October 17, 2014, - 4:00 pm

Wknd Box Office: Fury (a/k/a Hating Private Ryan), The Best of Me, St. Vincent

By Debbie Schlussel

The only decent new movie in theaters today is a Bill Murray flick–and even that seems like a kinda sorta rip-off of Bad Santa. What really galls me is the new anti-American Brad Sh-tt movie.

furythebestofme

stvincent

* “Fury“: More like, Hating Private Ryan. Or Defaming Private Ryan. If you go see this movie, the only Fury here is what you should be feeling toward the disgustingly anti-American filmmakers and actors who made this absolute garbage. This movie is extremely anti-American and makes our troops look like they were murderers, rapists, and thugs, as well as hypocritical religious Christian zealots. It made me very angry to watch this. America had the moral high ground in World War II. Our fighting men were good, and they were moral. But you’d hardly know it watching this crap. Yes, I’m sure there were a few bad apples, as there are everywhere, but overall and in the vast majority, we were–we ARE–the good guys, absolutely the opposite of what this absolutely sh-tty movie shows us.

In this movie, Brad Pitt (a/k/a Mr. Palestina Jolie) plays the commander of a tank unit, and he forces an innocent, naive typist (Logan Lerman) newly assigned to his tank to murder a German soldier who has already surrendered. Then, he forces the innocent soldier to rape a German girl, saying, “if you don’t take her into that bedroom, I will.” Other soldiers rape German women and take German loot. Then, they take the eggs some German women are about to eat, and they lick them all over. The Nazis were horrible, terrible scum. But you’d hardly know it watching this movie. In fact, the movie’s last scene, which takes up about a third of the movie, should be a scene in which you’d root for the American tank crew, fighting the Nazis with everything they’ve got left. But you’re hard-pressed to root for these scumbags you’ve seen behave so horribly.







Even the heroic storming of Omaha Beach and the Normandy invasion of D-Day is distorted and contorted beyond all recognition in this movie. As one of the soldiers in the tank (Michael Pena) tells it, the invasion was all about American soldiers murdering innocent horses that roamed free after German soldiers died. You see, he says that their job when the tank was in Normandy, was to come up to horses pet them and make them feel comfortable and then murder them. HUH? Was the this supposed to be the PETA version of World War II?

Shia LaBeouf’s and Jon Bernthal’s characters are stock Southerners in the eyes of Hollywood, especially the anti-Christian portrayal by LaBeouf. LaBeouf is a zealously religious Christian who doesn’t behave so Christian-like. Bernthal is a would-be rapist and thug toward every woman (and man) who comes along. Ditto for Pena’s character. These people are the scum of the earth, not the good, decent Americans who fought against the Nazis in real life.

My great-uncle Maurice J. Schlussel, a general who fought in World War II and became the U.S. Army’s chief medical officer over the South Pacific, and my grandparents who survived the camps, but lost everyone and everything, are turning over in their graves. They knew who the good and bad guys were in World War II, and this movie says the exact opposite.

The movie takes place in the closing days of World War II. The war is supposed to be over. But the tank, “Fury” is carrying on as the Germans haven’t completely surrendered and the fighting in Germany is ongoing. It was weird to see Clint Eastwood’s hot son, who looked–with his delicate, pretty boy features–like he was still modeling for Abercrombie & Fitch and not a World War II. But he is quickly killed off. In the meantime, the defamation of American soldiers who fought valiantly in World War II continues throughout this film. Oh, and by the way, in the end, the only good American soldier, the former typist, is saved by a “kind-hearted” Nazi SS Officer. Yeah, that’s the ticket.

Yes, there are a couple of good lines, such as when Brad Pitt tells the innocent typist soldier that “Ideals are peaceful, history is violent.” But none of those lines justify the defamation of American soldiers that comprises this long, slow, boring movie.

It makes me sick that Pitt has spent the last couple of weeks–with the full cooperation of the U.S. Armed Forces and the Obama Pentagon–hanging out with American soldiers and promoting this disgusting flick. Are our troops that stupid that they don’t get this is a slap in their faces and everything they stand for? Is the Pentagon that dumb, too? Or is this systematic demoralization by design?

Army proud? Not here. There is NOTHING patriotic about this movie . . . unless your “patriotism” is to America’s enemies. This movie is a disgrace. I’m sure, though, that it will do blockbuster ticket sales in the Middle East and Eurostan.

