Lead Adventure Forum

Miniatures Adventure => The Second World War => Topic started by: fantail on 25 June 2014, 10:35:32 PM

Title: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: fantail on 25 June 2014, 10:35:32 PM
Some cool looking tank fun coming soon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q94n3eWOWXM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q94n3eWOWXM)
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Cubs on 25 June 2014, 10:50:15 PM
Looks fun.

I couldn't quite see the tank properly and I'm not really up on tanks too much anyway. Was it a Hellcat? A 76mm Sherman?
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: former user on 25 June 2014, 11:34:59 PM
sherman vs tiger
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Paleskin on 25 June 2014, 11:56:24 PM
Worth a look

Nice to stick a clip of his bare torso in for the ladies! lol
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Elbows on 26 June 2014, 01:19:18 AM
I hope this is good.  However it looks a bit heavy on the overly-dramatic side.  Also I'm never too fond of movies which promote a silly ending "five against three hundred!"   lol  I'll see it just for some tank porn but my expectation that it's a quality film are rather low.
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Cecil Gaybody on 26 June 2014, 10:40:33 AM
Dear Boys,
Larry would be turning in his grave, all action but very little substance .
I am sure the Super hero/ far east teenage market will love it.
I will be performing "Old Mother Goose" in Bristol this next Pantomime  season.
We have decided to be faithful to the story no doubt unlike Brad,s balls and no
trouser effort.

Keep it up
Cecil
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Calimero on 26 June 2014, 10:54:11 AM
... I'll see it just for some tank porn but my expectation that it's a quality film are rather low.

Same here...  :?
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Calimero on 26 June 2014, 10:55:59 AM
Looks fun.

I couldn't quite see the tank properly and I'm not really up on tanks too much anyway. Was it a Hellcat? A 76mm Sherman?

Looks like a Sherman Easy 8...
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: dm on 26 June 2014, 11:48:17 AM
Looks fairly good from the first trailer and looking forward to seeing the movie and was about time Hollywood made a WW2 tank movie :)
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Ballardian on 26 June 2014, 01:52:16 PM
Yes, it's an M4A3E8 ('Easy Eight') Sherman, acceptable for the films timeframe (& so ends my rivet counting) - as to the films quality - decent cast, obviously had a reasonable amount of cash thrown at it, leads me to believe it'll probably be entertaining - I'm not sure absolute verite should be expected from this sort of star vehicle - just get the popcorn & sit back!
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Paul Hicks on 26 June 2014, 02:26:13 PM
I think I read somewhere that the Tiger was shipped from the Tank Museum to be used in the production. I could see the appeal to them as the payment would pay for the running costs. Have to say I'm really looking forward to it and it was filmed just down the road from me.
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: grant on 26 June 2014, 02:29:43 PM
Dear Boys,
Larry would be turning in his grave, all action but very little substance .
I am sure the Super hero/ far east teenage market will love it.
I will be performing "Old Mother Goose" in Bristol this next Pantomime  season.
We have decided to be faithful to the story no doubt unlike Brad,s balls and no
trouser effort.

Keep it up
Cecil

I shall be spending my ticket money on Mother Goose: a pantomime sans pants, rather than seeing the Pitt film. When Fury is inevitably shown on History Channel, I shall enjoy it for free.
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Tom Reed on 26 June 2014, 02:46:10 PM
I had heard from somewhere I can't recall that they built the Tiger from scratch for the movie, but I might be wrong.
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: axabrax on 26 June 2014, 02:56:01 PM
Looks decent. What is Brad like 50 years old? Where there really 50-year-old tank commanders? Of course being in his 40s didn't stop Brad from playing the teenage Achilles in Troy, so I guess he's not really a stickler for these things.

I'm willing to bet it's the faux Tiger Saving Pvt. Ryan tank built up on a Sherman chassis that we used to see every once in a while at reenacting events. I tend to doubt they would break out a real tiger just for the movie. Surprised they didn't just use CGI.

Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: former user on 26 June 2014, 03:42:49 PM
I'd rather put my money on some pieces dug out somewhere in Russia, they tend to do such things and need the money Hollywood can pay. I would assume for the cash they pay Pitt you can buy/rebuild 10 tigers
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Keith on 26 June 2014, 03:45:12 PM
The Tiger is the real deal - 131 transported from Bovington for the film. Only use of a real tiger in a Hollywood Movie (Theirs Is The Glory doesn't count - it was British and they had a bit of an advantage  :) ). Definitely not the Saving Private Ryan mockup.

Of course rivet counters will point out that 131 is a very early model, whereas you'd probably expect a very late version for this time period, but if they are fighting in Germany then arguably all bets are off!
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Ballardian on 26 June 2014, 03:57:11 PM
Fun as it is to debate real vs faux Tigers, it is only incidental to how good the film may be surely?
(Incidentally, I was going to say that I doubted we'll ever see a real Tiger I or II used in a movie - they're simply too rare, fragile & valuable to be let out from the few collections that own ones in running order - however I've since discovered that it indeed the fully running Tiger I owned by The Tank Museum at Bovington that was used in the film - surprising given the reasons mentioned earlier - ahh, looks liked I've been pipped at the post by Keith.)
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Calimero on 26 June 2014, 04:21:21 PM

According to this Wiki article (yes, I know...), there's only six Tiger tanks left around the world with only two in working order (one in Bovington, UK and the other in the US).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vimoutiers_Tiger_tank

IIRC the Saving Private Ryan Tiger was built on an old Russian tank frame wasn't it?
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Elk101 on 26 June 2014, 04:45:34 PM
This from IMDb on the shermans:

The Main Shermans used in Fury were :
Fury M4A2 76mm HVSS from Bovington Tank Museum, M4A2 75mm VVSS from Tay Restorations,
M4A2 76mm HVSS from Jeep Sud Est,
M4A4 75MM VVSS from Adrian Barrell,
M4A1 76mm VVSS from Barratt Homes.

