Login

russian armor

So, I want to watch 'Fury......'

15 Oct 2014, 17:23 PM
#41
avatar of Ginnungagap

Posts: 324 | Subs: 2

Ding!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYylN7WGLCc

Dont need to watch the movie anymore :D

Judging by the last trailer, this movie depicts realistically how tank combat in CoH2 works: The Sherman taking 2 hits and 320 damage, while circlestrafing the Tiger at such close distance that their models almost clip into each other, all while missing shots from 2 meters which should be physical impossible to miss. I'm wondering if the next 7 rear shots will all penetrate the tiger and Brad Pitt prayed to the RNG god enough...

This movie should be sponsored by CoH and not by World of Tanks.
16 Oct 2014, 01:42 AM
#42
avatar of Death's Head

Posts: 440



Yea, dat pro Stalingrad movie is best movie ever... :snfBarton:


How did you walk away from that movie thinking that it was anything other than anti-war?

Maybe you didn't actually see it?
16 Oct 2014, 02:46 AM
#43
avatar of StephennJF

Posts: 934

Ding!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYylN7WGLCc

Dont need to watch the movie anymore :D


LOL why do I have a feeling that this scene is pretty much the end of the movie?

That Tiger looks UP. Sherman OP. Even with a disabled engine critical it can blitzkrieg and circle strafe the Tiger. Noob Axis player should learn how to reverse though so his fault. Kappa
16 Oct 2014, 02:55 AM
#44
avatar of steel

Posts: 1963 | Subs: 1



LOL why do I have a feeling that this scene is pretty much the end of the movie?

That Tiger looks UP. Sherman OP. Even with a disabled engine critical it can blitzkrieg and circle strafe the Tiger. Noob Axis player should learn how to reverse though so his fault. Kappa


The German ragequit after losing his tiger. That's why it's the end of the movie. :snfCHVGame:

A lot of bad RNG for both sides. Shells bouncing off, missing its target and even engine critical at the first shot.
16 Oct 2014, 05:42 AM
#45
avatar of BartonPL

Posts: 2807 | Subs: 6


Judging by the last trailer, this movie depicts realistically how tank combat in CoH2 works: The Sherman taking 2 hits and 320 damage, while circlestrafing the Tiger at such close distance that their models almost clip into each other, all while missing shots from 2 meters which should be physical impossible to miss. I'm wondering if the next 7 rear shots will all penetrate the tiger and Brad Pitt prayed to the RNG god enough...

This movie should be sponsored by CoH and not by World of Tanks.


lol, movie was sponsored by WoT? :snfBarton:
17 Oct 2014, 08:58 AM
#46
avatar of GeneralCH

Posts: 419

Anybody seen this movie at theatre yet?
20 Oct 2014, 10:13 AM
#47
avatar of ZombieRommel

Posts: 91

Anybody seen this movie at theatre yet?


I plan on going sometime this week. It's been getting good reviews.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/fury_2015/

Some of you guys' comments about how that scene relates to CoH2 were hilarious.
20 Oct 2014, 11:02 AM
#48
avatar of Burts

Posts: 1702

So many historical innacuracies in 2 minutes.


Why is tank combat happening at like 10 meters from each other? Tank combat never happened like that. Average tank engagement distance was at around 900m-1000m. At those ranges E8 sherman could easily take out a tiger, not sure what they were saying shermans having "little chance againts a tiger".
Regural shermans yes, but E8 shermans could take out tiger with no problems.


Why is the tiger alone? Tigers , or any tanks for that matter, were never sent alone. Tigers always travelled in groups of 2-3.


Tank flanking never looked like this... Tank flanks were huge, many kilometer long sweeping movements, that included whole dozens of tanks, not this nonsense...


Even considering the scene involved a very close range ambush, there was absolutely no reason to flank the tiger at all. Just shoot at the front and easily pierce it....

And it's weird considering that these "experienced veteran american war heroes" managed to let themselves get ambushed in pretty much an open field so easily....

And then missed a shot at like 10 meters...


And i like how everyone is saying that that movie is authentic or realistic... To me it is funny.
20 Oct 2014, 11:06 AM
#49
avatar of KovuTalli

Posts: 332

As far as the movie goes I can't comment, but you can legally buy beer in UK Cinemas - at least Odeon and VUE cinemas do - or at least my local ones do.
20 Oct 2014, 11:30 AM
#50
avatar of awa59noob
Benefactor 3110

Posts: 152

As far as the movie goes I can't comment, but you can legally buy beer in UK Cinemas - at least Odeon and VUE cinemas do - or at least my local ones do.


Last option:

You go to a small Cinema and ask for a private viewing for all your friends - best in the afternoon, where there would not be a regular screening. You get drinks and Food and have an awsome party.

Legal and fun as hell.

Best Regards
awa59
21 Oct 2014, 13:39 PM
#51
avatar of theblitz6794

Posts: 395

Well, the movie sucked when it came to literal historicalness.

But it wasn't made for us technical specification junkies. A movie where 4 tanks pick at each other from 1500 meters over the course of 90 minutes would be boring as all hell, especially to the general audience.

Yes at 800m, 1st shot wins in an E8 vs Tiger, and that means 2 E8s, with their ability to fire on the move, are going to make clockwork of that tiger (maybe losing an E8 in the process of course). But no one in the general population knows or is thinking any of that.

