Fury (2014) - Fury (2014) - User Reviews - IMDb
Fury (2014) Poster

(2014)

User Reviews

Review this title
1,156 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
An energetic octane rush, but historically absurd.
Sleepin_Dragon14 January 2023
Where to even begin.... I don't make out to be a historian, but I take a keen interest in this time period, it's a fascinating, horrendous era, this .... doesn't give any historical fact or detail, it's basically a shoot 'em up movie which happens to be set during The Second World War.

It surprises me that they didn't have someone beating Hitler up, uppercutting Goebbels in a bunker action sequence.

The Second World War, Hollywood style, some white amazing looking action sequences throughout, it's incredibly atmospheric, you can almost smell the gunpowder and feel the tension.

I hate myself for saying it, but I love this film, it's Brad Pitt and Shia laBeouf both absolutely nailing it.

If you watch any reviews, or read many of the written reviews, you'd come away thinking this film wasn't worth your time, my advice would be to try it, but know what you're getting.

It's absurd, but it's so enjoyable.

8/10.
60 out of 76 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
I have watched it several times... Entertainment yes, accuracy no.
OzMovieWatcher18 July 2020
The goofs and historical inaccuracies are everywhere in this movie. War historian Youtubers pick this movie to pieces. As they should. The inaccuracies and goofs are overwhelming for anyone with an ounce of WW2 military history knowledge. As a military historian myself, I spotted errors within the first 5 minutes, BUT, I enjoyed this movie. It is WW2 war movie entertainment only. Military historians go to ton on this movie/... the inaccuracies are overwhelming... but it is a damn fine movie. The acting is superb. Fantastic film work, and what id o personally like is the German Tiger tank in the movie, is an actual German Tiger tank being the only fully functional restored Tiger in the world.
196 out of 261 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Those last bitter days
bkoganbing28 December 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Fury has Brad Pitt starring as a battle hardened tank commander in those last days before VE Day. Russians to the east, Americans, British, Canadians and assorted other allies invading the Third Reich that was supposed to last for a thousand years. These were the last bitter days of the war when what was on the west were kids and die-hard S. S. troops.

While the Russians were facing a desperate resistance from the German Army because Germans in general knew what to expect from the avenging Russian bear, the western front had everyone surrendering or trying to cut deals for themselves. Not so the S. S. troops, Hitler's elite. And those we kill.

In those last days Pitt gets a new replacement, a clerk typist suddenly drafted into the tank corps. It was Logan Lerman's misfortune to miss the end of the war in Europe by only a few weeks. He has a really bad time of it with Pitt and his crew, but eventually gets into the savage spirit of impatience for these men who just want these people to surrender and get it over.

In the end Pitt gets what could be a last stand mission, hold a vital checkpoint crossroads to prevent a Nazi counterattack.

Pitt and his soldiers are not from Hollywood World War II era films. They are a savage crew. But heroism sometimes can just be a case of\ opportunity.

There might be an Oscar in the offing for Pitt and Lerman. Both are incredibly good and incredibly dynamic. The battle special effects are first rate. It's one unvarnished view of World War 2's final days.
88 out of 150 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Gonna disagree with most people
bradykitchen-3364821 December 2023
Warning: Spoilers
Alright so my immediate reaction after this movie ended was holy crap that was good. I was in literal awe of the films ability to portray the brutality of war and how when it's all set and done it's not a bunch of medals and celebrations. When it's done it's grief and despair and trauma after everything that just happened. They show how this affects people, how it turns good people bad and forces them to become something they're not. Then I went online and read a few things that said that they didn't care about the characters cause they were "bad people". In my opinion those people completely missed the mark of the film.

This isn't a war film where you're supposed to like the characters. This is a war film that shows what war does to people, and what you have to become to survive it. Logan Lerman is the perfect example of that. His character Norman comes in as this scared shitless angel kid who's never done a wrong thing in his life. But over the course of the movie he sees what happens in war and how brutal it is and eventually becomes cold hearted and ruthless. That is what this film is. This isn't a "let's root for these lead characters because they're the heroes" film, this is a brutal telling of what actually happened during those wars and what it did to people.

The other big criticism I saw was how bad of a person Jon Bernthals character was. That was the point, everyone handles killing people over and over differently, they need to trick themselves into believing they are the kind of person who does. That's what Bernthals character is.

On a more technical note this film is almost flawless. Acting is across the board phenomenal, action sequences are stunning, music is perfect, story is top notch. I don't have anything negative to say her. Just incredible.
13 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
love this movie highly recommend.
0U23 February 2020
One of my favorite movies. Amazing cast and a lot of hard feeling moments that bring this movie together. There are moments that have you flashing between emotions and you can feel the emotions from the characters.
88 out of 154 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
"Ideals are peaceful, History is violent"
bob-the-movie-man23 October 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I can't make my mind up about "Fury". As an escapist war film, it delivers well in a clichéd sort of way. But is it a true reflection on what the latter stages of WW2 were actually like? I doubt it. This film certainly doesn't paint American soldiers in a good light, although after slogging their way across Europe for months on end, facing sense-numbing death and destruction on a daily basis, perhaps it is a realistic portrayal? I just don't know, and would be interested to hear the views of any veterans who were there.

