"Fury" Columbia Pictures film verses American "Tank Ace” SSgt. Lafayette Pool

I watched Fury for the first time just the other day, and while the action scenes looked good, the actions of the soldiers really bothered me.

I served for 14 years, and although I was not in any combat situations, I would hope our troops acted/would act more like "Band of Brothers" than "Fury".

I seemed to me like Hollywood's attempt to put a bad light on the greatest generation. I'm naive enough to think things like shooting and unarmed prisoner in the back never happened, but I seriously doubt things like that were condoned by all who watched, or stood by to let it happen.

Saving Private Ryan has all sorts of character flaws in the soldiers; cowardly interpreter who allows the Jewish soldier to be killed by the German, Rangers who want to execute the captured German, General who added armor to his jeep and caused the glider to be overloaded, probably others.

I just saw it myself for the first time about 3 weeks ago.Very entertaining.I thought there were a few absurd things,but hey,it's Hollywood,not history.But overall very enjoyable.

Redbird: Also I don't think Pvt Ryan depicts the American troops as flag waving "John Wayne types wearing white hats." Where did that come from ?

First of all your honour, I plead guilty to one charge of thread resurrection.  

Only saw the movie today after my DVD copy arrived.  Missed it at the movies unfortunately.  Only disappointing points for me as far as realism were Brad Pitt still in the fight after taking 3 x hits from a Kar98 to the chest/neck, and the lack of damage caused by the 2 x potato mashers dropped into the Sherman.  Like most of the posters in this thread, just grateful to have a new movie on the subject.

Prior to seeing the film I noted several forum members made mention of how Tiger and panzerfaust rounds did not penetrate the hull of the tank “Fury”. Several said it was unrealistic how these strikes would bounce harmlessly of Fury`s armor. They are correct about this. The panzerfaust warheads and 88mm shells from the German Tiger`s as well as the German anti-tanks guns were notorious for effortlessly slicing thought the light amour plating of the Sherman (view The Smithsonian Channel  "Tanks of Fury" documentary and listen to the surviving Sherman crews tales if one needs confirmation of that fact).  

So when I went to see the movie I paid extremely close attention to those scenes. Watch closely in the scene where War Daddys column of Sherman’s are ambushed by a Tiger tank. The Tiger engaged the  rear tanks in the column first. The 88 mm round sliced through the rear Sherman like a hot knife through butter, blowing its turret off (this was realistic).  Then the Tiger engaged Fury. The first round fired  at Fury fortunately did not strike its armor. The 88MM round struck a bundle of logs that was latched to Fury`s side skirt. A second round was fired at Fury; but again it fortunately did not strike the tanks armor. That round struck a suspension bogie or drive sprocket (wheel) that was latched to Fury`s front plate.

For those that may have missed it view the attached video “Tiger Ambush” trailer.                                      1) On the video-timeline around 0 Min 06 Sec into the scene you will notice the logs tumbling to the ground from the first Tiger round.                                                                                                                                                                       2) On the video-timeline around 0 Min 23 Sec into the scene you will see the second Tiger round strike the tank bogie/wheel that is welded/latched to Fury`s front plate.  

The Tigers 88 mm rounds did not bounce off Fury they were deflected or prematurely detonated by the various items War Daddy and his crew had attached to their tank.

By 1945, it was rare to see a Sherman without any field improvisations. It was a standard operating procedure for tankers in the E.T.O. to tie/strap/latch/weld ANYTHING they could scrounge up to the sides of their tanks that would provide a buffer zone between them and German projectiles. The idea was these obstacles would deflect or per-maturely detonate the incoming enemy projectiles before it come into direct contact with their thin amour.  They used sandbags, logs, spare tank links, tank wheels, steel I-beams from German tank traps, concrete, cinder blocks, wire mesh  etc.for increased protection against shaped-charge rounds. Mounting sandbags around a tank had little effect against high-velocity anti-tank gunfire, but was thought to provide standoff protection against HEAT weapons, primarily the German Panzerfaust and Panzerschreck. Consider it an improvised in the field retrofitting. It was their version of today's Abrams M-1 “Chobham composite armor”.

In the only study known to have been done to test the use of sandbags, on March 9, 1945, officers of the 1st Armored Group tested standard Panzerfaust 60s against sandbagged M4s; shots fired at an angle against the front plate blew away some of the sandbags but failed to penetrate the armor; unfortunately  shots against the side blew away the sandbags and still penetrated the side armor. By 1945 many Shermans had an additional rectangular armor plated squares welded on each side protecting their ammunition storage, others had an additional slanted plate in front of each front crew hatches.