April 1945 is another bad historical marker. But I just pretended the movie happened in October/November 1944 at the German border and it all made sense. To someone in the general population, April 1945 might make better sense. Besides, it's a work of art (as is all film), not a literal recreation, and it's better that way. I went with 4 friends, including a highly intelligent law student and a war game junkie, none of whom knew anything about WW2 true history or tech specs or anything, and they all loved it.

The movie is centered around the impression or the feel of brutal impersonal combat in a total war scenario.

"That right there is an entire city on fire."

I give it an 8/10 overall. I enjoyed it enough to see it twice. Certified fresh in my book.


PS: Movies like this are badly needed in American culture where we (traditionally) think of war as some cool looking actiony thing and next thing we know we're spending 8 years in Iraq and droning Pakistanis.
21 Oct 2014, 17:59 PM
#52
avatar of MadeMan

Posts: 304

I can understand why they made the tank warfare more 'exciting' by having it close up, it's nice to hear that they acknowledge things like the Sherman being outclassed etc (I have little knowledge of WWII combat, so reading this thread has been interesting).

It still upsets me that they need to change things like making the tank battles so up-close. I personally would have been just as interested (probably more interested) in seeing a movie portray kilometer wide flanking manuevers, long range tank battles and the like. Not sure why they feel it's inherintly less exciting, if anything it would make for a really tense movie.
21 Oct 2014, 18:48 PM
#53
avatar of Mortar
Donator 22

Posts: 559

Fury:

Ok, this film I would have given a 9 out of 10 if it weren't for some issues I had in the last act. Because of that, I give it an 8 out of 10. Still highly worth your time. The battle scenes were, for the most part, extremely well done.

The following contains spoilers.

21 Oct 2014, 19:23 PM
#54
avatar of GeneralCH

Posts: 419


For two, NOBODY gets in the SS without being a fanatical Nazi.

Waffen SS members were drafted from 42 onwards. They still had to sign, they did it by their "free will", however this was often forced.
21 Oct 2014, 20:03 PM
#55
avatar of Oktarnash

Posts: 403


Waffen SS members were drafted from 42 onwards. They still had to sign, they did it by their "free will", however this was often forced.

Not to mention, the hundreds and thousands of Scandinavians, who just wanted to fight the Russians, to keep their own countries from war, and the several slavic, french, Spanish and other nationalities that joined the SS.
21 Oct 2014, 20:08 PM
#56
avatar of Death's Head

Posts: 440


Not to mention, the hundreds and thousands of Scandinavians, who just wanted to fight the Russians, to keep their own countries from war, and the several slavic, french, Spanish and other nationalities that joined the SS.


There was even an entire division of Bosnian muslims in the SS, the 13th SS Mountain division "Handschar".
23 Oct 2014, 14:59 PM
#57
avatar of theblitz6794

Posts: 395

I think the whole point of the last scene was that, just like Norman in the American army, the German army, even the SS, had soldiers that still had empathy on some level, had inexperienced kids, had people that didn't really want to be there (maybe they signed up to fight the Soviets) and weren't 100% evil.

Part of the point of the movie to me seemed to be that the Americans were "gooder" than the Germans but both sides had good people (Norman and the SS dude) and both sides had shitty ones (Wardaddy executing prisoner, Americans letting Germans burn from White Phosphorous) or that the brutality went both ways to some degree
27 Oct 2014, 22:36 PM
#58
avatar of GeneralCH

Posts: 419

I was right in my guessing. The movie was similar to saving private Ryan in the way, that it started promising, but turned into a stupid unbelievable slugfest. However its a movie for the american audience, so i understand why Ayer directed it that way.
30 Oct 2014, 14:50 PM
#59
avatar of coh2player

Posts: 1571

I saw the fight scenes only (through cam). The movie's war fighting scenes are short and aren't very good, but due to the novelty value (ww2 tanks) they are worth seeing. The movie is doing well at the box office and I hope to see bigger tank battle movies in the future.

The movie was made with limited funds. Minus the marketing budget (half of it these days, it's not a lot). They only had 1 tiger and 4 shermans (the tiger vs shermans fight is very short) as combat vehicles in the movie. There is only one tank to tank fight, and the youtube link shows most of it.

In the final fight


The equipment and uniforms of the film, however are good. But the tactics are off, and it just looks wrong even to somebody who isn't an experienced reader of WW2 combat. SPR was far better, even with the oddities and all.

31 Oct 2014, 09:22 AM
#60
avatar of Dacha011

Posts: 4

I saw the fight scenes only (through cam). The movie's war fighting scenes are short and aren't very good, but due to the novelty value (ww2 tanks) they are worth seeing. The movie is doing well at the box office and I hope to see bigger tank battle movies in the future.

The movie was made with limited funds. Minus the marketing budget (half of it these days, it's not a lot). They only had 1 tiger and 4 shermans (the tiger vs shermans fight is very short) as combat vehicles in the movie. There is only one tank to tank fight, and the youtube link shows most of it.

In the final fight


The equipment and uniforms of the film, however are good. But the tactics are off, and it just looks wrong even to somebody who isn't an experienced reader of WW2 combat. SPR was far better, even with the oddities and all.




Multiply the number in your spoiler by 4 !
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

unknown 11
United States 155
New Zealand 12
unknown 1

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

906 users are online: 906 guests
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49130
Welcome our newest member, torsoworld
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM