(FWIW, that Tiger was captured in Tunisia in early 1943, and was from of one of the earlier production batches, so the nit you picked is probably technically correct. But JFC ... wood for the trees, much?)

I am not sure this is correct.

I thought there was a working Tiger I somewhere in Russia also.

I recall seeing it on ytube or somewhere like that.

I might have to see if I can find the site.

All I remember was it was at a old warehouse, they ran it around a bit and if I recall correctly, It might have been for sell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you missed the sarcasm tags that were implied given it was in response to @JohnS's biting but hilarious post.

Ooops, yep I missed it.

And forgot an ancient Bundeswehr order: raise complaints only 24h after the incident!

My correction was a quick shot from the commuter train. ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, but these "Tigers" are M48 Walker Bulldog, if I am not mistaken.

Off by one number - M47. Interestingly, that turret could be considered the 'Americanized' version of the German Panther 'Schmalturm'! It was designed immediately postwar and included all of the Schmalturm design advantages with the inclusion of an American-style rear counterweight and a cast shell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just watched the trailer. I thought you all were kidding about Brad Pitt....but...no.

I might see it. It does not seem to have the "Saving Private Ryan" realism to its gore--more "Band of Brothers". In some ways that is good, since I almost had to strap myself into my chair to watch "Saving Private Ryan", and still have images from that movie which haunt me--necessary for me to watch, I think, but not something I want to do frequently.

Things that generally bother me with WW2 war movies: In order to get everything into the picture frame, they bunch people/tanks. There is a scene in trailer with "300 German" soldiers coming down the road--marching like it was a parade.

Can anyone comment on if the internal tank sequences in the trailer look realistic. Clearly the distances are wrong--the camera seems as though it is 10 feet away. But does anything look realistic?

And I think the trailer has one of the only war scenes I have seen were the tank's bow MG has an important role. For non-warbuffs, even its existence may be a surprise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

soldiers coming down the road--marching like it was a parade.

I recall one infamous incident duribng the Bulge battles where an M16 'meat chopper' caught about 60 German soldiers doing just that. They waved the men forward as though they were a friendly unit then set on them with the quad .50 cals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to pick nits because its fun;

The trailer for "Fury" shows the tank crew as members of the 2nd Armored Division and Wardaddy talks about serving from Africa through France. They wear their triangular "Hell on Wheels" division patch on the left shoulder where, in fact, most WW2 US Division uniform patches were worn. However (and unfortunately for this film's costume design research historian), the 2nd AD patch was sewn on or above the left breast uniform pocket as directed by George S Patton when he commanded the division circa 1940.

index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_rel_module=post&attach_id=67118

index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_rel_module=post&attach_id=67117

The 2nd AD continued wearing that patch there until final de-activation in 1995. It was officially authorized, not just locally tolerated.

I can't recall or find exactly why this was done. I've heard two versions; one, that Patton wanted a quick way to identify the men of his division by having them wear the patch ("flash" to you Brits) uniquely from the other divisions where 2AD operated; two, Patton wanted the patch worn above the heart as an expression of loyalty to the unit.

I've seen pictures where other WW2 divisions followed suit.

1st AD

index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_rel_module=post&attach_id=67120

3rd AD

index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_rel_module=post&attach_id=66704

Can anyone cite the historical authority for wearing the armored triangle tank division patch on uniforms above the left breast pocket? Which divisions did so? Which did not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched the trailer with the sound off to prevents spoilers and/or a severe bout of wincing, should the script fail the smell test.

Visually, it looks promising. I'll definitely have to see the scene with that Tiger in action!

I wish we could have the actors (and some of the writing) from the classic WWII films of the 60s and 70s, but with modern film tech and some of the gear available these days.

I'm all in favor of war movies that go against the grain. I can't stand most films in the action/war genre produced since the early 80s. However, The Thin Red Line isn't one I would use as an example of a successful attempt to be different. It may be the least effective anti-war film I've ever seen and the only time in my life I've felt a deep sense of relief and satisfaction when a main character dies. Had the setting been Vietnam, then maybe...

...but still probably not.

motivator958c0ec302bb5540679cfb79e843dbba3df891a6.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, but these "Tigers" are M48 Walker Bulldog, if I am not mistaken.

You mean the 'Battle of the Bulge' film isn't technically correct?

Get up the garden path!

Next you'll be telling me the battle didn't end with the Americans rolling barrels of flaming petrol down a hill to stop the SS panzer spearhead!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another US hero movie. Yawn.

Looks nice though. ;)

More or less my reaction, too.

US WWII movies are all too often so doused in heroic and patriotic pathos that it gets sickening. Same seems to go for the russian ones.

In my opinion, the germans make the best WWII movies, for instance Die Brücke (The Bridge), Das Boot, Stalingrad and The Downfall.

I´ve been wondering why that is so, and I think it is because they can´t make those "salute the flag and shed a tear" cliché movies. For obvious historical reasons.

Thus, the germans have to make movies that focus on the more dark aspects of war and what war does to the individual. That creates much more interesting stories - in my opinion.

But I am surely going to see Fury. Often the trailer puts more emphasis on the clichés than the actual movie - I really hope that is the case.

Things that generally bother me with WW2 war movies: In order to get everything into the picture frame, they bunch people/tanks. There is a scene in trailer with "300 German" soldiers coming down the road--marching like it was a parade

The 300 germans in a file could simply just be down to the editing of the trailer: Could well be that this shot is actually from an entirely different part of the movie.

Can anyone comment on if the internal tank sequences in the trailer look realistic. Clearly the distances are wrong--the camera seems as though it is 10 feet away. But does anything look realistic?

Distances are probably always going to be wrong in most war movies, I´m afraid. I believe that the reasoning behind it is something like this:

If the distances were realistic then the Tiger would only be a tiny spec on the horizon when looking from the Sherman´s perpective - and vice versa. That doesn´t make for very good cinematography.

In order to be able to convey the action to the audience the director then chooses to reduce the distances. He probably knows that this is not realistic, but since it is probably less than 10 percent of the audience than knows it too, it makes good business sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Das Boot, Stalingrad and The Downfall are among my favorites, too. I think the older American WWII movies are often less clichéd than those of the last few decades. They just seem that way sometimes because of dated styling, effects, and uneven quality throughout their screenplays.

The actual WWII generation in the US was generally pretty humble about what it did and our place in the world. It has mostly been the later generations that have suffered from Cold War propaganda, a need to get over the Vietnam Syndrome, and post-Cold War national ego mega-inflation.

And the film U-571...I mean...why? Why on earth would you make a movie that steals credit from an Ally when it is totally unnecessary? The real story has plenty of drama.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree Germans make the best WW2 films. Funny though how one of the best American WW2 films was about the Germans "Cross of iron".

One movie completely neglected (as far as I have read this thread. My other post may show, that I do not read everything with sufficient patience. :-) )in this discussion is: Die Brücke.

Dating back to the 50s and you see only one Sherman, but for me THE German war movie! About a group of youngsters, being held back to defend a tiny bridge in their hometown.

When the unexpected US troops arrive, the thing turns into desaster.

Extremely touching!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jesus F Christ. They get the ONLY actual working Tiger, In. The. World., for the movie, and you complain about the freaking smoke launchers?

Who are you, Dorosh?

(FWIW, that Tiger was captured in Tunisia in early 1943, and was from of one of the earlier production batches, so the nit you picked is probably technically correct. But JFC ... wood for the trees, much?)

Actually the proper expression is Jesus H Christ, if you want to show frustration with my nitpicking at least use the oath properly.

No, I am not now, nor ever have been Dorosh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...