PLEASE. SKIP. THIS.

FOUR MARXES PLUS FOUR OBAMAS PLUS FOUR BIN LADENS PLUS FOUR ISIS BEHEADINGS
karlmarxmovies.jpgkarlmarxmovies.jpgkarlmarxmovies.jpgkarlmarxmovies.jpgplus.jpgobamasmilingsmallerobamasmilingsmallerobamasmilingsmallerobamasmilingsmallerplus.jpgbinladensmallerbinladensmallerbinladensmallerbinladensmallerplus.jpgisisbeheadingisisbeheadingisisbeheadingisisbeheading

Watch the trailer . . .

* “The Best of Me“: Oy. This predictable, sappy chick flick drivel was cheesy to the max and just laughable (in fact, I laughed several times when humor apparently wasn’t intended). One of the bad guys in the movie is your typical Hollywood defamation of the South. He speaks with a thick Southern accent, uses the word “boy” a lot, and dresses like a slavemaster, circa 1864, even though the movie takes place in the 1990s and the present.

This is yet another one of those cornball Nicholas Sparks romance novels transformed into movies. And, as in nearly every Sparks novel, there is forbidden love in which parents or some other force is trying to separate the two love birds. This particular movie is almost a carbon copy of another, far superior Sparks novel-turned-movie, “The Notebook.”

The story: a Southern teen boy comes has an evil, drug-dealer father who dresses and speaks like a slavemaster from the 1800s, complete with thick Southern drawl. The son, Dawson, is a good, smart kid, who wants to make something of himself and get away from his evil father and Dawson’s older, mullet-endowed drug-dealer, criminal-thug brothers. Dawson meets a nice, rich girl who hits on him relentlessly, and they fall in love. In the meantime, Dawson runs away from his father and lives with Tuck (Gerald McRaney), a benevolent older man and widower. But Dawson’s father and brothers won’t leave him alone, and they terrorize him and the girl. Tragedy ultimately strikes, and Dawson and the girl are separated and break up.

Now, it is 20 years later, and Dawson (James Marsden) and the girl (Michelle Monaghan) are brought back together by the death of their dear friend Tuck. Will they re-unite? I predicted every single thing that happened in this movie. It’s that cheesy and formulaic.

And a few more ridiculous things about this movie: the actors who play the young lovers look absolutely NOTHING like the ones who play them in later adulthood. It’s just silly. Moreover, 20 years later, which is supposed to take place in the present time, the evil father is dressed in a ridiculous wig and wardrobe that make him look like a fugitive from the early-to-mid ’70s. (He looked like Gary Cole, playing convicted murderer Jeffrey MacDonald in the TV movie, “Fatal Vision.”) I laughed really hard, even though, again, I wasn’t supposed to. And, finally, there were so many gratuitous shots of Marsden–and the guy who plays his younger self–shirtless, I thought I was watching the “Magic Mike” sequel. Again, cheeeeeesy. If ya gotta rely on cheesy chest shots, maybe ya got a week script. Just sayin’.

Cheese is fattening and high calorie. Skip this chick flick if you can.

TWO HUNKS OF CHEESE
smallhunkofcheesesmallhunkofcheese

Watch the trailer . . .

* “St. Vincent“: I had mixed feelings about this movie. It’s kind of a rip-off of “Bad Santa,” but I liked it a little better. On the other hand, I don’t like movies that glorify the Hillary Clinton/”It Takes a Village” baloney about what comprises a family. Plus the movie does kind of glorify a jerk. That said, I found the movie funny and entertaining, and I liked that the very weak protagonist turns out to be a war hero who did valiant things as a U.S. military man at war. And I liked how the protagonist teaches the young kid to stand up for himself.

The story: Bill Murray plays Vincent, a down-on-his-luck bum and misanthrope living in a working class New York borough neighborhood. He gambles, owes a ton of money to bookies (or loan sharks–you’re never really told which), patronizes a hooker who is also a stripper, and owes everyone money. Soon, he ends up taking care of the son of Melissa McCarthy, who has just moved into the neighborhood and works long hours. The son, in Catholic school, is teased and bullied, and Vincent starts teaching the kid how to stand up for himself and fight back. He also teaches the kid other life lessons, some of them not so appropriate, such as when he takes the kid to the race track and they bet on horses. Others are good, such as caring for and humoring Vincent’s wife, who has Alzheimer’s and is in a home for afflicted seniors.