I'd have let them use mine but it's only 1:50, though it would've been fine for tiny Tom Cruise.
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: The Dozing Dragon on 26 June 2014, 04:56:19 PM
Looks good fun. I stood on that Vimoutiers Tiger tank sometimes around 1966......

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-J4r1YLZ4nHY/U5SeXw1ixTI/AAAAAAAAGrs/z4KwHwNLwnE/s1600/Tiger+Tank+Pic+for+blog.jpg)
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Ballardian on 26 June 2014, 05:23:36 PM
Yes Calimero, the SPR 'Tiger' is on a T34 chassis, as appears to to the grand film tradition, just like the one from Kelly's Heroes.
It's a pity so much of the Vemoutier Tiger is missing, (including I think the entire floor pan!) but the restoration would easily hit six figures & spares are rare - though I suppose if you combined it with the equally ratty one at Samaur you would have most of one good one.
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: axabrax on 26 June 2014, 11:16:06 PM
Yes Calimero, the SPR 'Tiger' is on a T34 chassis, as appears to to the grand film tradition, just like the one from Kelly's Heroes.

Yes, that's right, it was a T34. I knew it was some kind of Frankentank, but couldn't remember exactly which chassis. It's freaking huge, that's for sure. It showed up at a few World War II reenactments that I went to. The funny thing was its only opponent was a Stuart on the American side!
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Elbows on 27 June 2014, 12:33:53 AM
Yep, T34...easiest way was to glimpse at the tracks.  I sure hope there is some vaguely rewarding footage in this new movie.  I expect we'll be seeing a lot of 30-yard tank battles for cinematic effect.

 ;)
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Atheling on 27 June 2014, 07:28:13 AM
So, who's going to remind us all in November then  :)?

i always seem to forget about films and end up missing them!!  :'( :'(

Darrell.
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Paul Hicks on 27 June 2014, 07:51:34 AM
The SPR Tiger is alive and well and on display at the IWM Duxford land war site.
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Silent Invader on 27 June 2014, 08:10:57 AM
This from IMDb on the shermans:

The Main Shermans used in Fury were :
Fury M4A2 76mm HVSS from Bovington Tank Museum, M4A2 75mm VVSS from Tay Restorations,
M4A2 76mm HVSS from Jeep Sud Est,
M4A4 75MM VVSS from Adrian Barrell,
M4A1 76mm VVSS from Barratt Homes.

I'd have let them use mine but it's only 1:50, though it would've been fine for tiny Tom Cruise.

What? Barratt Homes owns a tank?!
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Cubs on 27 June 2014, 09:52:39 AM
What? Barratt Homes owns a tank?!

Why not, Everest Double Glazing owned a helicopter.

I accept the fact that Hollywood will mostly make American movies, with American heroes for an American audience these days. I just hanker after the older films of the post war period, when people who were there were still around, possibly even making the film. There seemed to be a much more accurate and respectful spread of honours amongst the other nations involved back then.
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Arthur on 27 June 2014, 08:26:50 PM
What is Brad like 50 years old? Where there really 50-year-old tank commanders? Of course being in his 40s didn't stop Brad from playing the teenage Achilles in Troy, so I guess he's not really a stickler for these things.

Pitt was born in 1963, which makes him a bit long in the tooth for a front line WW2 tankie. That said, no one seemed to mind Lee Marvin as a 56-year old infantry NCO in The Big Red One or John Wayne as a 55-year-old paratrooper officer in The Longest Day.

Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: former user on 27 June 2014, 08:29:54 PM
besides, he looks way more youthful than the other two.

Plus, 3 years of combat fatigue can let 30 years old look like 50.....
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: SiamTiger on 27 June 2014, 09:56:03 PM
To be honest, yet another cheap propaganda movie.

Yeah killing germans (germans, not nazis), that's something a Tarantino Movie like Inglorious Basterds can come along with. But this action movie is just ... it's a Sherman, against so much enemies and surviving it? Oh, we all forget, it was the americans, who did win the war by themselves. Not the brits, not the polish airborne, russians and the combined allies, it was the americans...
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: former user on 27 June 2014, 10:09:27 PM
well, that's not so simple....
I can't say much about the movie before seeing it, and I don't want to speculate.

Where I cannot follow though is the 1945 plot with the tank platoon being greatly outnumbered by the german army....
I could understand the threat of the tiger against shermans, but maybe summer 44, not that late in the war.

And, after searching on IMDB, I cannot ignore the fact that there are no named german characters, so I guess the enemy has to be faceless and dehumanized again.... like in SPR and BOB.
Which interestingly is a contrast to Tarrantino, who offered a broad variety of german characters, with the americans being unidimensional pastiche....
but still, one has to see the movie first....
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: answer_is_42 on 28 June 2014, 08:16:46 PM
Hooray for war, death to Germans.