In many of the classic war films of the 50's and 60's, such as "The Longest Day" or "The Great Escape", when people were shot they just threw their arms in the air and fell down: sanitised death – – "war is hell", but let's not show it on screen. Spielberg's "Saving Private Ryan" rather changed all of that, with 15 minutes of the most visceral footage seen to date, which even D-Day veterans agreed was frighteningly realistic. Spielberg followed that with the remarkable "Band of Brothers", with some of the scenes – notably those in the Belgium forest – showing a realistic level of violence but more importantly bringing home the true mental anguish of war. Brad Pitt in (and on) Fury David Ayer's "Fury" differs from this masterpiece in two notable ways: firstly, the 'Tarentino effect' seems to have been brought into play with a level of violence and gore that seems to have gone over the top: heads fly off and faces come off with gay abandon; secondly, the US tank crew at the heart of the film seem to be so cold and brutal that you care very little about what happens to them – cracks in the hardened shell of Brad Pitt's character are not referenced again or followed through satisfactorily. Even the rookie crew member (a very good Logan Lerman) turns from pacifist shirker to hardened nut-job faster than you can say "Dead Nazi". As such, your emotional attachment to him gets severed pretty early on (in fact this is such an unbelievable transition that a "1 month later" subtitle could have been judiciously added at this point).

The tightly knit tank crew (Pitt, Lerman, Shia LaBeouf, Michael Peña, Jon Berthal) all spark off each other well, with LaBeouf as the bible-quoting Boyd Swan being particularly memorable.

The gorgeously vulnerable Alicia von Rittberg plays Emma as the one and only love interest in the film: and for once, Brad Pitt doesn't get the girl! This tense encounter is one of the best dramatic moments in the film. And Harry Potter's Jason Isaacs also delivers a great cameo as a scarred and embattled Captain Waggoner.

In terms of the film-making, it is an effectively put together film by David Ayer ("Training Day", "The Fast and the Furious") who also wrote the film. Real life tanks, from Dorset's Bovington Tank Museum, were used with South Oxfordshire standing in for rural Germany. The 'Zulu-style' climax is tense albeit very far fetched, with German's conveniently choosing to regroup and think about it for a few minutes while dramatic and more reflective moments go on inside the tank.

Music is by Steven Price (his first film score following his Oscar success with "Gravity") is effective – mixing electronica, orchestral and choral to good effect in the more dramatic scenes.

All in all, an enjoyable if rather gory romp with some memorable scenes that stick in the mind after the lights come on. If you watch blood and gore films with your hands over your eyes, this is one you might want to miss: your viewing time will be severely limited! Certainly not as bad as it could have been, but more and better character development could have perhaps turned this from a good war film into a great war film.

(If you enjoyed this review, please sign up to receive my future posts at bob-the-movie-man.com. Thanks.)
96 out of 154 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Fury is a straightforward ride into the center of war. It's a less flamboyant, certainly not romanticized, but a damn fine one.
quincytheodore29 October 2014
Strikingly far from mainstream war movie, Fury is unapologetically messy and brutal. The crude nature affects more than the visual, with the cast uttering unrefined profanity along with some military jargon. While the cinematography is splendid, it's nothing near the glossy or cinematic flair of other war movies, such as Saving Private Ryan, this is am unfiltered portrayal of war. It goes out of its way to display the gritty, sometimes intentionally overlooked aspect of war, the entire dirty ugliness of it.

Brad Pitt as Wardaddy provides a solid leader persona. He's as consistent as he could be, and with the experience of war movie under his other belt, albeit a rather different one, it comes as no surprise that he performs amazingly. It's not a macho leader character as Wardaddy occasionally has doubt, mostly heavily suppressed. Shia LaBeouf as Bible is good, displaying better on-screen flair than most of his recent ones. Michael Peña as Gordo and Jon Bernthal as Coon-Ass (classy name) round up the crew.

Peña works well, delivering a couple of good scene when least expected. Bernthal from Walking Dead has a certain niche, as an ally who sometimes looks like about to snap. Perhaps the highlight of Fury is Logan Lerman as Norman, the newly recruited crew. He's suddenly thrust into battle at its bloodiest. He gradually trades his innocence with experience of the horrid war out of necessity. Screenplay and dialogues are great, using direct, occasionally rude approach. The characters sound and act like soldiers, and it's not the usual presentable ones for cinema screen.

What gives it more depth is how it's rooted on military. From inside of the tank or down time between skirmishes, every bit seems realistic. The strategy is sound, thus giving more weight to action sequences. This one is not for the fainthearted however, as limbs will fly or get chopped off clean. The movies doesn't dwell on particular gore for shock purpose, it simply brushes fatal graphic and burning bodies as if they are normal occurrences. Soundtracks are effective as well. While most tunes are subtle or orchestra for tense scenes, a few hymns, as if chanted by the soldiers themselves, are eerily moving.

If there' are some minor complains of the movie, it's that the plot progresses in predictable way and the action in darker scenes are murky. Fury is a straightforward ride into the center of war. It's a less flamboyant, certainly not romanticized, but a damn fine one.
94 out of 167 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Accurate in some respects but fantastic in others.
RatedVforVinny9 September 2020
This film let itself down in the end but was the first U.S war film Iv'e ever seen depicting the reality, that American soldiers were mostly mopping up Hitler Youth fanatics. Also showing that U.S troops were capable of atrocities, just like any other combatant (from other nations). The best part of the movie was seeing a real legendary Tiger Tank in Action. The one that is used in this movie (the only working one in the World), is Tiger 131 (housed at Bovington Tank Museum). Obviously in real warfare it would have smashed those American tanks to a zillion pieces. The ratio of Tiger to Sherman K.O's is 14 to 1. One Tiger knocked out 50 T-34's on the Eastern Front. The ending is the most fantastical war scene I ever seen. All of a sudden 'Fury' turns into Star Wars but way less believable. How do 100's of Waffen SS soldiers fail to beat a a severely crippled tank. It's highly unlikely that they would have been there at the end of the war (singing along a road). The SS committed beastly war crimes (true) but they were also crack combat troopers. My 10 year old boy stated the pure obvious.! "Why the hell did they not fire the boxes of 'Panzerfausts' they had at hand!" I'm sure everyone apart from the Director, was thinking the very same absurdity. Still there is more to like than dislike, so settling on a 7 rating.
36 out of 55 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Excellent but painful journey of male bonding
richard-543-68336512 July 2015
Reviewer after reviewer criticizes this movie for its phony depictions of the war, clichés and unrealistic battle scenes. There is only one significant fact that is crucial to know when it comes to the accuracy of the depiction; Shermans were going to be your coffin in a face-off with a Tiger. If you want serious historical detail then consider watching a WWII documentary. I think the overall depictions were secondary and only serve as the backdrop for the director's real message which was the painful slow process of the relationship that was built between these guys in a tragic situation. I think Ayers did a masterful job at this. You think Brad Pitt is a second rate actor? Watch his facial expressions during the scenes in the room with Logan Lerman and the 2 women; Watch his nervous breakdowns. Watch him in the "Why are you such an asshole?" scene. Watch him as he jokes with his guys about Hitler and chocolate bars. Even with Wardaddy's personal weaknesses, by the middle of the movie you understand why these guys liked, admired and respected him, and I'll bet you do also. His timing and delivery, in my opinion, are better than Tom Hanks on this best day. Watch LaBoeuf's nervous leg, and a list of other endearing nuanced details; He plays a very convincing religious proselytizer. During the tank battle if you didn't feel like your life was threatened then you were probably on xanex. I'm not sure that there is another film that conveys this kind of claustrophobic camaraderie from a tank crew's viewpoint. If there is, I've never seen it.
221 out of 308 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Exciting if flawed Second World War tank action
Tweekums1 April 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Sergeant Don 'Wardaddy' Collier is the commander of a US Sherman tank nicknamed 'Fury'; he and his crew have been in the thick of it in North Africa, Normandy and are now in Germany in the dying days of the war. Private Norman Ellison has only been in the army for eight weeks and is trained as an office typist until for some reason he is assigned to Collier's crew to replace a dead member… he is definitely not ready for the terrors of war. He is certainly the outsider in the crew. As they progress through various actions he sees is baptism of fire and becomes a hardened fighter. Eventually collier is ordered to take five tanks to defend a vital crossroads; four are destroyed leaving 'Fury to defend the location… then a battalion of SS turn up and one hell of a firefight ensues.

If you are looking for a war film with lots of brutal action then this is likely to be the film for you; people are decapitated; burn and are blown up. There is also the feeling that secondary characters could die at any time and as the end approaches it feels as if anybody could die. There is a problem with the characters unfortunately; early on we see Collier forcing Ellison to shoot a German prisoner and the rest of the 'hardened crew' are even less likable… I almost found myself cheering for the German Tiger tank that was picking off the 'good guys'. The action scenes were intense and nicely captured some of the confusion of battle… even if, as others have noted, the tracer fire looked like lasers in a sci-fi movie. The ending definitely requires one to suspend ones disbelief as hundreds of Germans take enormous casualties before they make the slightest headway against this single tank even though they have anti-tank weapons. The cast lead by Brad Pitt, in the role of Collier, does a solid job making us believe in the characters even if some of those characters are pretty hard to like. Overall I'd recommend this to fans of war films; just don't expect it to be too believable.
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Fury captures the horrors of war perfectly
trublu21515 October 2014
Fury pits a tank filled with five American soldiers at the tail end of World War II as they struggle to fight off a small army of Nazi soldiers that are closing in on them. David Ayer directs this brutal and grim war film with no romance to it. Ayer's film is grim, bloody and unrelenting and fully captures the absolutely horrific nature of war. Brad Pitt's Wardaddy is far from Lt. Aldo Raine in Inglorious Basterds, he is a man who is truly run ragged by this war. So much so that it is all the character knows. Followed by his brigade of miserable men played by the likes of Michael Peña, Shia LaBeouf, Logan Lerman and Jon Bernthal, Fury depicts not only the atrocities of war but the ideology of brotherhood with this film. Each of these actors, especially LaBeouf, give their all in roles that are merely supporting on paper. Ayer has an extremely keen eye for chemistry on screen and he directs each of these actors to deliver performances that are well beyond anything that could be scripted. These men truly feel as if they are brothers in arms and you buy into every second of it. The film on a technical level is terrific. Ayer ditches his hand held method for still shots and dolly rigs and it pays off ten fold. The film is visually stunning, a pure grit to the desaturated frame is present from start to finish. As I touched on before, Fury is a violent war film much so in the vein of Saving Private Ryan and Lone Survivor. You are subjected to every bullet wound, every explosion of sharp shrapnel, every wound with the utmost visceral imagery. It is disturbing yet necessary for a film like this. Deapite these dark tones and brutality, Fury does feature lighter moments especially with Logan Lerman who gives a seemingly bare-bones performance as Norman Ellison that is subtle but extremely effective as he slowly becomes desensitized to all the violence around him. His performance is constantly evolving along with his character, letting us see layer after layer until he comes full circle in a bloody final act. The best way to describe Fury is by comparing it to Wolfgang Peterson's Das Boot just with a tank instead of a submarine. Its claustrophobic, up close and personal, making the scenes of harrowing violence even more effective. Overall, Fury is a brutal war film that shows war exactly how it should be shown. Its disturbing, its violent, its scary. Fury really hits a home run between the sweeping cinematography, the phenomenal performances and the near perfect direction, it is one hell of a film that shouldn't be missed.
314 out of 581 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Mixed feelings ...
Reviewer994 June 2020
Warning: Spoilers
Exciting, well filmed, good acting, but the plot had holes. The major one being the ending. You do not stand and fight at your crippled tank. You take what you need from the tank, booby trap it, then retreat back to your lines while booby trapping the route of the advancing enemy.

In the movie Platoon the soldiers had to stand and fight because they had nowhere to retreat to. That ending worked.

And what's with the tank hitting a mine along a pristine country road with no signs of battle anywhere in the vicinity. Or the singing Nazi soldiers marching in unison in this countryside setting too.

Oh the shark jumps ...
25 out of 36 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Gritty but unrealistic hocum and very silly final scene.
barjo-915-20322926 October 2014
Warning: Spoilers
OK, lets face it. We are over movies where one American kills 20 Germans who seemingly can't hit the wall of a Barn. They were big in the 1950's, and 1970s, but not any longer.

Fury is a gritty film, with great productions values, really period vehicles, settings and costume. The acting is good, but it is let down by tow things.

Clichéd characters. There is the tough commander, the new kid, the slightly crazy guy. There are a lot of clichéd characters here.

Unrealistic battle scenes. Seriously I just switched off in the last scene. 20 or 30 SS guys with Panzerfasut would have destroyed an immobilied Sherman tank in 5 or 6 minutes. BUT 200 CRACK SS soldiers can't destroy a tank with its tracks off, sitting in the middle of a road????? The tank only has machine guns facing forward, so most of its sides are unprotected. Germans are carrying bazookas, but instead choose to shoot the tank with machine guns, which would not do anything? Seriously, one of the silliest, most unrealistic scenes in any war movie. Really spoilt what could have been a good movie.
923 out of 1,190 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Repetative Hokum That Gave Me A Headache
dougdoepke11 April 2021
If you like lightning tracers, mass killing, no plot, and two repetitive hours of runtime, then this is your piece of meat. Of course it helps if you're a teenage boy with no knowledge of real warfare or death. Frankly the general outlines made me think of the cowboy flicks of my youth, where cavalry killed massed indians, no one cried out in agony or even bled, and the good, Bible-carrying guys always won. The battlefield logic here must have been hatched in somebody's cowboy movie dream, where the enemy simply crowds together waiting to be mowed down. On the other hand, at least this 2014 version doesn't prettify the guys or their battle-field surroundings, so maybe there's some progress in teen entertainment after all. But for those who take the two-hours as mere entertainment, remember that at a subliminal level you're being prepared for future wars, where good guys always win, death is quiet, heroes are made, and mass killing really isn't so bad after all. Regrettably that's apparent here, even if the visuals are colofully spectacular. Anyway, for this now 81-year old, it looks like few things change after all, especially in Hollywood.
30 out of 54 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Inglouris Blastards
film316-125-42767730 November 2014
People seem to think that war films are pretty hot right now, but they aren't. Having my ear so close to cinema I know for sure that there is always one or two war films floating around in the projection booths, but people are making somewhat of a big deal out of Fury, so I suppose the reel question is will this be a Flag For Our Fathers or will it make us wish for Apocalypse Now?

So lets get this out of the way now. Fury isn't as good as Saving Private Ryan, but then I don't think it ever meant to be, comparing the two movies is like saying that Saun Of The Dead isn't as good as The Book Of Eli, just because both films has similarities (in as much as they are set at the end of the world) doesn't mean they are anything alike. These are two films that are near logger heads with each other.