Soon, everyone finds out about Vincent’s “babysitting” and he comes under fire, but the kid finds the good and heroic in Vincent.

Like I said, the movie was entertaining and funny and typical Bill Murray stuff. I also liked that the kid found the good in him and it was redemptive. I didn’t like that they all ended up playing, “We are the world” with the hooker. As I noted, I don’t go for this “It Takes a Village”/”Don’t Judge” baloney.

ONE REAGAN
reagancowboy

Watch the trailer . . .

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Print Friendly, PDF & Email




Tags: ,


48 Responses

Or, on the other hand, you could pop some popcorn and pour butter on it and salt, and download and watch the Riff-trax guys skewering “Hawk The Slayer” starring Jack Palance playing a bad guy.

I know what I’ll be doing.

Saw a review which liked “Fury” because it stated American fighting men come home depraved and unable to function in civilized society (Like Senator Inouye and Governor Foss, both of them Medal of Honor Winners, or Sailor Malan, who went from fighting Nazis to battling apartheid post war). Idiotic twaddle from a clown named Cole Smithey, I think. Just once, I would like to have American soldiers portrayed as what they were in a modern film: decent fellows fighting a completely depraved group of vermin in the East AND the West.

My two biggest military heroes from WWII are airmen: Paul Tibbetts and the completely brilliant Curtis LeMay. Close runner up is the magnificent Leslie Groves.

The great tactical geniuses of WWII are the almost completely forgotten Sargeant Cullin (inventor of the Rhino device), Leigh, who developed the “Leigh” light, and the magnificent British Boffin who developed the dam busting bombs.

My favorite Civilian heroes from WWII (other than The Sublime Winston) are Richard Feynman and Oppenheimer.

Debbie, why aren’t you listed on “Rotten Tomatoes?” You should be a top critic!

Occam's Tool on October 17, 2014 at 7:19 pm

Deb-

Breitbart’s Nolte LOVED ‘Fury’.

…could you please give us a post on Nolte’s real agenda?

nick fury on October 17, 2014 at 7:29 pm

I went to the first showing of “Fury” today knowing nothing about it. Wish I’d checked with you first. It was torturous garbage, the first time I’ve ever seen WWII Americans portrayed as the criminals. Just hateful trash.

Frank B on October 17, 2014 at 8:23 pm

I really appreciate the review of FURY. I was going to go, but not now. For some reason I thought this was based on the Sgt Fury comics which I loved. What’s the matter with Hollywood anyway? Thanks Debbie.

Tommy Thomas on October 17, 2014 at 10:13 pm

It’s too bad Fury is such a scuzzy film, because it features what probably is the largest leading cast of Jewish actors (Logan Lerman, Jon Bernthal, Shia LaBeouf, Jason Isaacs) playing soldiers in WWII in a major American film, ever.

Of course, non-Jewish writer/director David Ayer didn’t make any of their characters Jewish…

Bee on October 17, 2014 at 10:39 pm

“Are our troops that stupid that they don’t get this is a slap in their faces and everything they stand for?” – Debbie
Nope, Debbie, they get it. Why do you think that the suicide rate is so high in our military?

nadie on October 17, 2014 at 10:53 pm

Interesting point, nadie. I am hearing more and more about this suicide rate in our military, and it just saddens me further. We are witnessing the complicit, planned, ongoing and inevitable dismantling of “this once great republic.”

The indoctrination will be televised, and also found at local theaters. How else could anyone in today’s military feel with stuff like this coming out, and people like Chimpface Pitt having more and more hypnotic control over people’s perceptions in our society, through these no longer so subliminal messages?

God help us all, tens of millions laying dead, smoke rising from the land.

The world said to America, “drop dead.”

And America only too willingly obliged.

Alfredo from Puerto Rico on October 18, 2014 at 12:26 am

Thank you, Thank you, Thank you for saving me from seeing the Brad Pitt Sh*t!!

RalphGoy on October 18, 2014 at 3:10 am

History is interesting enough without twisting it to fit some liberal agenda.
There have been plenty of awful soldiers in the world. Why not do an accurate movie about those?
Show the Japanese rape of Nanking. Show Columbus’ enslaving and genocide of the natives. Why make Americans look bad when they weren’t that bad?
Our self hatred will be something studied a thousand years from now by historians when they are trying to figure out how the most prosperous and powerful nation in history self destructed.
They will properly be studying in Spanish, Arabic or Chinese since English will be a dead language by then.