This looks awful.  lol
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: dm on 29 June 2014, 11:03:07 AM
Hollywood are going to make any WW2 movie based around American involvement as they have a large consumer base but i wont knock the movie till i see it and just pleased that someone has finally made a WW2 movie that covers tank action. The trailer will also hype up the story as most movie trailers do.

Band of Brothers mini series was set against the backdrop of American involvemnt in the later stages of WW2 and it was widely praised even though it covered only the American perspective.

Maybe this new movie will inspire other countries to make their own movies that cover their countries tank actions in the period and with CGI getting better all the time even if the real tanks are not available for filming they could still be made
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: former user on 29 June 2014, 11:09:51 AM
it has been a long time since "kelly's heroes"

I wonder whether we will see references
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Driscoles on 29 June 2014, 02:16:45 PM
Ronson !
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Sterling Moose on 29 June 2014, 02:34:53 PM
A friend, and fellow wargamer, is an extra in this.  He sent me a couple of pretty good pics of himself in both US Inf and SS uniform.  He did comment that the MG42 he had to carry was made of rubber.

Any idea who holds the moulds for these?   lol
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: wrgmr1 on 29 June 2014, 10:17:38 PM
Pics of tanks used:

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/10/04/article-2443958-18847DE200000578-575_634x372.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/10/04/article-2443958-188548F900000578-982_634x423.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/09/30/article-2439334-1867E95D00000578-775_964x477.jpg
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Atheling on 29 June 2014, 10:37:40 PM
Pics of tanks used:

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/10/04/article-2443958-18847DE200000578-575_634x372.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/10/04/article-2443958-188548F900000578-982_634x423.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/09/30/article-2439334-1867E95D00000578-775_964x477.jpg

Wow!  8) 8) 8)

Darrell.
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: FramFramson on 03 July 2014, 05:20:46 AM
In the last picture, is that a half-scale model of an M26 Pershing on the left, in the foreground?

EDIT: No, not a Pershing. Damn, what is that?
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: former user on 03 July 2014, 05:52:49 AM
M18 Hellcat

(http://www.panzerdepot.com/Images/Pic%20of%20M18.JPG)
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Atheling on 03 July 2014, 06:31:53 AM
M18 Hellcat

(http://www.panzerdepot.com/Images/Pic%20of%20M18.JPG)

Yep, it is- and a beauty at that  8). Bad armour, very big gun!

Darrell.

Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: FramFramson on 03 July 2014, 06:44:00 AM
I'm familiar with the Hellcat (vroom vroom!), but I totally failed to recognize it there.
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Elbows on 03 July 2014, 09:02:16 AM
I noted the Hellcat but assumed it might be scaled down.  Was it that small?  Was it based off something tiny?  Again I'll see this for some tank porn but that's as far as my expectations go.

PS: We might see toys released to support the film which is always a potential bonus for gamers.
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: former user on 03 July 2014, 09:53:05 AM
hellcat was smaller than sherman, it used a different chassis.

we are probably used to regard sherman tanks as small in comparison to the german tanks it had to battle, so anything smaller than that might appear tiny, but it wasn't....

shermans were in fact rather large, given that they managed to fit in a 10cm after the war....
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Elbows on 03 July 2014, 11:55:58 AM
There is a Sherman on my campus.  It's pretty hefty.  Not huge, but hefty. 
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Elk101 on 03 July 2014, 12:56:56 PM
I keep on misreading this thread as 'Fury at new Brad Pitt WWII film'. I'm clearly getting way ahead of myself  :D

It would be nice if it was somewhere near an insight into life as a WWII tank crew without too much jingoism, etc. etc.
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: former user on 03 July 2014, 03:20:37 PM
boom!
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: former user on 03 July 2014, 03:33:44 PM
roll!
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: former user on 03 July 2014, 04:03:14 PM
and finally

Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Barbarian on 03 July 2014, 05:49:22 PM
-Roll your tanks as in a traffic jam, 10 meters of each others.
-Fire at each other at 30 meters.

Maybe they're playing FOW (or BA)?

 lol
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: former user on 03 July 2014, 05:58:16 PM
what do You think all those expensive tank heavy games get their ideas for rules from?  8)

plus, why do You think wargamers accept such 20th C firing distances as reality?  :?

and, it gets even better with battleships and military supersonic jets....
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: FramFramson on 03 July 2014, 09:30:06 PM
Hellcats were longer than Shermans (by about a full metre), but the one in that photo looks quite a bit smaller than any other tank in the shot, more like the size of a tankette. Really not sure if it's some sort of scaled down model or not.
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Elbows on 03 July 2014, 11:20:25 PM
what do You think all those expensive tank heavy games get their ideas for rules from?  8)

plus, why do You think wargamers accept such 20th C firing distances as reality?  :?

and, it gets even better with battleships and military supersonic jets....

Wait, so you're telling me...that unlike Flames of War, artillery support can't shoot 30-50 meters from their own position?  NONSENSE!*

*I say this, but I admit that for gaming purposes, even in 28mm I've included somewhat silly short ranges for stuff, solely to differentiate between weapons...like almost every other game.  However, stuff like artillery on a board which represents a football field does make me chuckle.  :`
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Calimero on 05 July 2014, 02:02:03 AM
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/09/30/article-2439334-1867E95D00000578-775_964x477.jpg

Hellcats were longer than Shermans (by about a full metre), but the one in that photo looks quite a bit smaller than any other tank in the shot, more like the size of a tankette. Really not sure if it's some sort of scaled down model or not.

