Fury - The Worst Movie In The History Of The Universe

Seanaldinho said:
Lone Survivor was great. I was disappointed they departed from the truth a bit towards the end but movies are movies and the vast majority of the movie was fantastic.

Looking forward to Fury.

Also looking forward to American Sniper in January.
Click to expand...

I haven't seen Lone Survivor and it's not on Netflix. I'll check it out.

I'm looking forward to American Sniper as well, but don't expect too much from it. I like being proven wrong.
 
Haven't seen Lone Survivor yet, but I'm intimately familiar with the event. ****ed me off that assets weren't allocated to properly portray our brothers who took part in the actual event. I respect the command guidance that didn't approve them though due to real world requirements, but is still a punch in the gut watching the trailer and seeing other units portraying our guys.

I say Black Hawk Down and Act of Valor are about the most realistic look you are gonna get at modern warfare.
 
Just saw Fury and thought it was a very intense movie. Definitely shows the brutality and savagery of war. Loved watching those tracers. IMAX would have been impressive I bet. Hard to watch at times but worth the price of admission.
 
jkgoblue said:
Just saw Fury and thought it was a very intense movie. Definitely shows the brutality and savagery of war. Loved watching those tracers. IMAX would have been impressive I bet. Hard to watch at times but worth the price of admission.
Click to expand...

Wow, it showed it through the eyes of a fatherless six year old girl wandering through corpses during a bombing?
 
Jay Honeck said:
An interesting video showing the Tiger vs Sherman.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3slnEXOoSo
Click to expand...
Pretty good video. Sounds like the Tiger vet and his crew could shoot (12 confirmed in 30 mins). Maybe they should have been cast for the video.

I just finished Lone Survivor. It's definitely very, very, very good movie. A few small complaints here and there, but overall I'd watch it again. Would recommend.
 
Last edited:
gws said:
Anybody remember Strategic Air Command starring Jimmy Stewart and America's sweetheart June Allyson? As a teenager I had a crush on her. Very sweet lady. Movie had a really good story and quite a bit of history on the B-36 "Peacemaker."
Click to expand...

Saw it on TV recently. I love the flying scenes with the B-36. Not too many others available.
 
Flymy47 said:
Yes I did.
Click to expand...

I only knew him indirectly. A couple of my coworkers were pretty good friends with him (Dana A. and Jason B.) Also, one of our pilots (Tim S., who I believe was the company commander at the time) was very close to Corey.
 
Fury was a collection of cliche's and one-note characters that happened to have to tight fighting scenes. Still sucked out loud. Good movies either have great stories, good writing, or competing characters. Documentaries are accurate, and lots of those about tanks in WWII.

To make things worse, the whole thing was decked out in cliches and underwritten dialog that could at best be described as terse. When Tom hank's character died in Saving Private Ryan you cared about him. When Brad Pitt's character died in Fury I was relieved, it meant that the damn thing was ending soon.

The saddest thing, Brad Pitt has been in two recent WWII movies. Inglorious Bastards was barely a movie, more a collection of vignettes that happened to revolve around a central set of very, very well written characters. And because it was very well written, it was an excellent movie I would happily watch again. Fury did have some good fighting scenes going for it, but that was about it. Not enough to make a whole movie, which is really a pity. A movie about a tank crew confined in a tight space having to relate to each other because of and despite their experiences could have been really really good if written well. Instead they just wrote an orgy of violence with a scene in an apartment thrown in for reasons I can't even fathom.

Better off watching a documentary about WWII. You'll get more out if it and it might even be more compelling. Fury isn't the worst movie ever, but I'd call it a long, long way from good.
 
Last edited:
Henning said:
Wow, it showed it through the eyes of a fatherless six year old girl wandering through corpses during a bombing?
Click to expand...

Excellent point Henning.

My mother was a young girl in Germany during the war. I am sure she saw and experienced things that would be hard to convey on film.

I know it still affects her (and through her it affects her children) to this day.

It has definitely made her very compassionate to people (like the homeless) in unfortunate situations.
 
RalphInCA said:
Excellent point Henning.

My mother was a young girl in Germany during the war. I am sure she saw and experienced things that would be hard to convey on film.