Steve G. on October 18, 2014 at 9:12 am

    How about something we never see: the utter brutality, skinning people alive, eating a womans baby right in front of her, and a host of unbelievable barbarism that “natives” routinely engaged in. Its also a part of history but is never talked about.

    belo on October 18, 2014 at 10:11 am

I would probably agree with you on the Fury film. But then, I thought Inglorious Basterds was a sadistic revenge fantasy laced with Tarantino’s own sickening quirks and sexual fantasies. I haven’t watched another film with Brad Pitt since.

I won’t bother with Fury either.

belo on October 18, 2014 at 10:04 am

Glad I read this, after reading THIS review I was thinking of going to see it.

[link redacted]

You both have totally opposite opinions of the film. Nolte calls it
“‘FURY’ REVIEW: SUPERB, VIOLENT AND DEEPLY CHRISTIAN WWII DRAMA”
I think I trust Debbie over this guy.

J: John Nolte is a failed liberal filmmaker who moved to Hollywood and failed miserably. He is NOT a conservative, just pretends he is one. Every movie he likes is liberal crap promoting a leftist agenda. Anybody who thinks “Fury” is “deeply Christian” is either a liar or a moron or both (the latter describes Nolte to a “T”). The movie is thoroughly anti-Christian. Nolte also makes up stuff repeatedly, such as reporting Michael Moore admitted to having nine homes (he admitted to having 9 properties, only 2 of which are homes). I do NOT allow links to Breitfraud, especially that scumbag Nolte, on this site. He is a complete snake, aside from being a liberal.

Further, when I was on the Breitfraud Big Hollywood site as a contributor, Andrew Breitbart overruled him and had me on the site when Nolte revoked an invitation he sent me, then told me I’m “too controversial.” Breitbart told me Nolte is “an idiot,” but then kept him on his payroll as the “editor in chief” of his crappy Big Hollywood site. Nolte also refused to post articles of mine against liberal movies, telling me, IN WRITING, that he was trying to get on the studios’ good side and didn’t want to offend them, so he’d get invited to screen movies. He refused to post or even link to anything I wrote that called Kim Kardashian or Paris Hilton porn stars because he said it wasn’t true, when starring in porn videos was how each of them became famous.

Nolte also repeatedly posted lies and fake “facts” in order to cover up and lie for Sean Hannity after I exposed Hannity’s Freedom Concert scams and fraud. He posted as “fact” that Hannity paid for his own private planes, hotel suites, etc. to the Freedom Concerts when in fact that was false and he didn’t require Hannity to provide a single receipt or check to prove it because there aren’t any. Nolte has ZERO fact-checking of any of the articles he writes or that anyone else writes at Big Hollywood.

And you can’t trust a thing on it. DO NOT post any links to that piece of sh-t on this site. That site, Big Hollywood/Breitfart, is an IQ test for conservatives. If you read it, you failed. DS

john on October 18, 2014 at 12:24 pm

    Debbie: devastating take down of Nolte.

    skzion on October 18, 2014 at 10:03 pm

    Deb-

    I recall that Nolte often tried to vet his opinions by continually mentioning that his relative (brother/cousin/whatever) was an ‘editor’ on the ended “Burn Notice’ series (which I confess I enjoyed)

    Nick Fury on October 19, 2014 at 1:56 am

How, pray tell, could this be a “deeply Christian” film?! Why, because after watching their acts of brutality throughout the film, they repent at the end? I’m calling bullshit here. Two extreme opposite views of the same film. I agree with DS on most things (not all). I’ll side with her on this one. Will not see Fury.

H: NOBODY repents at the end of this movie. John Nolte is a lying, piece of sh-t liberal. DS

huh on October 18, 2014 at 12:42 pm

…Shia LaBeouf’s and Jon Bernthal’s characters are stock Southerners in the eyes of Hollywood, especially the anti-Christian portrayal by LaBeouf…
LaBeouf and Bernthal aren´t Christians in real life so maybe thats how they like the world to view Christianity.
Also to see more moral superiority watch movies like soldier blue, Dirty Dozen, casualties of war, Redacted,…

Warmonger on October 18, 2014 at 7:01 pm

    The movie was written and directed by David Ayer, who is not Jewish. So whatever portrayals of Christianity or Southerners by LaBeouf and Bernthal are Ayer’s fault. And the Logan Lerman character is positive and Christian, though he is Jewish in real life.