Well, look like there's something off with this last picture anyway... look at the SUV in the background it's almost as big as the first Sherman in the foreground... :?
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: FramFramson on 05 July 2014, 06:37:26 AM
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/09/30/article-2439334-1867E95D00000578-775_964x477.jpg

Well, look like there's something off with this last picture anyway... look at the SUV in the background it's almost as big as the first Sherman in the foreground... :?

All the cars in the background are like that! What the heck?...  o_o
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: former user on 05 July 2014, 08:40:34 AM
The picture is most probably from the enforced perspective set of the new Peter Jackson movie "The Fury of Smeaug"
in reality, the only measurement in which a Hellcat exceeds a sherman is the width...

Specifications  M18 Hellcat
Weight    17.7 metric tons (39,000 lb)
Length    6.68 m (21.9 ft) (with gun)
             5.28 m (17.3 ft) (without gun)
Width    2.87 m (9.4 ft)
Height    2.57 m (8.4 ft)
Crew    5 (Commander, gunner, loader, driver, co-driver)

Specifications  M4 Sherman
Weight    66,800 pounds (30.3 tonnes; 29.8 long tons; 33.4 short tons)
Length    19 ft 2 in (5.84 m)
Width    8 ft 7 in (2.62 m)
Height    9 ft (2.74 m)
Crew    5 (Commander, gunner, loader, driver, co-driver)

and:
"In contrast to the M10 tank destroyer, which used the chassis of the M4 Sherman, the M18 Hellcat was designed from the start to be a fast tank destroyer. As a result it was smaller, lighter, more comfortable, and significantly faster, but carried the same gun as the Sherman 76 mm models."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M18_Hellcat#Design
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Silent Invader on 05 July 2014, 08:49:53 AM
The black SUV looks like a new Range Rover (btw, often used for filming from the open rear - eg Top Gear) which has dimensions of:

Length 4999mm
Width 2220mm
Height 1835mm
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Elbows on 07 July 2014, 02:29:27 AM
Remember guys, big settings like that (if it's to represent a armored unit camped or a fuel depot etc.) can also be using scaled models etc.  Stuff in the background of a shot does not need to be in scale to the actors if it's in scale to its surroundings.  Also perhaps some of the tanks/vehicles in the picture are large models to be used for explosions, tanks blowing up, etc.   Plenty of explanations.  I don't believe we'll see actors zipping around in midget vehicles.  Besides I think Brad Pitt in a Bren-carrier would be a little weird.
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Calimero on 07 July 2014, 03:36:36 AM
...still there's something way off with that picture and I would like to know what's going on... it looks like the perspective its all over the place (so to speak) ...look at those two men in the background compare to the ones closer to the Sherman tank... what are they? 10ft tall?

(http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/ll206/Calimero_34/Furyset-article-2439334-1867E95D00000578-775_964x477_zps073f4f74.jpg) (http://s289.photobucket.com/user/Calimero_34/media/Furyset-article-2439334-1867E95D00000578-775_964x477_zps073f4f74.jpg.html)

I don't really care about historical accuracy at this point, I'm really just wondering what can cause this... is that a montage? :?
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: former user on 07 July 2014, 05:37:56 AM
I don't think it is a montage, nor downsized vehicles. Size is a matter of relation.
First of all, the picture is a crane shot, and that messes up scales in the first place. We expect perspective, but there is none - the eye tries to construct it, but the frame of reference, the walking surface, is viewed from above. I have measured the people marked by the arrows on the screen and they are about the same size. I believe the reason it appears distorted is that the "small"  people in the foreground are in contrasting colours to the whole brownish soup, and they have contrasting outlines as opposed to the uniformed ones. In addition, the dark clothed crew stands next to huge tanks that dwarf them, whereas the soldiers are in front of tents that match their height approximately, plus they wear helmets that pump up their heads  (the 28mm scale crep effect basically), The M18 looks small because it does not have a size relation - noone stands near it, and it looks too small. But measured on the screen, the width is the same as of the one sherman we see from the rear... And SUVs are huge and meant to look huge.
Look at the detail directly above the M18 turret in front of the black screen. the fist crew members visible, only viewed from the middle up, are seated, but appear to be closer and smaller than the ones standing immediately in front of them, because our minds impls perspective.

If I am not grossly mistaken (but why should a set photo be composed?)  this is a simple coincidental lesson in visual scales....
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Silent Invader on 07 July 2014, 05:52:07 AM
Maybe they also employed a bunch of short extras for shots alongside the tanks - so the tanks don't seem 'small' (public conception being that they were/are huge?)?.
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: former user on 07 July 2014, 05:57:19 AM
interesting idea.... and the large ones for the tents?

the screenshots I have taken show the soldiers that take cover behind the tanks look smallish indeed....


maybe someone with the appropriate collection would like to reconstruct the shot and find out....
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Constable Bertrand on 07 July 2014, 06:49:09 AM
Quick! Base that tank to make it look right!  lol  lol  lol  lol  lol  lol
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: FramFramson on 07 July 2014, 06:35:50 PM
Interesting.