I know it still affects her (and through her it affects her children) to this day.

It has definitely made her very compassionate to people (like the homeless) in unfortunate situations.
Click to expand...

My mom too, in Berlin.
 
Jay Honeck said:
We saw Fury at an IMAX theater. Hoe-lee-chit, watching those tank battles with surround-sound on a three story screen was....amazing.

I'll say this: If you don't like Fury, you don't like war movies.
Click to expand...

I like war movies. Saw it at an Alamo something or nother out of town this weekend that played portions of a LOT of old war movies leading upto the start (none of the commercial crap most theaters run). That said, the action was great but the story line is weak.

There's a similar Russian tank battle (KV-2 I think) where they hold off a ton of german tanks and are finally taken out after 24 hours by the germans placing an artillery piece directly behind the KV-2.

kenjr said:
Lone Survivor is the best war movie since Saving Private Ryan. I doubt Fury will be 'better'...but I still look forward to seeing it.
Click to expand...

Saving Private Ryan was written better and established the characters better.

RalphInCA said:
Excellent point Henning.

My mother was a young girl in Germany during the war. I am sure she saw and experienced things that would be hard to convey on film.
Click to expand...

Henning said:
My mom too, in Berlin.
Click to expand...

My father was a young man in Germany also ... but that was after liberating N. Africa, Sicily, Italy, Buchenwald and Dachau.
 
steingar said:
Fury was a collection of cliche's and one-note characters that happened to have to tight fighting scenes. Still sucked out loud. Good movies either have great stories, good writing, or competing characters. Documentaries are accurate, and lots of those about tanks in WWII.

To make things worse, the whole thing was decked out in cliches and underwritten dialog that could at best be described as terse. When Tom hank's character died in Saving Private Ryan you cared about him. When Brad Pitt's character died in Fury I was relieved, it meant that the damn thing was ending soon.

The saddest thing, Brad Pitt has been in two recent WWII movies. Inglorious Bastards was barely a movie, more a collection of vignettes that happened to revolve around a central set of very, very well written characters. And because it was very well written, it was an excellent movie I would happily watch again. Fury did have some good fighting scenes going for it, but that was about it. Not enough to make a whole movie, which is really a pity. A movie about a tank crew confined in a tight space having to relate to each other because of and despite their experiences could have been really really good if written well. Instead they just wrote an orgy of violence with a scene in an apartment thrown in for reasons I can't even fathom.

Better off watching a documentary about WWII. You'll get more out if it and it might even be more compelling. Fury isn't the worst movie ever, but I'd call it a long, long way from good.
Click to expand...
You were able to put into words what I was not. Relief was the only feeling that came through when the characters started dying. Like you said, that's the point that I knew it was ending.

danhagan said:
There's a similar Russian tank battle (KV-2 I think) where they hold off a ton of german tanks and are finally taken out after 24 hours by the germans placing an artillery piece directly behind the KV-2.
Click to expand...

Any more information on this story? I'd like to read about it.

Edit: Found a small bit here: http://tankarchives.blogspot.ca/2013/03/battle-of-raseiniai.html
 
Last edited:
Tough crowd. I am always dumbfounded at the way critics can shred a terrific movie.

Are the characters cliche? Only if you've grown up watching old John Wayne movies. To a millennial, the characters would seem fresh and new.

Is the storyline subtle? Hell, no. It is as blunt and in your face as war -- which, IMHO, was the point that y'all are missing. There is no time for subtlety when you're in combat for weeks and months on end. It's kill, or be killed, and all other human activities are pared away, one by one, until all you have left are basic animal functions: Eat, drink, screw, and kill.

We see that transition through the eyes of the Norman, the new replacement guy, who starts off a clerk typist and is thrust into the tank with little training. He gradually changes into a reluctant but effective killer, by the end of the movie.

Could that transition have been portrayed more realistically? I got the feeling that they probably edited out some character development scenes that would have helped in that regard. The movie is already a bit long, so those are the things that probably ended up on the cutting room floor.

Okay, let's leave it at this: "On the Waterfront", or "Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolf" this movie is NOT. If you're looking for a director's film, with subtle character development and nuanced performances, stay home and watch TCM.