You see Fury is contained, and given an almost claustrophobic feel to it, the entire film is either inside or at close proximity of the tank that Collier commands. This gives the movie a focus, and a focal point. We are never given a rest from the tank and it's enforcing nature, we are given no repreave from it, just like the men themselves, we are trapped in a steel giant that is only purpose is to kill people.

To say that Fury is bloodthirsty would be an understatement, actually that's not fair for me to say. Fury doesn't enjoy itself in gore, it only tries to give us an accurate portrayal of what it must have been like for those brave men and women who faced death on a daily basis.

That's what David Ayer does really well, he controls his audience. In the opening scene we are shown Collier (Brad Pitt) ambushing and attacking a German officer, it is crude and desperate and over quickly but we can tell even then that is a man who cannot cope with the horrors he has had to endure.

Looking back there are so many moments in Fury that stand out as impressive. There is a single second where Collier shows his true emotions and it is incredible to view. Collier is a man who is forced to be a hero, he never chooses it, he wants only to survive this war.

Any war film can be impressive in it's action sequences, anyone can make loud noises and explosions and fighting, but if a war film can still shock and grip and captivate you in the slower periods, in the silences, that's when you know for sure you have an outstanding movie, and that is what happens with Fury.

Like all war movies, Fury ultimately builds to a climatic finale and truly I think it's one of the best I've ever seen, not because of the action or it's quality of visuals but because we have invested too much into the characters we have seen on screen.

The film of course would be nothing without the men inside the tank, those being Brad Pitt (who helms the best), Shia LaBouf, Logan Lerman, Michael Pena and Jon Bernthal. With these men there is no star, or main character, outside the tank the two leads are Logan Lerman (Who plays the new recruit) and Brad Pitt, however once we are inside the tank all men are equals, and dare I say it, but Shai LaBouf is actually quite good in his role. It's also always nice to see Jason Issacs on screen (hello to you).

Fury is a poignant and painful reminder of how much war can take from each of us, it is a film that never wants us to relax and we never do. Gory and gripping, Fury deserves a high spot in the history of war movies.
209 out of 360 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Not your typical war movie
niteliterr1 December 2014
When one watches this movie you need to keep in mind that not all war movies are the same and the focus of the movie depends on who made the movie, how it was made and who is watching it? Make sense...of course not but in a nutshell keep an open mind. Is it about war? Yes some of it is. It is about bonding and camaraderie? Yes of course, it highlights strained relationships in very stressful and violent situations. I enjoyed the movie and being ex military in the 3rd Armour Division you do tend to pick things out BUT I could do that in just about any military movie I have seen especially from WWII to date. Without being too specific I spotted armor and infantry tactical strategies which confused me a bit but other than that I did enjoy this movie. War is ugly and this movie does not miss that point.
207 out of 327 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Pathos and elation at the expense of logic and realism
BeneCumb15 December 2014
Panoramic war movies with the participation of famous actors have always caught great success and ticket income. No exception is Fury, where Brad Pitt for "older" generation and Logan Lerman and Shia LaBeouf for "younger" generation are definitely the names to attract audience. And yes, they do great in this movie, pity that LaBeouf's character was not so elaborated and spent limited time on screen. All three have successfully diverged from plain "nice-guys-with-cute-faces" roles and have (Pitt, LaBeouf) or attempting to (Lerman) participate in something more versatile and dramatic.

Fury has firm expectations for this, but unfortunately the script has focused on action and battling rather than smooth logic of events. Clichéd characters and unrealistic events and solutions prevail too much, and feeling of time and space is impaired on several occasions (the time-frame between Lerman's character detecting German soldiers and first shots from their tank is especially odd). Moreover, the ending is trivial as well.

Thus, 8 points for acting and 4 for the plot from me, but if this movie has made the younger people pondering on and over the essence of war, then it has gained its end. Anyhow, there are too many movies focusing on visual effects and reasoning out there.
97 out of 185 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A relentless, unflinching account of the horror and carnage of war.
BrentHankins16 October 2014
"Ideals are peaceful. History is violent."

These words, delivered by Brad Pitt's scarred and battle-weary Sgt. Don Collier, are meant to bring some level of comfort to Norman Ellison (Logan Lerman), the young man who found himself snatched unceremoniously out of the clerk's office and placed under Collier's command in the final days of WWII. Despite having no combat training to speak of, Ellison has been assigned as the new assistant driver of Fury, the Sherman tank that Collier and his men call home. Ellison has spent most of the war behind a desk, hammering out correspondence at 60 words per minute, but over the last few hours he's been gunning down Nazis in spectacularly gory fashion, and he's struggling to make sense of the carnage.

Collier offers no other thoughts on the subject, having already forgotten about the previous battle and instead thinking about the skirmishes yet to come. He's a fierce figure who inspires confidence and loyalty among his men, who affectionately refer to him as "Wardaddy." But he's also terrifying to someone like Ellison, who finds himself woefully unprepared for the demands of his new vocation. During one of the film's early battle sequences, Ellison hesitates just long enough for tragedy to occur, and his subsequent brow-beating by Collier is followed by one of the most frightening and gut-wrenching scenes ever depicted in a war film. Ellison is quite literally forced to shun his own moral code and forsake any shred of humanity he still clings to, because Collier knows that if he doesn't, everyone in the unit will be dead.