    Bee on October 18, 2014 at 7:19 pm

I have to disagree completely. Norman (Lerman’s character) is not forced into raping the German girl. In fact, it’s pretty much obvious that it’s consensual. The very next line Collier (Pitt) has is “They’re young and they’re alive” to the German girl’s cousin. He wasn’t raping her. Moreover, the German girl that ends up with the other tankers is either a prostitute or a starving German woman who wants chocolate and coffee. They’re not forcing her; they’re bribing her.

The part about shooting horses in the Falaise Gap? It happened.

Americans are shown as having the moral high ground. German civilians are hanged by the SS for not resisting in a war already lost. Pitt’s crew makes a doomed last stand to hold the crossroads because it was the right thing to do. As Bible (LaBeouf)’s character quotes from Isaiah, “Send me.” Someone had to die to prevent the Germans from winning; it happened to be the tank crew. If sacrificing your life for what you believe in–and for the good of others–isn’t Christian, than what is?

Yes, there are cliches. The part where Norman is forced to kill the German POW was overdone and not really necessary (just as the scene where the surrendering Germans are gunned down in Private Ryan was unnecessary). It’s one scene in an otherwise superb film. Jon Bernthal seems typecast as playing jerk Southerners, but jerks exist in real life and in war.

In short, it’s a realistic war movie that shows just how dangerous it was for American tank crews, and how brave Americans can be when pressed to the wall. It certainly doesn’t portray the Germans as anything more or less than they were, and draws no moral equivalence between Americans and them.

I feel like I watched a different movie. Debbie, you usually get things spot on, but I’m afraid I’ve got to vehemently disagree with you here. Luckily, we still live in a nation where we can do that…so far, anyhow.

S: Wow. Incredible that you would defend this crappy, anti-American movie and just FLAT-OUT LIE about its content. It’s quite clear that the German women are scared out of their minds AND that Brad Pitt’s character tells the Lerman character, “If you don’t take her into that bedroom, I will.” Lerman doesn’t want to. The girl doesn’t want to, either, but chooses Lerman over Pitt, when she realizes she has no choice and doesn’t want to be raped by Pitt. The other German woman, her cousin, wants to stop it from happening, which is when Pitt intervenes, stopping her from trying to prevent the rape and says, “They’re young and alive.” It’s quite clear it is NOT consensual. You sound like the most leftist ACLU attorney or a criminal defense attorney in a case where all the evidence is solid against the criminal, so you grasp at straws to defend the rape. If you saw a robbery, with two armed men taking what they wanted while fearful store owners complied, I’m sure you’d be telling us that the robbery was also “consensual” and that the store owners clearly wanted to give away their merchandise for free. So sad and frickin’ clueless. DS

sentinel28a on October 19, 2014 at 12:27 am

I have to disagree on “Fury”. It looked to me like an accurate representation of how a lot of people act under the stresses of war. The characters in the film were based on men who had been through three or four years of war. The only difference between then and now is when people piss on dead terrorists, is now it gets photographed or filmed on a cell phone and results in a court martial. It is unrealistic to think that anybody’s troops were perfect people during that war, or any war. I did not catch an anti America vibe off of this film, and I am quick to pick up on that sort of thing.

RT: Pissing on dead terrorists is hardly the same thing as murdering soldiers who’ve surrendered and raping women from the other side. Since you can’t tell the difference, it’s no wonder you didn’t get that this horrible movie was so obviously Anti-American. Clearly, you overestimate your quickness in picking things up. As I CLEARLY noted in my review, there are bad apples in every bunch (you didn’t pick up on that either–claiming I somehow insisted our troops were “perfect”), but this movie made Americans look like all bad apples, rotten to the core. The movie wasn’t “based” on anything. It was written by an anti-American, far-left writer who just flat-out made stuff up. Period. DS

RT on October 19, 2014 at 3:15 am

    I don’t think the movie’s writer, David Ayer, is officially far-left. He is a veteran who is generally believed to be conservative, and he even follows the IDF on twitter.