If, however, you want to see a war movie that portrays the intensity of tank combat in WWII, it doesn't get any better than Fury.
 
Henning said:
My mom too, in Berlin.
Click to expand...

danhagan said:
My father was a young man in Germany also ... but that was after liberating N. Africa, Sicily, Italy, Buchenwald and Dachau.
Click to expand...

My wife's parents spent some time in Germany, as well. After June 6, 1944. She came ashore on Omaha Beach on June 7, 1944 (Army nurse). Not sure with him, but I know he was in Patton's 3rd Army.
 
Jay Honeck said:
Tough crowd. I am always dumbfounded at the way critics can shred a terrific movie.
Click to expand...

I'm not a critic, and I never diss a good movie. Fury wasn't for the reason that I outlined.

Jay Honeck said:
Are the characters cliche? Only if you've grown up watching old John Wayne movies. To a millennial, the characters would seem fresh and new.
Click to expand...

You're right, for someone who's never ever seen a movie it might be fresh. I just wouldn't write and market a movie to the 6 year-old crowd.

Jay Honeck said:
Is the storyline subtle? Hell, no. It is as blunt and in your face as war -- which, IMHO, was the point that y'all are missing. There is no time for subtlety when you're in combat for weeks and months on end. It's kill, or be killed, and all other human activities are pared away, one by one, until all you have left are basic animal functions: Eat, drink, screw, and kill.
Click to expand...

The story is so utterly subtle an sublime as to be utterly invisible. Put better, what do you feel was the story of the piece?

Jay Honeck said:
We see that transition through the eyes of the Norman, the new replacement guy, who starts off a clerk typist and is thrust into the tank with little training. He gradually changes into a reluctant but effective killer, by the end of the movie.
Click to expand...

Gosh how original! And in the space of days he goes from being unable to hurt a butterfly to mass killing Nazis. Really realistic.

Jay Honeck said:
Could that transition have been portrayed more realistically? I got the feeling that they probably edited out some character development scenes that would have helped in that regard. The movie is already a bit long, so those are the things that probably ended up on the cutting room floor.
Click to expand...

A good movie with a talented director and screenwriter could have down so. Instead we get what we get. Thankfully they killed everyone so we won't have to suffer through a sequel.

Jay Honeck said:
Okay, let's leave it at this: "On the Waterfront", or "Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolf" this movie is NOT. If you're looking for a director's film, with subtle character development and nuanced performances, stay home and watch TCM.
Click to expand...

I would have happily settled for Black Hawk Down, or The Hurt Locker, or Zero Dark Thirty. And there are routinely shown a host of better war films on TCM than Fury.

Jay Honeck said:
If, however, you want to see a war movie that portrays the intensity of tank combat in WWII, it doesn't get any better than Fury.
Click to expand...

That's because no one's bothered to do it since the 50's, probably because it's difficult to portray tank combat. I can't imagine the CG time that went into filming those battle sequences.
 
Review of the movie from one of the motorcycle boards I frequent. hehehehehehe

****************

OK,

So I was a bit bored and thought that i hadn't been to the big screen in a while. I saw that Brad Pitt has just made a WWII movie, "Fury". Set in the last month of the European theater, it's the story of a tank crew at the lead of the final invasion into Germany. I figured- good actors, footage of Sherman tanks (E8 HVSS to be exact), some glimpses of tiger tanks- how bad could it be?

Answer: ...much worse

While the story of war should include cruelty and tragedy rather than just flags and heroism, this movie goes to extreme, wildly unrealistic lengths to drag the audience through a nonstop parade of blood and guts. the veteran tank crew is introduced as a bunch of sadists who are as vicious to a green recruit as they are to German soldiers. While i realize that there was a very dark side of the war thast does not get told in John Wayne movies, I don't believe that US soldiers slaughtered all their prisoners. I know a veteran tanker from the 2nd Armored ("Hell on Wheels") division and he has great recall. They were the point of the spear pictured in this movie. My friend did say that after the massacre of US troops at Malmedy during the Bulge at the hands of the SS, the Second Armored actually did go on a blood for blood rampage that had to be stopped by high ranking officers. However, that was not the story in Germany.