See photos: Please note the logs latched to flanks of the Sherman in the first photo. This is the similar to what War Daddy and his crew had improvised on their Sherman....it saved their lives.

I don't know about anyone else but for me the scene did have a certain authentic realism about. The intensity of the scene  had me on the edge of my seat and my intestines in a knot!!!! Well done Hollywood!

As a former tanker, I took a co-worker with me to see it. He has asked me a million "what was it like" type questions as to how a tank crew functions. I told him when this movie is over, you will understand a little better.

Individual crews all have different personalities and ethics, usually dictated by the TC. The main point is when you are crammed into a few square feet of space with three or four other smelly dudes for a long time...your people skills have to right up there...LOL

I finally had a chance to see the movie Fury. This isn`t your typical flag waving John Wayne type of movie were the Americans are wear white hats and are always the good guys…as in Saving Private Ryan. It portrays the American soldier in various shades of grey; doing some  good as well as bad things; but that’s what happens when are people are thrust into brutal live or die situations.    

The gritty realism it portrays about the final days of combat in the ETO during WWII is rare for the big silver screen. The constant dreary grey skies, mud, and rubble were an excellent mood setting backdrop for this fictitious tale. Brad Pitt did any outstanding job portraying the charter “War Daddy”. While unpleasant, sour, foul-mouthed, cynical and decidedly brutal; its what happens to men (and women) who are thrust into the unsavory and terrifying world of active combat.  The War Daddy charter was a complex man with many layers; for example his ability to speak fluent German was a surprise…but not unrealistic because numerous Americans had American-German ancestry and the language was spoken around their household and communities. War Daddy`s occasional launch into forays of philosophy i.e. "Peace is idealistic. History is violent.” shows he was a man capable of intellectual thought. His quoting of a verse from the Bible in the final battle scene shows he was a man of faith. Even the sequence involving the tankers and the pair of German civilian women War Daddy keeps his crew from performing a gang sexually assault of the women. In this encounter War Daddy shows a moral human/civilized side of his make up by just asking for a pan of hot water to wash the stench of war his body, sitting down at the dinning room table for a quite civilized meal and conversation. Additionally, in the final stand-off scene at the cross roads where he decides to remain and hold off the approaching SS battalion (even though out numbered and facing certain death) shows he was a man of conviction to duty and service to his country. I wish there more time developing and exploring the background of this charter…I found him interesting. I wonder what his background was in civilian life...hummm.

He as well as his men were savages when the shells started flying and very human when it was quite. The part right after the engagement with the three anti-tank guns where Pitt's character tried to "toughen up" the new driver and demanding that he shot the commander of the of the German anti-tank gun crew may constitute a war crime, but one must place the act into the context of the situation they had just survived. The ambush left them all  with the feeling that swift retribution my be handed out. Even the slapping around of the new guy when he failed to shoot the school age kid armed with a panzerfaust, resulting in the columns lead tank being destroyed and killing the entire crew. 

As I stated earlier “Fury” portrays the American soldier in various shades of grey doing some  good and doing some bad things; but that’s what happens when people are placed in a brutal live or die situations.    

The only unbelievable Hollywood  part of the film was the crossroad stand off. I seriously doubt  the  SS would have spent so much time to destroy one lonely tank. They could have easily bypassed it or taken it out with panzerfausts. I think the "standoff" in the end was pure entertainment.

Great fictional storyline, great charters, great grab you by the seat of your pants action and well filmed. On the scale of 1-5, I would give the movie a 4 based on its entertainment value. And, yes I would see it again!

 P.S.

I did see The Smithsonian Channel  "Tanks of Fury" documentary in which .they interviewed veteran WWll tankers. It was a great prelude to put you in the correct mind set of how these guys felt before before seeing the movie.

Good to know.

Thanks

The Smithsonian Channel has a show called "Tanks of Fury" which features interviews with some veteran tankers along with close looks at how they filmed many of the tank scenes, planned and staged the battle scenes and what they used for vehicles. They built a number of accurate replicas using modern running gear to avoid wear and tear on priceless vehicles. They also built elaborate sets for interior shots of the Shermans. Definitely worth watching

Ken

I went to see it a whopping 5 TIMES over the past few weeks with my dad (as there are no other good movies on at the minute) and we both loved it, it has some minor historical inaccuracies such as how the tiger's rounds would almost always bounce harmlessly of their armour, and how their tank could survive in one piece after encountering 300 SS men with rocket launchers

And a few hundred Dragon 1/35 SS figures in various late war cold weather uniforms ;)

 Now all you need is.....

