Plots(1)

April, 1945. As the Allies make their final push in the European Theatre, a battle-hardened army sergeant named Wardaddy (Brad Pitt) commands a Sherman tank and her five-man crew on a deadly mission behind enemy lines. Outnumbered and outgunned, Wardaddy and his men face overwhelming odds in their heroic attempts to strike at the heart of Nazi Germany. (Sony Pictures)

(more)

Videos (9)

Trailer 2

Reviews (14)

D.Moore 

all reviews of this user

English It's not a bad film, but only two scenes really caught my attention, one of which was at the dining table (the other was the disposal of the tiger). It seemed to me as if David Ayer wanted to combine The Big Red One and The Thin Red Line, but he just couldn't reach that bar with the help of clichés and uninteresting characters. Yet Brad Pitt was 100% suited to the role and it was obvious that he played the tank commander with gusto, and the dirty, muddy atmosphere had a lot going for it as well. But why was it all so long, even though so little happened in it? ()

novoten 

all reviews of this user

English Attempting to make a Tank Patrol into a living monument to the soldiers of World War II is a lot to promise, but it falls apart when David Ayer's genres start clashing with each other. I would believe both in the invincible crew of the Fury and in tears during drunken confessions, but once these moods meet and regularly alternate, it's over. And it's a shame because Brad Pitt and Logan Lerman can effortlessly develop any smallest supporting storyline to the edge. ()

Ads

DaViD´82 

all reviews of this user

English It's not entirely bad in any way, but it could have been so much better if it had decided whether it wants to be an uncompromising dirty (anti) war display of the horrors and nonsense of war and fighting, tank addiction aimed at tens of millions of World of Tanks players or a stylized action movie in a style "we are outnumbered, ikh mnogo", which is something between 300 and Soviet propaganda war movies of the fifties. And to make matters worse, Tarantino's fifteen-minute scene divides it right in the middle, which looks like a removed scene from the Inglourious Basterds. And in each of those styles, it works more or less well here, but together it doesn't do the job as a whole. Not at all. ()

EvilPhoEniX 

all reviews of this user

English David Ayer is one of the few directors who has only managed to keep me interested in each film at 3*, but here he has managed to break the ice and chop me up with a wartime spectacle led by a perfect Brad Pitt. Fury is very bleak, depressing, relentless, decently gory, appropriately and profanely spelled out in military slang and perfectly captures the horrors of WWII. Watching the film you witness the most extreme and visceral imagery of injury, both explosive and gunshot. The highlights are definitely the action against the Tiger and the heroic finale, which is sure to leave you gasping for breath. Although the film focuses more on the psychology of the characters (it's not a non-stop action ride, there are only four action sequences), it maintains a decent pace and entertains. For me, undoubtedly one of the best war movies and the sounds of the cannon in the cinema still ring in my ears now. 95%. ()

Lima 

all reviews of this user

English Half an hour before the end, I was still convinced of a five-star rating, because such a realistically dirty, unkempt war film had been missing for a long time. Add to that the production values of fantastic sets, Pitt being the walking embodiment of charisma, and the lunch at the German woman and her daughter's house scene, which I consider one of the best movie scenes of last year. But then came a hardly acceptable scene, which even the Soviets at the time of masterpieces like Liberation would not have liked in terms of exaggeration and heroism. Ayer just got carried away and the whole great impression went down the drain, or into the mud of a tank belt trail, of which the film is full. ()

Gallery (74)