The US troops capture a german town and immediately start tearing the place to pieces- looting and raping the population. It's really, really offensive. The reality was that there was a stream of refugees fleeing to the West to escape the horror of the final Russian offensive. American and British troops by all accounts were not uncontrolled, sadistic madmen.

The dialog is completely forgettable. Where Saving Private Ryan is notable for its development of a number of interesting characters, here you can't tell one mud covered GI from the next. Ryan was notable for making death personal with the early loss of the medic at a machine gun nest- his prolonged, slow death was heart wrenching. Here, it's just a river of blood that makes you inured to the violence.

The final insult was the battle scenes. The use of the tanks followed no believable tactics. At one point, three Shermans engage a Tiger in a head to head charge- suicidal. The end of the movie is a ridiculous fantasy of one lone tank taking on 2-300 SS grenadiers.

The whole movie is a mess. I don't know what it was trying to say. Save your money.
 
The Beast. Good tank movie.
 
By the way, Sahara-both the Bogart and the Belushi versions is the best tank/leadership movie ever.
 
While it's no secret the Russian Army were infamous in their brutality, the Americans, British and French took part in atrocities against civilians. Based on the scale of that campaign, I wouldn't exactly say it was common. It amazing how much more civilized wars (OIF / OEF) are fought these days...if there could be such a thing.
 
Last edited:
Ghery said:
My wife's parents spent some time in Germany, as well. After June 6, 1944. She came ashore on Omaha Beach on June 7, 1944 (Army nurse). Not sure with him, but I know he was in Patton's 3rd Army.
Click to expand...
My dad was a Captain in the U.S. Army, stationed in Nuremburg, Germany, during the trials. He was a minor clerk in the legal process, but saw a lot of history.
 
Henning said:
North Africa liberated?:confused:
Click to expand...

If you didn't own it, and moved in on it, and were finally evicted ... that would sound like the area was liberated, especially if it was under French control initially. Unless you're referring to the Italian area that was lost with Rommel trying to secure it.
 
Last edited:
danhagan said:
If you didn't own it, and moved in on it, and were finally evicted ... that would sound like the area was liberated, especially if it was under French control initially. Unless you're referring to the Italian area that was lost with Rommel trying to secure it.
Click to expand...

No, I mean for someplace to be 'Liberated' it has to end up in the control of the indigenous people, not a different imperial power. We have the problem in the Mid East we do right now because of what we did there in the Lawrence of Arabia period where we deposed many Sultans and made them subservient to another.
 
Henning said:
No, I mean for someplace to be 'Liberated' it has to end up in the control of the indigenous people, not a different imperial power. We have the problem in the Mid East we do right now because of what we did there in the Lawrence of Arabia period where we deposed many Sultans and made them subservient to another.
Click to expand...

I meant literally as in "to free (a nation or area) from control by a foreign or oppressive government" which doesn't mention indigenous people.

There aren't many areas or peoples that I can think of that weren't under the control of another power or aren't currently.
 
danhagan said:
I meant literally as in "to free (a nation or area) from control by a foreign or oppressive government" which doesn't mention indigenous people.

There aren't many areas or peoples that I can think of that weren't under the control of another power or aren't currently.
Click to expand...

Well, is France, England, or America not foreign to Lybia, Egypt, the Arabian Peninsula or any of what was once the Persian Empire? We remained in control of all of those after WWII up until the 70s.
 
ARFlyer said:
I'll still go see it. If I can watch "Rubber", then I can watch anything. :rofl:



Then I bet you haven't or can't stand to watch Das Boot.
Click to expand...

Das Boot is a great movie. U-571 SUCKED.
 
Jay Honeck said:
My dad was a Captain in the U.S. Army, stationed in Nuremburg, Germany, during the trials. He was a minor clerk in the legal process, but saw a lot of history.
Click to expand...


So was mine! He was the dental officer assigned to the trials, and also a Captain. He, and some colleagues would often have dinner with those on trial. He knew Admiral Doenitz, and Rudolf Hess particularly well. I bet my dad knew your dad.
 
