SallyAlbright October 19, 2014 Share October 19, 2014 Just saw this, liked it but it also made me quite sad! I rather surprised at how big of a role Logan Lerman had, he was really the star here and I thought he was fantastic. He reminds me a lot of a younger Jake Gyllenhaal, and I think he is both adorable and really talented. When he looks a little older, I think he is definite leading man movie star material. I was also reminded in this film how talented Shia LaBeouf is. I am glad it seems like he's realized he was being an idiot IRL, because he is really good and was very moving in this film. The cast was solid all around, and it was a good war flick. However, not something I think I'll see more than once. What did you guys think? Link to comment
ZoqFotPik October 19, 2014 Share October 19, 2014 I enjoyed it, but did think it had some faults. First of all, I knew, before the movie had started, that Brad Pitt's character was going to die and Norman was going to be one of if not the only survivor. Secondly I felt that Norman's transition from "I'm not supposed to be here!" to "Die Nazis Die!" was more than a little abrupt. I think if the movie had spanned a couple of months instead of days and shown a more gradual change would have been better. I also felt that Norman's acceptance within the crew was also abrupt. One minute they're treating him like shit and the next he's one of the guys. This could also have been addressed had the film timeframe been changed. The one thing I loved was how they showed just how ridiculously outclassed the Sherman was compared to German tanks. I do agree with you, a solid film but not something I'd watch multiple times. Link to comment
Cobalt Stargazer October 19, 2014 Share October 19, 2014 I was also reminded in this film how talented Shia LaBeouf is. I am glad it seems like he's realized he was being an idiot IRL, because he is really good and was very moving in this film. The cast was solid all around, and it was a good war flick. LaBeouf was the main cast member I had reservations about, because I'd only really seen him in the Transformers movies, and those were.....not good, IMO. But he got to me a little in this one, especially when the tank crew is at that crossroads and he asks someone to pass him a bottle. "What're you gonna do with that?" "Whaddya think I'm gonna do, I'm gonna fuckin' drink it." And while this might be blasphemy, because it's my favorite movie of all time, the final scenes weren't unlike The Wild Bunch. They know if they stay instead of seeking shelter in the woods they'll all probably die, but if so they're going to die defending not just the little patch of mud they're stranded on but the tank itself, which has become their home over God knows how long. Even Norman, who only ended up there through what amounted to a clerical error. "Ideals are peaceful. History is violent." Indeed. Link to comment
Rick Kitchen October 19, 2014 Share October 19, 2014 I haven't seen it yet, but I will, probably next weekend, however, the local newspaper's reviewer absolutely hated it because of a scene where an American soldier takes a German girl into her room to have sex with her against her will Is this that as movie-destroying, as the reviewer said it was? Link to comment
Cobalt Stargazer October 19, 2014 Share October 19, 2014 I haven't seen it yet, but I will, probably next weekend, however, the local newspaper's reviewer absolutely hated it because of a scene where an American soldier takes a German girl into her room to have sex with her against her will Is this that as movie-destroying, as the reviewer said it was? Um... I'm reluctant to say either yes or no, Rick Kitchen, because the girl doesn't appear to be actively afraid when she's in the bedroom with the soldier, and he doesn't threaten her in any way. Instead, he's the one who comes off as hesitant, not forceful. Then again, I didn't read the review in question, so its entirely possible that the reviewer had a different interpretation than mine. Link to comment
Rick Kitchen October 19, 2014 Share October 19, 2014 Here's the review in question. Note that the review spoils the scene we are discussing. http://www.sacbee.com/entertainment/movies-news-reviews/article2829208.html Link to comment
Cobalt Stargazer October 19, 2014 Share October 19, 2014 (edited) Well. As someone who has seen both Fury and Basterds, I can say that I'm probably more familiar with Tarantino's work than Ayer's. And far be it from me to take issue with the reviewer's viewpoint. However, the soldier in question's behavior after this scene takes place belies any suggestion that he saw the girl as someone to be used and discarded. If and when you see the film, you can decide for yourself how bad it is/was. Edited October 20, 2014 by Cobalt Stargazer Link to comment
ZoqFotPik October 20, 2014 Share October 20, 2014 A bit of trivia from the movie, the Tiger I tank used in the film is the last fully functional one in the world. Also, I just realized that Norman was the guy from "Perks of Being a Wallflower". Link to comment
Athena October 20, 2014 Share October 20, 2014 Just a reminder that once a movie has been widely released in US theatres, spoiler tags are not necessary in its topic. Carry on. Link to comment
Rick Kitchen October 20, 2014 Share October 20, 2014 Weren't there more than one tank used? Link to comment
Raja October 22, 2014 Share October 22, 2014 Even Norman, who only ended up there through what amounted to a clerical error. "Ideals are peaceful. History is violent." Indeed.If wasn't so much of a clerical error as it was that General Marshall underestimated the number of combat troops the US Army would need. After August of 1944 more and more support soldiers and those who active service was being delayed for advanced training were thrown into the front lines as replacements. Link to comment
Raja October 22, 2014 Share October 22, 2014 Weren't there more than one tank used? There was one German tank which took out the rest of the US platoon. The other fights were against infantry with towed anti tank guns. Link to comment
Rick Kitchen October 23, 2014 Share October 23, 2014 I meant, didn't the filming use more than one tank to stand in for the one seen on the screen? Link to comment
Rick Kitchen October 25, 2014 Share October 25, 2014 I finally got a chance to see the film, and I don't understand the Sacramento Bee's reviewer's problem with that scene. I saw no indication of rape whatsoever. Once the other members of the tank crew came in, then it was rapey, but not till that point. Wow, what a violent film! Link to comment
Raja October 27, 2014 Share October 27, 2014 It was a rape moment when the tank commander said he would take the girl in there if his bow gunner didn't. Up to that point he was like both the good and bad Sergeants from Platoon. Remember this was after executing a prisoner of war not to mention the SS officer in the town. It wasn't as bad as the squad in Casualties of War when they set out to rape but on the road march to the town the tank crew were openly talking about girls turning into a prostitute for a candy bar and the Sergeant had already pulled out eggs for the lunch, hence justifying sexual actions in payment. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.