And what a unit it is, a motley crew of the highest order, comprised of a deeply religious gunner (Shia LeBeouf), a pugnacious redneck with a severe mean streak (Jon Bernthal), and a driver (Michael Pena) who drowns the filth and death in bottle after bottle of whatever booze he can find. But these soldiers are bound together by the sort of brotherhood that can only exist between men who have seen combat together: each is more than willing to die for the other, and the introduction of Ellison into their group is met with a hefty amount of resistance. The kid is an unknown, a variable they hadn't anticipated, and viewed as little more than a liability.

But after proving his mettle during a nail-biting engagement with a superior German tank, Ellison gets the seal of approval from the rest of the boys. Collier even takes Ellison with him to explore an American-occupied village, and the two stumble upon a small apartment and its two female tenants. The film takes an interesting turn at this point, allowing the audience a glimpse into the exhaustion and sadness behind Collier's rugged exterior. A bath, a shave, and a nice dinner are a welcome respite from the day's butchery, but it's the second half of this sequence that truly shows how even the best of men can be transformed by the horror of war.

Every member of the cast is at the top of their game here, even LeBeouf, whose well-documented public meltdowns feel like a distant memory. Despite being hampered by a script that regulates everyone but Collier and Ellison to skin-deep characterizations, the actors make the absolute most of it, bringing depth to characters that could very easily have been one-note portrayals. Pitt and Lerman, on the other hand, are given plenty to work with, and their dialogue exchange during the final moments of the film is one of the most emotionally gripping cinematic moments of the year.

Director David Ayer does a superb job with some of the more human moments in Fury, but his skills are best showcased in the thrilling battle sequences, the majority of which were filmed using actual working tanks from the era. Interior shots are skin-crawlingly claustrophobic, especially when surrounded by the shouts, explosions and machine-gun fire that signify the chaos of battle. Exteriors are also handled well, although the film's frequent use of tracer ammunition makes some of the combat resemble the major clashes in the Star Wars films. Yes, it's historically accurate, but sometimes it's more distracting than engrossing.

While Fury never quite ascends to the level of excellence offered by other WWII epics such as Saving Private Ryan or Cross of Iron, it remains a relentless, unflinching account of the unspeakable nature of war. To quote LeBeouf's character, "Wait til you see what a man can do to another man." When we see it, it's certainly not pleasant, and yet we can't look away.
190 out of 359 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Stupid and Unrealistic Conclusion
claudio_carvalho19 October 2015
In 1945, in the World War II in Germany, the tough Sergeant Don 'Wardaddy' Collier (Brad Pitt) commands a tank and survives to a German attack with his veteran crew composed by Boyd 'Bible' Swan (Shia LaBeouf), Trini 'Gordo' Garcia (Michael Peña) and Grady 'Coon-Ass' Travis (Jon Bernthal). He receives the rookie soldier Norman Ellison (Logan Lerman) as the substitute for his deceased gunner and he tries to harden the youth along the battles.

"Fury" is a war film with despicable characters and ridiculous situation in a stupid and unrealistic conclusion. The boastful nationalism of the writer and director David Ayer is laughable and the final scene with the five American soldiers fighting against hundreds German soldiers with a damaged tank is hilarious. However the production is careful in details. The execution of the German soldier and the behavior of Don's soldiers in the house of the German ladies is something that unfortunately happened during the occupation of Germany. However they are not shown in most of the American films that usually blame Russian soldiers only for rape and violence against civilian population and German soldiers for war crimes. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "Corações de Ferro" ("Iron Hearts")
58 out of 113 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
'Fury' is an ultra-violent and bloody war film and is a solid entry into the WWII genre, however it almost imploded on itself at the end, leaving a bitter taste.
bryank-0484412 August 2015
Warning: Spoilers
When Brad Pitt signs up to kill Nazis in a WWII movie, you say, "YES". This particular movie is called 'Fury', and is a solid, very good war film. It's brutal, violent, raw, and has enough of a fresh feel to keep you on the edge of your seat throughout the entire 134-minute runtime. Instead of being out in the open, walking the fields of France or another nazi occupied country, 'Fury' takes place mostly inside a small steel tank with five guys led by 'Wardaddy' (Pitt), during the final month of WWII. The claustrophobia sets in quickly and gives us an ample amount of time to dig deep into each soldier inside the tank.

Writer-director David Ayer is known for his cop drama films, ('End of Watch', 'Sabotage', 'Street Kings', and 'Training Day') to name a few. And he pulls from his past work to take on the fierceness of this merciless story of a squad of U.S. tanks, winning the war against the Germans. It's a story you won't soon forget, yet in the final moments of the film, Ayer pulls a stunt that almost ruins everything that came before it. Despite that horrible aspect, 'Fury' is quite good.