Henning said:
Well, is France, England, or America not foreign to Lybia, Egypt, the Arabian Peninsula or any of what was once the Persian Empire? We remained in control of all of those after WWII up until the 70s.
Click to expand...

Mistake in American policy was abandoning the Monroe Doctrine. If you're going to send military to an area, KEEP the area and control it. Don't turn it over to a puppet government that will roll over in a year. Gas would be about $1.49 right now if this had been exercised just since the 1980's.
 
steingar said:
Good movies either have great stories, good writing, or competing characters.
Click to expand...
Example of all three: Twelve O'Clock High.

Anthony said:
He knew Admiral Doenitz, and Rudolf Hess particularly well.
Click to expand...
Came across some interesting Hess trivia. After his arrival in Scotland he was taken into custody by a British MI5 agent named Brinley Newton-John. You may have heard of Brinley's daughter, Olivia ...
 
danhagan said:
Mistake in American policy was abandoning the Monroe Doctrine. If you're going to send military to an area, KEEP the area and control it. Don't turn it over to a puppet government that will roll over in a year. Gas would be about $1.49 right now if this had been exercised just since the 1980's.
Click to expand...

Better if we had just stuck with the founders vision of staying out of others wars and don't let the European Nobility have control of the US economy. In effect, the US Revolution ended with the Civil War as a loss, by 1913 the European banking families were back in control of our economy completely and they took all the wealth created from the Industrial Revolution, through the Guilded age, all in the crash of 1929.

Had we stayed within our shores for resources, we would have replaced oil as a fuel source long ago and used it for high value polymerization instead. Instead we having been paying for a society that holds the principle of "profits above all else" so dear.
 
Pilawt said:
Example of all three: Twelve O'Clock High.

Came across some interesting Hess trivia. After his arrival in Scotland he was taken into custody by a British MI5 agent named Brinley Newton-John. You may have heard of Brinley's daughter, Olivia ...
Click to expand...

Excellent movie.

I've heard of her somewhere... :D
 
nauga said:
Just saw 'Fury'. Entertaining, in a flashbang sorta way. No match for 'Guardians of the Galaxy', which will probably go down as my favorite of the year, but I'm a sucker for raccoons with high powered weaponry.
Click to expand...

I enjoyed Guardians so much, I saw it three times. And I will definitely be buying the Blu-ray for the home theater when it comes out.

I saw Fury yesterday, and while it's certainly no Saving Private Ryan, I was sufficiently entertained. I'm a sucker for WWII movies of any kind (especially the European theater, not so much the Pacific theater) so as long as its got Allies killing Nazis, I'm good. If there are planes, tanks, and explosions, then all the better.

The only thing in Fury that did bother me was the end battle where 200 or so Germans let themselves get cut to pieces before even STARTING to use their Panzerfaust. The scene earlier with them marching down the road clearly showed at least a couple of them with Panzerfaust slung over their back, so you know they would have stayed back when investigating the tank and fired those suckers off at the first sign of fire from the tank.

Fury isn't something I'd see twice, nor buy on Blu-ray for viewing at home, but was it worth the $20 I spent on the ticket and a bag of popcorn? Yeah.
 
I (finally) got around to seeing this movie, and I liked it. Yes, there were cliched plot elements, yes, there was some holes in the logic. But it was a good story, well-filmed, with great effects. I was able to suspend disbelief enough to enjoy it. Just like, despite working 35+ years in space operations, I was able to enjoy "Gravity."

One aspect increased my enjoyment of this movie: There was an older woman in the theater whose last war movie, apparently, had been "The Longest Day." Wasn't quite prepared for a more-realistic one, and her stifled gasps, whimpers, and "ohmygawd they shot his head off" were interesting to listen to.

As to the ummm..."less than honorable behavior" shown by some of the troops in combat, this shouldn't be a surprise to anyone who's read Kipling ("Single men in barracks don't grow into plaster saints"), Charles MacDonald ("Company Commander") or Bill Mauldin ("The Brass Ring").

Ron Wanttaja
 
So... for those that have seen it, my 9 year old is pestering me to go, but R rated.....

Outside of language and blood, guts, and gore.... anything else those young eyes shouldn't see?

Thanks
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top