For reference, Google Images gives us some good shots of Hellcats with people to show how they might relate:

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b0/M18-Hellcat-wiesloch-19450401.jpg)

(http://www.electric-image.co.uk/mv/armour/Hellcat/Pic171.jpg)

(http://image.motortrend.com/f/wot/our-cars-driving-a-69-year-old-buick-m18-hellcat-tank-destroyer-416067/55970612/1944-buick-m18-hellcat-tank-destroyer-side-view-in-motion.jpg)

(https://yy1.staticflickr.com/4082/4913955887_f011ebac35_z.jpg)

(http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/sub4/hellcat-fra.jpg)

Also, I'm not sure the Hellcat was smaller. The Sherman is only listed as being larger when you include the gun, whereas there's no mention of if the Hellcat length was with or without the gun. I wasn't able to find a direct photo comparison of the two, but I did find this render image:

(http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100922135447/companyofheroes/en/images/d/db/M18_Hellcat_-_M4_Sherman.jpg)

The hellcat looks correct in that and I can't imagine that the animator got the width right and the length wrong. If this picture is wrong than a real hellcat would be almost square in shape. It's possible the Sherman is too small, but then it would appear wider than the Hellcat in the render image. But based on the real photos above, I'm pretty sure that the Hellcat was simply a larger vehicle (though lower than the Sherman).
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: carlos13th on 31 October 2014, 04:17:41 AM
Watched this with the misses today and actually thought it was a good film. The ending felt a little silly but I would prefer not to spoil it by mentioning more. The main cast did a fantastic job even Shia labeouf who I never rated as an actor until this movie. The movie kept up tension during many of the scenes and I never felt bored or disinterested during the roughly two hours and twenty mins running time.

I'm no world war 2 history buff so I can't say for sure how accurate anything was but it seemed authentic in terms of vehicles, uniforms and weapons to me. One of my favourite scenes was the shermans vs tiger scene.

The characters in the film don't seem like standard super heroic good guys you often see in movies which was a plus.

Those who said the Germans are largely nameless bad guys are pretty spot on, beyond a few civilains I can't think of a single named german. Not all Germans are shown as mustache twirling villains though.

Genuinly think it's worth a watch.

What did those who saw it think of it?
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Valerik on 31 October 2014, 05:27:26 AM
The Thursday Night Movie Club saw it last Sunday.

We all enjoyed it, had fun & willingly suspended our collective disbelief.

I'm the only militaria geek in the group, so my challenges, & sacrifices, were greater.


****HERE BE SPOILERS****

Please HIGHLIGHT to see the offending text...



In order of absurdity, or annoyance, or recollection:

1.

Whatever possessed some random costumier to give Brad Pitt RUSSIAN goggles??

Given that the others wore US GI period appropriate eye protection, why DO that?

Chapped my cheeks every time they appeared on screen, so brutally, blatantly WRONG.

The distinctive Soviet square/round style added nothing artistic, & detracted historically.

2.

An M4 or M5 HST zipping across the screen towing a...105 howitzer???

My Ford Focus can tow a 105, why waste the muscle?  Just looked lame, mercifully briefly.

3.

Improperly calling for, & use of, ammunition types inappropriate for the targets, or the gun.[/colour]

4.

Wildly inappropriate combat ranges as previously discussed.

5.

Absurdly aged soldiers.  Not since the re-make of Memphis Belle has Hollywood really got this visually right.

6.

No shoepacs or galoshes visible.  C'mon, Germany, early '45, sheesh...[/colour]

7.

ditto, an unbelievable dearth of Armored Forces clothing, tanker's jackets, overalls...[/colour]

8.

Unrealistic depiction of the capabilities of the 76mm M1 main gun of the Easy 8.[/colour]

9.

The lads spent an awful lotta time outside the tank, doing suspiciously doughboyish type things...just fartin' about, actin' like targets, not tankers.[/colour]

10.

The patent absurdity of a solitary immobile tank surviving a close range attack by '350' infantrymen clearly armed with HEAT weapons, in this instance the panzerfausts are are highly visible as the landser march toward the "ambush".  & they cleverly show us much earlier in the film just how devastating such weapons are...

There are other nits to be picked, but overall I enjoyed it.  There's a good bit of tasty eye candy for those of us enamoured of militaria, some diorama worthy moments, they got most of the uniforms/insignia/weapons right most of the time. and the "HOLLYWOOD" seemed less obtrusive than I'd expected.

Bloody well HATED those effin' Rooski goggles though.

YMMV

Valerik

Did I mention how awful the Commie tanker goggles looked on Brad Pitt?

EDITED: to do the spoiler thingee former user requested
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: former user on 31 October 2014, 05:53:01 AM
You should change Your spoilers to background colour, it makes the thread unreadable for anyone who hasn't seen the movie. Spoilers should be only seen by active highlighting by the reader.
You have transformed the whole thread into a spoiler thread...
like this:


I don't understand the problem with the russian goggles - granted, having US issue goggles in soviet Russia would be a problem, but how do You know soviet "style" goggles would have not been available for private upgrade in the land of the free... market powers?
besides, he clearly states that he started with "torch", against the 10th Panzerdivision which had taken part in "Barbarossa" and was the transferred to Tunisia. Clearly a veteran would have been able to pinch an item formerly pinched somewhere else

damn, what is the background colour called? "tan"  is only close....
it works
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Barbarian on 31 October 2014, 12:58:40 PM
#CCCC99 or #999966.
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: former user on 31 October 2014, 01:39:22 PM
THX
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Valerik on 31 October 2014, 01:48:16 PM
You should change Your spoilers to background colour, it makes the thread unreadable for anyone who hasn't seen the movie. Spoilers should be only seen by active highlighting by the reader.
You have transformed the whole thread into a spoiler thread...