Wardaddy is a tank commander with the 2nd Armored Division who has been around for quite a few wars. He's a seasoned soldier, rough, tough, and has seen it all. However, there is something deeper inside him going on that shows us there's more to him than just being a nazi killing machine like we saw in Quentin Tarantino's 'Inglorious Basterds'. But his sheer barbaric ways show when he initiates a newcomer named Norman (Logan Lerman), a young kid who is a trained typist for the army, who is literally thrown into Wardaddy's tank as an assistant driver, even though Norman has never seen the inside of a tank. Wardaddy forces Norman to shoot a captured S.S. Officer point blank in the head, and that will be the first of many things Norman is forced to do over the course of this movie.

The other soldiers inside 'Fury', which is painted on the tank's gun barrel are Boyd (Shia LaBeouf), a rough solider who is also super religious, Trini (Michael Pena), the driver with a drinking problem, and Grady (Jon Bernthal), the aggressive red neck jerk of the highest level. These seem like stereotypes, but I can assure you, Ayer has written them with a good amount of depth, particularly LaBeouf's character who hasn't been this good in anything for many years. As the war is coming to a quick end and as the Nazis are still fighting to their last breath, the Americans are taking town by town, usually led by Wardaddy's tank unit.

After the successful take over of a nazi occupied town, there is a moment for some down time where Wardaddy takes Norman under his wing and up to an apartment where a mother (Anamaria Marinca) and her teenage daughter (Alicia von Rittberg) come face to face with the two U.S. soldiers. They are terrified at first, but Wardaddy puts them at ease, and the women end up making a meal and drinks for the two soldiers. This might be the best scene in the film as we get a small glimpse at someone who has been through hell and seen such horrible atrocities, still trying to have a normal life of routine and genuine pleasantries. But war is terrible, and this nice situation doesn't last long as the rest of Wardaddy's crew heads up to the apartment and ruins this seemingly nice setting. It's not their fault really, but it's rather what the war and the stuff they had to do to survive and win has done to them, turning them into animals.

The climactic scene doesn't seem to make any sense as the Captain of the unit tells Wardaddy and a few other tanks go on a big mission to stop a treasure trove of Nazis that are headed to a certain location. Even though the war is quickly coming to an end, and this mission doesn't seem to have much of a reason, it's unclear why the captain would send these great soldiers on what seems like a suicide mission. And this we are in the steel tank again as our soldiers fight a never-ending stream of nazi soldiers. But again, Ayer pulls this wild card out of his back pocket, that completely negates anything that came before it, and almost destroys his own film.

Pitt is great in his role and gives a few layers of depth to his brute soldier character. Lerman ('The Perks of Being a Wallflower') plays the newbie who is forced to hold a gun and kill any German soldier he faces very nicely. And the rest of the crew turn in amazing performances as well. The set pieces, uniforms, and tanks all add to the realistic setting of 1945 Germany. And Ayer's direction keeps you on edge, particularly during one of the tank battle sequences. 'Fury' is an ultra-violent and bloody war film and is a solid entry into the WWII genre, however it almost imploded on itself at the end, leaving a bitter taste.
17 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Brutal (Anti) War Drama Let Down By Weak Ending
Theo Robertson29 March 2015
Warning: Spoilers
After complaining that the recent Neill Blomkamp film CHAPPIE suffered from a painfully ill thought out marketing campaign I must confess that David Aye's ferocious war actioner was an even bigger victim of poor marketing . Seeing the promos for this film last Autumn it was one movie I was going out of my way to avoid . You know the clips I'm talking about with handsome Brad Pitt bragging he'd been killing Germans all the way from North Africa to Germany . Okay I'll be the first to admit that some American units had this dubious privilege but compare this to many British units such as the 51st Highland division who'd spent 1940-45 fighting against the Germans non stop . That said I'm knowledgeable enough to realise that this pales in to almost insignificance when you realise the Chinese and Japanese had been fighting each other since the early 1930s . Europeans do have a very Eurocentric view of history but like so many people in Europe I wasn't keen on seeing yet another Hollywood revisionism of history especially when all the marketing material revolves around FOUR Americans in ONE American tank holding back hundreds of Waffen SS soldiers

It's not often a film surprises me . No on second thoughts let me rephrase that and state it's not often a film shocks me but this is exactly what FURY did . For the most part it tries to avoid the Hollywood clichés and when it doesn't such as newbie and reluctant recruit Norman being introduced to the tight knit and battle hardened unit it does disguise the clichés quite well . Where the film works best is showing the relentless inhumanity of war . It's not a case of clean cut Americans with high moral values beating the ghastly Germans and nasty Nazis without suffering a scratch but a grim unrelenting battle to the death where there's no real winners until democracy triumphs over tyranny . Absolutely nothing is held back and as someone who has seen a lot of war films I was actually quite shocked as to some of the on screen incidents especially the scene where Norman is bloodied in to shooting a prisoner . This is a brutal and depressing film of the type I thought I'd never see Hollywood attempt especially since recent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are still fresh in the memory

