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

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.

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

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!

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.

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 ?

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 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.