    B: Not sure what your definition of “officially far-left” is. But Ayer IS far-left. That he is a military veteran or follows the IDF on Twitter are distinctions without a difference. There are plenty of lefties who served in the US Armed Forces, BTW. Ever heard of John Kerry? Robin Williams, a big lefty, was pro-Israel, as are other left-wing celebs. Ayer was involved in several anti-American, far-left, horrible movies, including “Training Day,” “Sabotage,” and “Harsh Times.” Almost all of the movies he’s involved with attack institutions and figures of authority, including the U.S. military, police, DEA, Homeland Security, etc.–making them all look like murderous, raping, druggie thugs and criminals. Oh, but when it comes to REAL criminals, as in “The Fast and the Furious,” he glorifies them. He is your typical Hollywood anti-American liberal, as “Fury” made quite clear. DS

    Bee on October 19, 2014 at 2:20 pm

      “Officially” far-left means he actively claims to be liberal. “Unofficially” far-left means he claims to be conservative but is actually liberal (like John Nolte, perhaps). 🙂

      Bee on October 19, 2014 at 2:54 pm

      Debbie’s right, the list of lefties who served is endless. Here’s a couple more, Charlie “The Red” Rangel and Oliver Stone. My understanding is both men served honorably, but they certainly have done their best to undermine this country since their service ended.

      Alfredo from Puerto Rico on October 19, 2014 at 4:45 pm

    How about you give an opinion on war when you’ve been to war. When you’ve seen your friends in the unit killed by the same people you just captured, then you can make the decision whether or not you want to kill that person who just killed your friend. Americans killed surrendering soldiers just like the SS and regular German troops and the Japanese soldiers did. You’re not sent to combat to be nice and civil. You’re sent to kill people. In WWII it was Allied policy to bomb and kill civilians until the enemy government buckled. A thing which we’ve forgotten and that’s why we keep losing wars, because we’re unable to do what’s necessary.

    Hearts and Minds doesn’t work. The only way to win in Iraq and Afghanistan is to bomb their cities into dust and outlaw their religion and then line up every citizen who survived and interview them as their religious beliefs and their loyalty to a new government. Then build a bunch of huge military bases in both countries, reduce their women to prostitution and any men who’ve survived to gutless followers of the new policy. You have to bomb the civilian population until they are so tired of war that they denounce it as a practice.

    The sole occupation of the Japanese for a thousand years was warfare. America beat them so bad, they denounced warfare as a practice. And we didn’t do that by handing candy bars.

    And if you’re appalled at what I’ve just written, then maybe you should study what the United States did in WWII.

    HSICOC on November 14, 2014 at 2:05 pm

Re southern stereotypes: this used to bother me, however; Hollywood has so discredited itself (with crappola like Fury, etc, etc) that I ignore it now. People from all over the country are flocking to upstate South Carolina (I’m a native) and it is for the exact opposite reasons that morons like Pitt, Clooney and the rest of fascist, elitist Hollyweird types portray in their mind numbingly stupid movies. Y’all come! 🙂

Larry on October 19, 2014 at 9:32 am

Why is it so difficult for Hollywood to make a decent movie?

P. Aaron on October 19, 2014 at 4:48 pm

OT

Please don’t catch Ebola Debbie! That is all. Thank you. xxoo

theDebster on October 19, 2014 at 5:34 pm

Please don’t catch Ebola Debbie. That is all. Thank you.

theDebster on October 19, 2014 at 5:35 pm

Debbie, I can see why you deleted Nolte’s post, but, while it was up, it showed him for what he was. THAT was the best defense/attack he could muster? I’ve seen Peanutters who were more impressive.

skzion on October 19, 2014 at 6:15 pm

You know, it’s not hard to cripple Hollywood if everyone made a concerted effort to do so. I have spent all of $2 in the last year on movies (not a typo) and have seen a couple. If more and more people decided to do other things on the weekends, instead of blowing money on 2 hours of mindless junk, then we would hit them where it hurts – their pocketbooks.

Mr. x on October 20, 2014 at 2:30 am

I don’t often disagree with Debbie but I do with respect to Fury. I thought it was very pro-American. It simply depicted typical soldiers who have been at the front for 3 years. My main beef with the movie is that there are so many true heroic stories that could have been told (watch American Heroes Channel any night of the week), they didn’t have to make one up. The movie had the feel of a true story but it never claimed to be. Also the idea that 5 soldiers in a disabled tank, outnumbered 50 to 1, could slaughter most of an elite unit was unbelievable, as was the SS soldiers not capturing or killing Norman at the end.