1. A helmet
   
2. A gas mask.
3. A set of #AF 35033 M4 Sherman HVSS T84 Workable Tracks ..........and away you're on your way.

                                 What  a Sweet wife.

Well, on the "plus" side of the whole experience, after taking my wife to see it last month, she walked in to the local HobbyTown and asked for the "Fury tank", and the guys there, gotta love 'em, set her up with the Tamiya boxing of the Tasca/Asuka M4A3E8.

Happy happy happy Birthday to me.

I would never have bought it myself, and I finally get to build a Tasca Sherman.

I tend to prefer war movies that don't pretent to tell real, factual stories. When Hollywood tries to do that, it generally screws things up pretty badly. I'm thinking of "Battle of the Bulge," "Pearl Harbor," and "Midway."

I can't think of many supposedly "true" war movies that I really like, Two that come to mind are "30 Seconds Over Tokyo" and "Escape From Sobibor." But my three favorite war movies (or maybe "military movies" would be more appropriate) are "The Bridge On the River Kwai," "The Sand Pebbles," and "Twelve O'Clock High," all of which really qualify as historical fiction. I can think of at least a dozen other good ones that fit in that category.

Just about all the World War II movies we love are not based on real events, other than the actual war itself. Sahara, Saving Private Ryan, Dirty Dozen, and any number of the old 1970s war action movies, like what's that one with Clint Eastwood? Where Eagles Dare? Enjoyable movies, but not supposed to represent an actual event.

Exactly... a good fictional war tale. Not attempting to tell actual history, just telling a good war story. Intense, gritty, edgy, but not claiming to be something that it is not. Everybody seems to love "Kelly's Heroes" and it makes no such claims either. But it is a bit more fun, and has a far happier ending.

Yes, it did remind me of an edgier WW2 comic book like Sgt Rock on steroids, or some other one of those 1970s war comics but done to a 2010s standard.

I finally saw it tonite. Good stuff. Yes it has it's Hollywood artistic license, but really I think I liked it better than most movies of this century "inspired by actual events". This one made no such claim and could best be seen as the typical WWII war novel put to film, and very well done at that. Sort of a cross between "The Haunted Tank" and "Saving Private Ryan". I think WWII US Army tankers finally got their film made.

I will definitely be adding this to my DVD library.

Right, remember it's a movie, not a supposed "documentary" or "historical account", and enjoy it for what it is.

My hope is that this movie will make enough money for it's producers that Hollywood will see it as an indicator that this type of production, using historically accurate equipment, is good for their bottom line and make more of the same type, to the same standards.

Not only will I go see it again, to view it on the big screen, but I'll buy the DVD when it comes out.

I went with several fellas from my local (AMPS) modeling club this past Saturday night and we all really enjoyed it.  Not too much to nit pick about.  Reminded me a lot of 'Saving Private Ryan' especially the part about throwing a raw clerk/typist in to a combat situation.  Still, suspend your disbelief a little and enjoy.

 One more bob to the top......

 There aren't many movies that I'll go see more than twice in a period of say 5 years; however, this is an exception.

 I accepted this movie for what it is, which is a fictional account of an event in WWII.

I sat back (had the whole viewing area to myself) and just had a great time watching this entertaining tank themed war movie.

 We all read comic books as kids and I know many of you remember for example,  the "Haunted Tank" (from G.I. Combat), "Sgt Rock", "Sgt. Fury" and way back in the day, Captain Midnight (Yikes - 10¢) complete with the back page adds for a 125 piece toy soldier set packed in a footlocker for $1.25. Of course we ate it up as the gospel because we were kids and well, we wanted to believe - even the toy advertisements.

  Okay, now fast forward 50 years and we're all grown up and know better and well, that just takes the fun out of it.

 Other than the fact that the Tiger was an early model variant portrayed in the last month of the war (which WAS possible) and that the land mine severed the track above and ahead of the drive sprocket (while the tank was headed forward) when the blast was actually beneath the second set of bogies.

 That wheel was trashed and the track appeared to have parted in the wrong area.  I just couldn't help but notice that (and yes there were other mistakes too). I didn't let that get in the way of having a good time though.

 The final battle scene reminded me of the "Wild Bunch". It "really" got my attention, which I'm sure it was supposed to do. Although based on several accounts from WWII, there is no claim that this movie is an actual event that ever happened.