I regret I wasn't savvy enough to do that, hence the BOLD RED ALERT, read past at peril


I don't understand the problem with the russian goggles - granted, having US issue goggles in soviet Russia would be a problem, but how do You know soviet "style" goggles would have not been available for private upgrade in the land of the free... market powers?

Rather the reverse actually.  US GI tanker helmets, commo gear, & goggles were standard issue US tank equipment, and as such delivered to the Soviets with EVERY Lend-Lease tank that had a radio or an intercom fitted.  The absurd goggles in question are also post-war design & manufacture, still current issue AFAIK, and look nothing like the Russian WWII pattern.  Given the vast array of commercial motorcycling, racing, & flying goggles available in the US between the wars, to say nothing of 3 standard issue GI models, a distinctive "look" is easy to find, without resorting to a post-period pair that are simply flat out WRONG with a Capital "R".

besides, he clearly states that he started with "torch", against the 10th Panzerdivision which had taken part in "Barbarossa" and was the transferred to Tunisia. Clearly a veteran would have been able to pinch an item formerly pinched somewhere else

Soldiers liberate gear that's interesting, or unique, & above all better than they have.

Not worse.

Given the comparative manufacturing capacity & skill, coupled with the well known & world respected German optical industry, I'm doubtful Russian tanker goggles represent a trophy worth replacing your waffenamt issue ones with...

YMMV

Valerik

who will now go back to hide his egregious goof
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: BattlewagonBruce on 31 October 2014, 01:53:15 PM
The tank 'Fury' is an M4A2 (E8), or Easy Eight as they where known.

I have made one in 1:72 and its sold, with an order for another.

I think I got it pretty close.

Great movie!

(http://i1138.photobucket.com/albums/n524/bruce-bonus/Fury/Fury001_zps6f3542af.jpg)

(http://i1138.photobucket.com/albums/n524/bruce-bonus/Fury/Fury008_zps3ee24f2c.jpg)

(http://i1138.photobucket.com/albums/n524/bruce-bonus/Fury/Fury007_zps8ed4e10a.jpg)

(http://i1138.photobucket.com/albums/n524/bruce-bonus/Fury/Fury006_zps9e6a2018.jpg)

thanks

Bruce
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: former user on 31 October 2014, 01:59:16 PM
fuck! this is 1:72?   :o

point taken, gear issued after the movie takes places is not good, but You have to give them that it looks more retro and pilot than the real ones....

problem was the germans and the russians did not have enough of anything, they used virtually everything they could grab, better or worse.

might not be true for US tankies though. But I could construct a number of interesting narratives around these goggles, that would make the aspect of quality pointless (I think they are used in the Tunisia sequence of "Valkyrie" too). Plus they look wrong only if you know that they outdate the period

anyway, the ammo issue and the combat distance are far worse than such minor detail like goggles. And lining up tanks on a field with the infantry behind looks like straight out of uninspired wargaming....

(http://media-cache-cd0.pinimg.com/736x/05/2c/67/052c67ba161aeb072a5e08b442be5223.jpg)
(http://agentsofgeek.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/fury-brad-pitt-first-footage.jpeg)

does this really matter?

I am pretty convinced these are incorrect as well...
(http://www.angelfire.com/ca/mrron/Ron4a.jpg)
(http://www.angelfire.com/ca/mrron/Soldier.jpg)
there You are, they were probably meant to be fancy italian ones
(http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/8528/autiere.jpg)

maybe he took them from an italian pilot he downed with a rock, because he is wardaddy.... lol
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: carlos13th on 31 October 2014, 02:18:57 PM
The tank 'Fury' is an M4A2 (E8), or Easy Eight as they where known.

I have made one in 1:72 and its sold, with an order for another.

I think I got it pretty close.

Great movie!

(http://i1138.photobucket.com/albums/n524/bruce-bonus/Fury/Fury001_zps6f3542af.jpg)

(http://i1138.photobucket.com/albums/n524/bruce-bonus/Fury/Fury008_zps3ee24f2c.jpg)

(http://i1138.photobucket.com/albums/n524/bruce-bonus/Fury/Fury007_zps8ed4e10a.jpg)

(http://i1138.photobucket.com/albums/n524/bruce-bonus/Fury/Fury006_zps9e6a2018.jpg)

thanks

Bruce

That looks sweet. Mind sharing what model you used and how you did it?
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Valerik on 31 October 2014, 03:03:48 PM
Spoilers spoilt!!  The egregious ones anyhow.  I left the obvious visible.
Thanks for the edumacation on how to do so absent a handy-dandy forum button.

point taken, gear issued after the movie takes places is not good, but You have to give them that it looks more retro and pilot than the real ones....

problem was the germans and the russians did not have enough of anything, they used virtually everything they could grab, better or worse.

might not be true for US tankies though. But I could construct a number of interesting narratives around these goggles, that would make the aspect of quality pointless (I think they are used in the Tunisia sequence of "Valkyrie" too). Plus they look wrong only if you know that they outdate the period

anyway, the ammo issue and the combat distance are far worse than such minor detail like goggles. And lining up tanks on a field with the infantry behind looks like straight out of uninspired wargaming....

fuck! this is 1:72?   