John S on October 21, 2014 at 11:22 am

Notice how a movie like Fury could only be made in our time, when few of the WWII vets remain to defend themselves and their brothers in arms. Note also how all of the actors, writers and directors are from younger generations who lack any understanding of what WWII was really about and what it was like to be shipped overseas to fight our enemies. It’s just more revisionist history from the flaming Left idiots in Commie-wood.

Phillip Slepian on October 22, 2014 at 9:18 am

Saw Fury and didn’t come away with any concern for what was shown. The tank crew were shown as a close group of guys on the verge of madness driven by their prolonged exposure to the horrors of battle. Pitt’s character was the father figure providing the glue to somehow hold the group together. The brotherhood and courage in the face of overwhelming odds brings home the American spirit of do or die. I found it to be excellent and not demeaning in any way. Minor lapses of civility not withstanding.

Dennnis Walcott on October 23, 2014 at 5:35 pm

How about you give an opinion on war when you’ve been to war. When you’ve seen your friends in the unit killed by the same people you just captured, then you can make the decision whether or not you want to kill that person who just killed your friend. Americans killed surrendering soldiers just like the SS and regular German troops and the Japanese soldiers did. You’re not sent to combat to be nice and civil. You’re sent to kill people. In WWII it was Allied policy to bomb and kill civilians until the enemy government buckled. A thing which we’ve forgotten and that’s why we keep losing wars, because we’re unable to do what’s necessary.

Hearts and Minds doesn’t work. The only way to win in Iraq and Afghanistan is to bomb their cities into dust and outlaw their religion and then line up every citizen who survived and interview them as their religious beliefs and their loyalty to a new government. Then build a bunch of huge military bases in both countries, reduce their women to prostitution and any men who’ve survived to gutless followers of the new policy. You have to bomb the civilian population until they are so tired of war that they denounce it as a practice.

The sole occupation of the Japanese for a thousand years was warfare. America beat them so bad, they denounced warfare as a practice. And we didn’t do that by handing candy bars.

And if you’re appalled at what I’ve just written, then maybe you should study what the United States did in WWII.

HSICOC on November 14, 2014 at 2:05 pm

Mrs. Schlussel,
Thank you for all that you do. I rely specifically on your reviews when I am in question about or even thinking of seeing a show. Long time listener from the Mike Church Show.

Your depiction of Fury is spot on. However, I went to see the show just for the tanks.
I try to think that there are a few people in the world that still realize that movies are not real life. All movies, in my opinion, are just that. Slanted by the viewer recollection. Even the individuals who participated in the actual events only can provide so much detail and only in there field of view. I try not to put too much “value” on store line fact and just enjoy the show for what it is.
I realize that my thoughts are not the norm and that, more than likely, some will take this movie as fact and not just entertainment.

Just my two cents. Keep up the good fight.

Ed on November 17, 2014 at 5:00 pm

Some of you people are really simple minded. This movie was not anti-american. The Americans did a great deed in going to liberate Europe and this movie does not discredit that. Americans are too used to seeing glorified nationalist propaganda … Ahem… I mean american Hollywood war movies. The reality is that war and trauma can screw up good people. Reality is not pretty or glamourous . If anything, this movie shows why we need to take better care of veterans for the horrors they endured.

And for the record, I think Mr. ‘Palestina’ Pitt must know a thing or two more about human suffering than many misinformed Americans. Today’s Palestinians are a product of human violence and injustice.

Sarah on November 21, 2014 at 11:25 pm

    No, Sarah. He’s just as misinformed as you are.

    Greta on December 6, 2014 at 8:06 pm

lol.. youre a cunt debbie.. and youve always been one. I hope you get breast cancer.

flacco on December 7, 2014 at 10:57 pm

It was a terrible movie. I had never seen such an inaccurate portrayal of the American military. It’s a new generation of children that make movies about events of which they know nothing. I was appalled to see that a movie that shows American soldiers murdering POWs, forcibly coercing civilians, treating recruits with utter disdain, and dishing every military stereotype in the book received such high praise. My only consolation is that anyone who positively acclaimed this film has nothing to do with me.

Sincerely,
Someone who actually serves and knows what it’s like.

Jack Ryan on February 9, 2015 at 1:47 am

I was conned into watching St. Vincent. It is crap nine ways from Sunday and twice on weekdays. Don’t .. do .. it …

Jack on March 9, 2015 at 12:20 pm

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field