the audience applauded
Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.
It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.
Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.
Fury2 And A Half Out Of 5Fury is a character driven war drama about a troop that goes through various range of emotions whilst fighting against Germany. Pitt's urge to play safe by going under a war genre backfires vigorously as the medium chosen in here doesn't necessarily respects or honors the sincerity of it. Having said that, the feature has its moments undoubtedly but unfortunately that too, is extracted from typical textbook formula. Stuffing in all such material to keep it alive and breathing for more than two hours, isn't feasible at all. Such familiar structured script with such safe acts are far away from being furious let alone be morally competent. If anything it is blighted enough to even take the heat out of the plausible work pulled of by the actors in here. The background score is dull along with editing and cinematography, but what draws the attention is gut-wrenching visuals; kudos to the art designing department, and sharp sound effects. The writing is more blunt than strong with coherent loud symbols (the dinner table conversation is where the line should have been drawn) that audience gets sick off, listening to. Ayer; the writer-director, is no short on execution and seems to have matured in its own method, no matter how long he still has to go to, to offer its own script some gravitas. Pitt is putting all his chips in with equal arrogance and raw power foliated in his portrayal with Bernthal's sassiness and Pena's reserved act, the feature is quite good on the performance objective. The chemistry among the characters and few comic action sequences (like Pitt's tank against a huge tank) are the only high points of the feature. Fury is of safer breed that completely contradicts its genre but then is also immensely gripping.
IMDB needs a scoring update so pedantic 'it's not realistic' ''that gun wasn't made until 1946' can put their low scores somewhere else. A high production film which has merit, entertaining.
I have a family member, in his 90's now, who was a tanker in WWII in Europe. He got through about half of this movie before he turned it off in disgust. The rest of us in the room agreed with him wholeheartedly and in fact, some of us had voted to stop it before then but he kept hoping it would get better.I remember the exact moment he, and the rest of us gave up on it; the scene were they're eating a meal with the German women in their apartment and acting like knuckle dragging Neanderthals, My Uncle told us, almost in tears, that no one he ever saw in the service acted like that toward Germans or anyone else, they never executed prisoners in cold blood, not that he ever saw although he admitted it may have happened he knew it wasn't common. Overall they were just trying to do their jobs, stay alive, and come out of the war alive with their sanity, their humanity and their minds intact. This movie disturbed him, and the few service friends he has left, greatly and I'm sorry he ever saw it.I wasn't expecting much going into this movie to begin with because Brad Pitt is a terrible actor and overall, his movies aren't that good. And as bad an actor as Pitt is, he looks like Lawrence Olivier compared to Shia LaBouf who's also in the movie and overacts in every single scene he's in, possibly in an attempt to conceal that fact that he can't act... If your anti-American and/or anti-military this is definitely the movie for you, enjoy! If you believe that all allied soldiers in WWII should be honored for doing an incredibly dangerous job as well as they could and helped keep the world free avoid this movie completely because it will make you ill.And if you know anything at all about history, you know...history? As in the actual recording of facts, occurrences and events as they actually happened, you'll know that this movie is nonsense from beginning to end. It seems a lot of reviewers here seem to think Hollywood's version of WWII is what really happened. In defense of this piece of trash they reference other Hollywood movies, not documentaries or history books...other movies. If that's the extent of your knowledge of history then I submit to you that you're opinion of this movie is worthless. And in reading through all those reviews I solved the mystery of how this terrible film could have such a high rating on IMDB; the positive reviews are repeated over and over and over again. I read some positive reviews four and five times...while the negative ones seemed to only appear once. I wonder what is happening there?It's just a shame that a clueless dolt like Brad Pitt and everyone else involved, got the green light to dis-respect WWII soldiers with this project, I wouldn't expect him to understand that, I doubt he has the sense got gave a donut and Hollywood is generally anti-military, and at times anti-American anyway, but somewhere along the way someone should have realized that this piece of drek was an insult to the men who served, and died, in World War II.
Having watched the movie "Rage", immediately there is the thought that the film was created to outperform the popularity of the Russian tank movie "White Tiger". But I could not do it. For someone it turned out a masterpiece, for me it's a failure. The film, which I do not want to revise for the second time, unlike the deep and intelligent White Tiger. The very final scene, when one immobilized Sherman remains alive for half a day, disgusts the film with its unreality. However, like many American military films. In order to make films about the war, it is necessary that this at least somehow correspond to historical reality.