Movie: Fury

[rob love]

Originally Posted by Gina Vampire

popcorn brand??

Orville Reddenboker of course.

From my very few times on rocket ranges, it is not hard to deflect a round if the angle of incidence is too great.

[Jon Skagfeld]

...and the angle of incidence equals the angle of reflection which leads to sometimes great collateral damage.l

[Jim Burrill]

When the German column was marching down the road, it seemed like every other guy had a Panzerfaust shouldered. Funny that when they ran into the tank, they had one box of 4 to use. What happened to the rest?

I also thought the scene in the dining room was out of character for a crew that supposedly had gotten along so well for three years. I don't think they would have behaved so pissy when the SSGt was "playing nice" with the locals.

Granted, taking the piss from the FNG who just got laid would have happened, but I don't think quite so nastily.

[jdmcm]

Can't remember a movie in recent history that actually did their best to be accurate in the vehicles, uniforms, weapons etc....You can never please the "Rivet Counters". I saw some guy on the net going on about the tanks being too close together..."highly in-accurate" Except it is a movie...not a course in Tactics at Fort Knox...Pretty hard to get all the tanks in the frame if you have them all spaced "tactically correct" ....and yes Fury was actually an M4A2 posing as M4A3...but who the hell cares? They could have used Chaffee's for Sherman's and M47 Patton's for Tigers...but they didn't...and do you think 99% of the world would have cared?...probably not...yet the MV community who should appreciate the effort that was taken for accuracy sake...picks the movie apart because we are smarter then the film makers...I have never been in combat so I can not speak to the accuracy of the action sequences...but they sure made an impression on me...and if a Canadian writer director wanted to make a movie about a Canadian tank crew...would we fault him for not including more Americans? And finally we are disappointed in the final battle because the Germans didn't kill everybody more efficiently? Let's try to remember it was a fictional movie made for our entertainment...not a documentary

[Ryan]

Saw it today. Had read some criticism of it beforehand and had seen the trailer which didn't leave me too excited.
However, upon leaving the cinema I can thoroughly recommended it. It was tense, violent, gritty and very well acted.
I so want to own a tank again.

[Ed Storey]

Saw it once, wouldn't see again; although I guess I have indirectly contributed to Brad Pitt's wealth.

I would summarize the movie as 'a re-enactor's wet dream', loads of nice kit, but very little substance.

From my perspective, the war movies of the 1950s and 1960s had pretty good plots but totally inaccurate kit; now they have all the right kit and ridiculous plots. Perhaps some day we will see a merge of the two.

[jdmcm]

Yeah Henry Ford and Telly Savalas rolling 50 gallon drums of gasoline down the road and single handedly thwarting the entire Ardennes offensive was way better...maybe in the Fury sequel Clint Eastwood and Richard Burton will swing in on a cable car and save the day...