 Just like those really far fetched comic books from years back, this was made for entertainment; something to sit back, relax and enjoy.

                    I think I'll go see it again........... 

Most tankers will love this movie. Most movie critics and average movie goers can pick apart the story line fairly easily. I think it is well worth the few bucks and couple of hours out of your life.

Several armor modelers are interested in making the various Sherman tanks used in the film. I've seen questions about which kits will best represent each tank. The owner of the M4A4 Murder Inc is a member of one of the modeling websites I frequent.

I imagine at shows and contests in the near future, models of Fury, Murder Inc, Matador, Lucy Sue and Old Phyllis will make an appearance.

Well well, along comes a movie about a subject pretty much passed over by Bollywood and it gets great raves and picked apart at same time.  I am a ole Cav Sprocket Head, that's Tanker to those who know no better.  I have ate, slept, releaved myself and anything else you can think of inside one of these armored rolling monsters.  I have fired the main gun when it was so hot, water was sprayed onto the vehicle to help the crew from passing out from heat exhaustion.  I have dug them out of the Earth bured to the fender with both tracks thrown to the inside.  I have mounted up and the outside of the tank was so cold, to touch with bare hands resulted in a layer of your palm skin sticking/frozen to where you placed your hand.  I went from the driver seat to the commanders position.   What does this have to do with a movie, I will tell you, been there and done it and this was as close as I believe they could get you into the world of the armour fighting crewman on a tank.  Best movie I have seen and take my word, if you are looking for something to pick apart and critique then stay away.  But for those wanting a hit you in the gut, on the line by the seat of your pants tank movie........then waste some of your life and go see it.  As for that Tiger, is most certainly the real deal and when one is in combat, anything is liable to happen, Tiger takes out three before getting his just deserts.  For those who do not know, tactics of the war for Sherman's was to attack in groups of three to take out a Tiger.  I believe they did just that.  So what do I have to say about the movie.......Gary Owen!

Still haven't seen the film yet, but hoping to do so soon. As somebody who has handled both the Garand and a Thompson, in Europe, in most cases, except room clearing, I think that would prefer the Garand. The Thompson is one heavy piece of weaponry. But I guarantee you that one abandoned on the battlefield that was still operational would be picked up by somebody... Finders keepers is a way of life for GIs...

@fificat: with all due respect, but being a combat rifleman is not like playing a video game where you "upgrade" your character by picking up the biggest and baddest weapon lying around.

1) That M1 Garand on your shoulder: what do you do with it? You're 100% responsible for it.  You're NOT going to carry both right?  Five minutes after you set down your M1, you can bet the SGT is going to be on your ***

2) Likely, you only had basic training in the .45 SMG.  Now you're going to be Sgt Rock?

3) you'd look like an NCO or officer -- and be targeted more

4) what's an SMG useful for: assault.  You planning on volunteering much?

I liked the film.  Only thing that clinked for me was in the very last shot as the camera goes up, showing the ruined tank in the intersection.  What got me was the Thompson sub machine gun lying on the tank by the open top hatch.  If I had been a dogface with an 8 in the clip M1 Garand and saw a Thompson just lying around, I would snatch it fast, and promote me some .45 ammo and some mags ASAP.  

BTW, I am not an expert on Shermans, but remember reading some accounts of the use of them in WWII, including the account of the 761st, that spoke of the need to do anything to repair and get these tanks back into action.  My guess is that anything that might fit was used, without regard of make or model.

im not going to gt caught up in the realism thing because most times, when using real equipment, you use what you can. it never bothered me that M-24s were American and M-46/47/48s were German. and i don't mind dark movies when they represent dark situations. and the TIGER was COOL!!!!!

all that aside i thought it was awful and 3 hours of my life i will never get back.

i thought the first 30 minutes of SAVING PRIVATE RYAN were dark but fascinating and done very well.

and i know it's hollywood but why in the hell would any TIGER commander who survived that long get in a knife fight with a SHERMAN?

Rob, you can't walk into a Dr. Mo (DRMO) and pickup a surplus Hum-Vee today.  They have to be crushed, cut up, etc and scrap-metalled just like the M-151's.  There is only one source for a surplus actual military Hum-Vee.  A military contractor just happened to be driving past a USMC motorpool, and saw rows of hulks lying there.  He inquired about them, and was told they couldn't be surplussed.  He went to the Contracting folks and told them that he wanted to accept partial payment in Hum-Vee hulks.  They accepted his offer, and he got somewhere between 5-10,000 units which he is reconditioning for sale to the public.