I am in complete agreement with every statement you have vouchsafed...

Except it looks MUCH more like 1/76 to me...

The lined up armor & infantry were redolent of reenacting nightmares I've lived, & suppressed.
All the more so with lines of "concrete cannoneers" manning a myriad of  misshapen, ill conceived, inappropriate attempts at sorta simulating Civil War artillery pieces, lined up hub to hub, making a mockery of history,
and a target of themselves.

point taken, gear issued after the movie takes places is not good, but You have to give them that it looks more retro and pilot than the real ones....
~snip~

 Plus they look wrong only if you know that they outdate the period
  

No man should know what I know. Or recognise what I can see...

Tis unnatural, ill founded, bordering maniacal, perilously pedantic...

Absurdly useless bits of arcane & obscure knowledge benefit no one & bore most.

It's nonsense, a sickness really, been infected my entire life.

Cure is impossible, control improbable, utility non-existent, thus I remain afflicted.

I try not to inflict this upon others too much or all that often, but he DID ask for it!!

Watched this with the misses today and actually thought it was a good film.

~snip~

What did those who saw it think of it?



The tank 'Fury' is an M4A2 (E8), or Easy Eight as they where known.

I have made one in 1:72 and its sold, with an order for another.

I think I got it pretty close.

Great movie!
(http://i1138.photobucket.com/albums/n524/bruce-bonus/Fury/Fury006_zps9e6a2018.jpg)

thanks

Bruce

I like the execution of FURY you've done!!

ONLY quibbles are too many stripes, He's NOT a Master Sergeant & the lack of Armored Forces patch, in this case 2d AD, a nice splash of colour.

Not that I am capable of work at anywhere NEAR your level!!

Great work Bruce, you are well named Sir!!

YMMV

Valerik

enjoying this repartee as much as the film!!
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: BattlewagonBruce on 31 October 2014, 03:07:18 PM
well spotted on the rank stripes! A USMC client of mine spotted that too, but that model has already gone to Portugal so its to late for me to change them.

I have an order for another so I wont make him a Top this time. I am doing them for £50 each.

No mystery how I did it, its just a bit of detailing on an plastic 1:72 kit!

ta

Bruce
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: former user on 31 October 2014, 03:10:10 PM
@Valerik

totally offtopic, but there You go:

in my late teens (during my 1/72 WW2 collection time), I was once awarded a diploma for spoiling group watching of war movies by commenting on the mistakes.....

maybe this would help You too?  ;)

@Bruce, congratulations on Your "little bit of detailing", it is a mystery to me how You don't get stoned to death by envious collectors on every convention You visit  ;)
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Constable Bertrand on 01 November 2014, 06:41:00 AM
I watched this today and enjoyed the action. I was also very impressed with the "weathering department". Every visible skerrick was; beaten and worn and was covered in; mud, grime and rust.

Patina is so trending  :-*

Also, Shia labeouf did a pretty good job surprisingly. He was rather dashing with his moustache, and much more likeable than his role in transformers.

Apart from any real plot besides character development, 2 things got my goat.

1. More Tiger! For the cost of filming with one of the sole remaining Tigers, I expected to see it crashing through walls and doing jumps. At least more noise from its engine/wheels. (I was hoping for the screeching of tanks pre Town battle scene in "Saving Private Ryan")

One might think they were being very gentle with it for some reason.

2. Valerik's Point 10!
 :o
Seriously?
Just go around back.

Oh, and that shot of the sky filled with planes was amazing. It firmly grounded the tank war in the mud, and showed just how far the angels in the heavens were from the grunt on the ground. It was a very nice touch unseen in most ww2 films.

Cheers
Matt
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Harry Faversham on 01 November 2014, 06:04:51 PM
Oh deary, deary me, it's not very good is it!? You don't often watch a war film and burst out laughing because it's that dire... 'Fury' makes 'Kelly's Heroes' look like a documentary!
I remember leaving the cinema after 'Saving Private Ryan' thinking, well done, a magnificent tribute to the sacrifice American soldiers made to end nazism. I came out of 'Fury' thinking, what an insult that drivel was to the sacrifice American soldiers made to end nazism... drivel of the highest order.

>:(
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: julesav on 02 November 2014, 01:38:21 PM
My gang of long term ww2 gamers watched 'Fury' last week. We were all impressed by the film. Memo to self before making a WW2 epic with 'real' WW2 tanks I must check availability of correct tankers goggles!
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: former user on 10 November 2014, 10:09:49 PM
finally saw it...
I have rarely seen a movie where the visuals were so good and full of quality and the rest was such a gigantic pile of crap.....
Yuck.....
would have made much more sense to replace all germans with Uruk-hai....
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Calimero on 11 November 2014, 01:49:18 AM
... would have made much more sense to replace all germans with Uruk-hai....

Indeed! lol
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: FramFramson on 11 November 2014, 04:06:06 PM
Now that would be a movie to watch!  lol
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Predatorpt on 15 November 2014, 01:56:13 AM
Just watched a very interesting documentary about the movie:

http://www.smithsonianchannel.com/sc/web/show/3415077/tanks-of-fury

Quote
They were out-gunned and out-armored by superior German tanks, but what the American M4 Sherman tank crews lacked in firepower, they made up for in courage. Discover the stories of the heroic GIs who rolled into Nazi territory in the final weeks of WWII and faced off against an enemy that refused to surrender. Then, go behind the scenes of the film "Fury" and inside the tankers' world, as we hear accounts from veterans who survived the intense tank battles firsthand.

Avoid if you still haven't seen it, plenty of spoilers there. But it's worth seeing, if only by the veteran accounts and the Tiger from Bovington's museum.

Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: cram on 15 November 2014, 05:57:40 PM
Will be going to see this film next week.

Here is an interesting link which gives one veterans opinion on the film:
http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2014/oct/24/fury-movie-tank-veteran-sherman-verdict-realistic
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: MajorTalon on 15 November 2014, 08:10:43 PM
Oh deary, deary me, it's not very good is it!? You don't often watch a war film and burst out laughing because it's that dire... 'Fury' makes 'Kelly's Heroes' look like a documentary!
I remember leaving the cinema after 'Saving Private Ryan' thinking, well done, a magnificent tribute to the sacrifice American soldiers made to end nazism. I came out of 'Fury' thinking, what an insult that drivel was to the sacrifice American soldiers made to end nazism... drivel of the highest order.

>:(

It showed that not all American soldiers were men like Captain Winters, Audie Murphie or Private Ryan. There were those who took advantage of the war, indeed, it showed that the enemy also did that in their own towns.
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Amalric on 16 November 2014, 12:08:23 AM
....Oh, and that shot of the sky filled with planes was amazing. It firmly grounded the tank war in the mud, and showed just how far the angels in the heavens were from the grunt on the ground. ...

I agree.
This scene also reminded me of the beginning of the WW1 movie The Blue Max where Bruno is running for his life in no mans land, jumps into a crater and hugs the mud, then turns at a sound, looks up into a pristine clear blue sky where a beautiful clean biplane is slowly dueling another.
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: Harry Faversham on 16 November 2014, 03:50:05 AM
It showed that not all American soldiers were men like Captain Winters, Audie Murphie or Private Ryan. There were those who took advantage of the war, indeed, it showed that the enemy also did that in their own towns.

It also showed that the Germans were a tad dense...
swopping their Panzerfausts for Assegies and charging a tank like Zulus at Rorke's Drift!!!

 :o  lol  :o
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: former user on 16 November 2014, 04:57:58 AM
yes, especially the ladies who - while others ran around in springtime greatcoat, were wearing skimpy summer dresses to tease ameican GIs
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: former user on 16 November 2014, 05:56:16 PM
yes, but then again, I don't know shit about making movies  8)
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: joroas on 17 November 2014, 12:42:45 AM
Well, the worst of these type of films, that I never finished watching, was Inglorious Bastards.  After they murdered the sergeant, I started rooting for the Germans, then it got so awful that I had to turn it off.......
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: joroas on 17 November 2014, 12:55:38 AM
Well, I have to say,regardless of drugs, that I like most of Tarantino's films, but IB was awful.  He should avoid historical movies.
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: former user on 17 November 2014, 02:09:38 AM
I actually don't care much about "rivets". Although I think they got this aspect about 99% right. I strongly dislike "Fury" for other reasons. Not the visuals either.

As to "Inglourious Basterds" - This was a farcical revenge fantasy clad in a tragedy. Actually two movies in one. very much like "Kill Bill" or "Django Unchained". In fact a fresh approach to movie storytelling.  And had a better message than the tank movie. It played feelings better. But it wasn't necessarily "made" better.
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: warburton on 17 November 2014, 03:21:07 AM
Well, the worst of these type of films, that I never finished watching, was Inglorious Bastards.  After they murdered the sergeant, I started rooting for the Germans, then it got so awful that I had to turn it off.......

I felt exactly the same way. Very poor movie. Though, the opening scene was really quite good and I did not mind the charades scene (I was a fan of Pulp fiction and Reservoir Dogs...) the rest was total unwatchable rubbish.
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: FramFramson on 17 November 2014, 06:19:51 PM
I have to chime in and say I haven't big much of a fan of anything Tarantino's done since Pulp Fiction. I've seen all of them out of a sense of hopefulness (though I only watched about a third or half or so of Basterds, in bits here and there), but they've actually been getting worse and worse for me over time. Django was downright excruciating to watch and not in a "This is supposed to be uncomfortable, because that's the director's intention" sort of way. I probably won't bother at all with the next one.

I actually sort of suspect that Tarantino has been secretly making personal fetish movies all along and is just really good at creating plots that give him a very roundabout excuse to, er, indulge himself.
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: carlos13th on 17 November 2014, 10:39:38 PM
I Remember that film, it had chow yun fat in it I beleive having seen both though they are very different films but with a very similar central theme. City on fire I think it was called. I would say it was heavily inspired by rather than a rip off.

Bit like avatar and the story of pocohontus. Very similar in theme and story but different enough to be not considered a rip off.
Title: Re: FURY new Brad Pitt WWII film
Post by: FramFramson on 18 November 2014, 12:11:00 AM
I'm not kidding when I say that watching recent Tarantino movies feels like this:

(http://threepanelsoul.com/comics/2010-12-07-182.png)