It's hardly two hours of feel good entertainment but the bleak and nihilistic tone makes it an absolutely outstanding piece of American film making for the most part but then for the last half hour the film then proceeds to shoot itself in the foot , the head and every other piece of anatomy you can think of as Brad tells his men - all four of them - that they'll be defending a crossroads with their broken down tank against several hundred Waffen SS troops because

"I ain't ever run away from anything and I ain't about to start"

Bare in mind their tank has broken down , the war has only a few weeks to go and they could have easily made it back to safe lines without being charged with desertion or dereliction of duty so there's two options left to them . The sensible one that'll see them live and pick up their war pension or the stupid one that'll see them give the audience 20 minutes of ridiculous over the top mock heroics that the film company can stick in the trailers . I suppose being film characters they'd quite happily sacrifice their lives to do the film company a favour but at the same time I'd like to see a film where characters do something understandably human and sensible , especially if they've got American accents . The final climatic battle scene is as every bit as ridiculous and overblown as you'd expect to see in the worst Hollywood Rambo type flag waver as literally hundreds of Germans are mown down left , right , centre , background and foreground which goes totally against the bleak nihilistic scenes that preceded it . The fact that it ends with most of the Americans dead doesn't make it any less ridiculous

This is a great shame because up until the final act I was very impressed with what I was watching . Again let me repeat this is in no way a feel good movie and if you don't like war films you'd quickly be turning this off due to the graphic violence on display and this refusal to sugar coat the grim and horrific face of conflict is what made FURY so refreshing to me . Such a pity the film had to end on a seen it all before cliché ridden denounment
26 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
An instant favourite!
obiwankenobean2 December 2014
I was blown away by this film, I thought the acting was on point (even from Shia, who I don't really like anymore since his "I am not famous anymore" stunt), Brad put in a brilliant performance & looked awesome. I didn't really rate Pena until seeing End of Watch & this, I was dubious at first.

Fury seems to have annoyed several historians, I don't know much about all that so my 9/10 rating takes none of that into account.

I loved how gritty it was, reminded me of Saving Private Ryan/Band of Brothers & depicted how brutal war can be & is.

Yes, okay, the final scenes might be a bit ridiculous & over- exaggerated but that takes nothing away from this film for me, I would recommend to anyone & everyone
88 out of 156 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Gruelling tank action in this war epic
Leofwine_draca21 May 2016
David Ayer is an up-and-down director for me. For every film of his I love (STREET KINGS, SABOTAGE) there seems to be one I equally hate (END OF WATCH). Thankfully, FURY is at the top end of his scale, a straightforward war epic centred around the crew of a single tank as they trundle through the German countryside and encounter Nazis at every turn.

This is a war film as it should be: gruelling, violent, and dehumanising. The attention to detail is remarkable and the action scenes are expertly staged, as you'd expect from the experienced Ayer; you really feel like you're on the ground with these soldiers and taking part in the combat. The first tank assault is my favourite scene, as it's an example of blistering, never-seen-before action, although the extended powerhouse climax is almost as good.

Yes, the story is predictable and the clear-cut characters a little too simplistic. But Ayer counters this by incorporating interesting actors into the tale. A weary Brad Pitt plays virtually the same character as he did in INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS and is fine for it, while Shia LaBeouf gets to play a character support role for a change. Jon Bernthal (THE WALKING DEAD) remains a scene-stealer, and Logan Lerman shows a little more experience in his acting than in previous years. FURY is a dark and depressing film, but the vibrancy of the cinematography and all-out action makes it one to watch.
24 out of 44 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
War, and watching 'Fury', is hell.
mjjusa-117 October 2014
Warning: Spoilers
It is hard to put into words just how loathsome a movie 'Fury' is. The self hating writer/director must have correctly calculated that any WWII veteran of the European Theater must be in his or her's late eighties by now, thus avoiding the real potential of one of them slapping the living scheisse out of him for this atrocity. It begins with a ridiculous scene, is of the war movie genre that demands German soldiers running upright and without cover toward machine guns so our anti-heroes can mow them down conveniently, and consistently opts for opportunities to shove the new hip narrative that lovingly depicts American soldiers as murderous, war crime committing, raping thugs. See: 'Inglorious Basterds.' Much of it is hard to watch, especially after 'Saving Private Ryan' which set a high bar for any war movie following, the rest is drivel. And, not even good drivel at that. High marks (pardon the pun) though, for the German soldiers surrounding the tank, who stop firing for inexplicable reasons, but which coincide with long discussions on war and friendship by the tank crew.
353 out of 592 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Emotional, Visceral, Gritty
CalRhys4 November 2014
I can gladly say that David Ayer's World War II flick 'Fury' lived up to my expectations. The audience are confronted with the horrors of war, accompanied with some truly spectacular well-crafted battle scenes that proves Ayer's desire to create something new and profound. Ayer keeps the gritty realism he employed on his other acclaimed films only this time uses it to depict the journey of a tank crew in Germany in 1945. The performances are strong from Brad Pitt, Logan Lerman and even Shia LaBeouf has proved he has a hidden acting talent after his heyday on the set of 'Transformers'. An emotional war-drama that packs a punch with visceral action scenes and an atmospheric score, definitely worth a watch.
340 out of 620 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed