New WWII Film 'Fury' Features Last Working Tiger

World War II - Multimedia WWII Movies & Video Clips
#1

‘Fury’ Film Features Last Working WWII Tiger Tank
LiveScience.com
By Tanya Lewis, Staff Writer 11 hours ago

tiger-tank.jpg1412973255.jpg
tiger-tank.jpg1412973255.jpg575×521 71.9 KB

The original Tiger 131, the world’s last working Tiger I tank

The upcoming World War II film “Fury” puts tank warfare front and center in a depiction of the final Allied push into Germany in 1945.

In the movie, a U.S. Army sergeant (played by Brad Pitt) commands a medium-size Sherman tank in battle against a Nazi force with superior firepower, including a well-equipped Tiger I heavy tank. The film, which opens in theaters nationwide on Friday (Oct. 17), features the last working Tiger tank in the world.

The Sherman tank (officially called the Medium Tank, M4) was the most widely deployed tank in World War II. The workhorse vehicle was used by the U.S. Army, U.S. Marine Corps and the British, Canadian and Free French forces, according to the Encyclopaedia Britannica. Designed and built in the United States, a total of 49,324 Sherman tanks were made between 1942 and 1946. [7 Technologies That Transformed Warfare]

The M4 was a reliable tank, but the German Tiger heavy tanks outclassed it. The Tiger I (officially known as Panzerkampfwagen VI Tiger Ausf. H) was deployed on all German fronts during WWII. The formidable tank weighed 50 tons (54 metric tons) and was heavily armored. About 1,350Tiger tanks were produced in total, between August 1942 and August 1944.

During a scene in “Fury,” four M4 tanks go head-to-head with one Tiger I, and only one M4 survives the fight.

An M4 Sherman like the one featured in the film could penetrate the upper frontal hull of a Tiger 1 from between about 1,600 and 3,300 feet (500 meters and 1000 m), while the Tiger could knock out an M4 from the front at about 2,600 feet (800 m), according to a Tiger crew instruction manual.

Both tanks used in the film — the Sherman M4E8 and the Tiger 131 — are real, and belong to the Tank Museum in Bovington, England.

The Tiger 131 was built in Kassel, Germany, in February 1943 and was shipped to Tunisia to join the 504th German heavy tank battalion, according to the Tank Museum’s website. On April 21, 1943, the Tiger was taken out of action by a Churchill tank of the British 48th Royal Tank Regiment, and was captured and repaired. On Sept. 25, 1951, the Tiger was given to the Tank Museum.

The Tiger was “one of [the] most feared weapons unleashed by the Nazis,” capable of destroying an enemy tank from more than 1.2 miles (2 kilometers) away, Richard Smith, the Tank Museum’s director, told the BBC.

Yet despite its ferocity, the Tiger wasn’t invincible. Its tracks would freeze up with mud and snow in the winter, which Russian forces used to their advantage in battle. The tanks engines’ were underpowered, making them difficult to drive. The tanks also faced problems because of their large size. Since few bridges could handle the Tiger’s weight, the first version contained a snorkel that allowed the tanks to cross rivers up to 13 feet (4 m) deep, but later versions lacked this feature, according to the History Learning Site.

LINK

#2

Aw that’s why I have high hopes for this movie, I feel they have done so many things the correct way including the tactic with the four M4 Shermans and the many other things. The actors seems like they make a decent fit to their roles, so I am totally going to see it this Friday. Really Hyped about this! (kind of hoping it will the Saving Pvt. Ryan of this decade. in wise of popularity)

#3

World of Tanks has been pushing this movie out for a couple months now. Their even introducing a premium E8 “Fury” tank. I’ll probably go see it, but I’m skeptical about many things.

#4

I’m planning on seeing it, I just hope that they really do a good job on it, and keep the “Hollywood” to a minimum, and pay close attention to details. (though I believe that WOT would do a better job than Hollywood) :mrgreen:

#5

I always reserve judgment on movies like this until I see them - but this one sounds interesting, and I look forward to seeing it. Given the presence of Brad Pitt and co. I would not be too hopeful about “Hollywood” being absent, but I can tolerate a bit of it.

Interesting, the comment about four Shermans facing a Tiger, but only one surviving. I recall that the Allied experts worked out a cold-hearted calculation that suggested exactly this ratio. The idea was that Sherman #4 would get behind the Tiger and “hit 'em up the ***”, that is to say, at its weakest point. Taking on a Tiger in the open would have been a very bad idea even for improved-firepower versions like the “Firefly”. Also, I recall seeing a number of interviews with veteran Allied and German tankers, recorded in the 1980s and '90s. The Allied veterans recalled taking no encouragement, at least personally, from the fact that destroyed Shermans could be replaced much more quickly than Tigers, since they would in many cases end up being destroyed along with the replaceable Shermans. The German veterans were quite open about the Tiger’s drawbacks - mechanical unreliability, heavy fuel consumption, poor deployability, and so on. Asked the direct question, “which of the two, Tiger or Sherman, would you have preferred to be in in Normandy”, both groups opted unanimously for the Tiger. Best regards, JR.

#6

Note that the Netnanny on this site dislikes the word “***”. This could be a problem if anybody wants to talk about less members of the equine order … Not really kidding, JR.

#7

I went to see this movie today, and while there is more Hollywood in it than I care for, it is certainly worth seeing. The movie has some warts, and couple large ones at that. But, don’t let this stop you from seeing the movie, its well worth your time.
Normally when I go to the movie house, there is some background jabber by attendees, with this film all was quiet. visually, very well presented, good authentic mud everywhere. (A universal truth when Tanks are involved. ) Go see it. (don’t take your girlfriends though, unless they are big fans of Sam Peckinpah ) One spoiler, the Allies win. :mrgreen:

#8

I just saw it and thought that it was pretty good. In all honesty though, for the feats that the E8 accomplished they should have been in an E2…

#9

[QUOTE=JR*;193296]Note that the Netnanny on this site dislikes the word “***”. This could be a problem if anybody wants to talk about less members of the equine order … Not really kidding, JR.[/QUOTE
Use spaces between the letters, and it will accept them, or judiciously placed asterisks. I had similar trouble when posting about a local Civil War Fort Named ****erson, (D i c kerson.)

#10

I would agree, the Jumbo would have been better as long as it had been upgraded with the 76.2mm gun. It would have been little trouble to Hollywood the E8 into a Jumbo. (unless this story is based on actual experiences by members of an actual unit.) The one problem with it is that there were so few Jumbo’s produced. (256 IIRC) Even rarer than the Tiger I they encountered in the movie. Even being a much tougher target, the Jumbo was not impossible to stop, Cobra King of Bastogne fame, was damaged beyond salvage sometime after its Historic action. A combination of fire, and shell damage.

#11

True. But for the purposes of the amount of damage taken versus the amount of armor, the E8 would have been toasty bits halfway through the movie…

Also, a couple of other things that bothered me: In the middle of the final firefight the tank gets hit with a panzerfaust yet doesn’t explode, unlike the first tank to explode in the movie. And the AT guns covering the field were completely useless because reasons. Oh yeah, and Hollywood Time™ is a bit excessive.

#12

Those were some of the Warts I spoke of, a lot of convenience is exercised in this film. I had some issues with the fight between Fury, and the Tiger, the 76.2 mm gun was capable of much greater damage against the Tiger, and did not in fact need to be altogether behind it to get a shot through. There are many more warts, but keeping spoilers to a minimum, I won’t yet reveal any more of them yet.

#13

I saw the movie on Friday. I feel that there was a lot of things they did wrong but at the same time they did right. I like it so don’t let any of our opinions stop you for seeing the movie. Though the only thing that bugged me is two things; when the final fight occurred it went to evening to black as a cat night in like 20 secs and the fact that you can see Germans moving around the tank but no shooting from behind. Hopeful I didn’t give to much out.

#14

I learned that the movie will come to German cinemas not earlier than January 1, 2015. So I just read about the plot…sounds like regular Hollywood stuff to me…

#15

Despite the goofs in it, it is a good film, and anyone will find it worth their time, and coin to see it. If you like Sam Peckinpah style movies, (Cross of Iron for instance ) you will like this one. Very realistic, even more so than Peckinpah. Brad Pitt does an excellent job acting, and for the most part he gets lost in the character. I will point out the goofs via PM if someone wants to know, but not here, no spoilers. (except that the Allies win) :mrgreen:

PS, I would support this film if for no other reason than they felt it important to spend the time, and money to use the genuine Tiger Tank, as well as all of the other real equipment when making it. Though some authenticity is sacrificed to convenience, at least we can see the real things all muddy, and doing something, rather than just sitting all prim, and proper in a display.

#16

Stupid premise sitting there in a disabled tank.

Have not seen it, but if time allowed, a real crew would have fixed the track or simply bugged out.
The war was fini. Nothing to be accomplished being a martyr.
That is an early model Tiger and quite a bit different than a late war version.

The Brits spent a ton of money restoring it. There were some interesting pictorials on that.

#17

Saw it this weekend. Combat realism was not, in my opinion, a high priority: e.g., soldiers armed with a panzerfaust close to about 20-30 feet to fire the weapon from the middle of a road, rather than firing it from 30 meters away safely in the brush. Another brilliant tactic: let’s leave the extra ammo for the hull MG outside the tank! Plot developments were often predictable. Still, the movie was enjoyable if you just went with it.

While not discounting the possibility of a field mount, I was wondering about the M4 having both a .30 and .50 AA MG on the turret top. Has that any basis in reality (especially in April '45, when the Luftwaffe was such a “frequent” visitor to the skies)? I scrolled through a lot of pictures, and didn’t see a single tank so well supplied.

#18

There were reasons for the crew not leaving, but no spoilers, so you’ll have to see it. It is worth seeing, despite the screw-ups.

#19

Just had a look at the Bovington Tank Museum website. They are making great play of the advantages of lending Tiger 131 to the producers of “Fury” - and why not ? Bovington is already a huge museum attraction (in spite of its location in remote Dorset), and this can only promote its educational and tourism attraction.

As regards the movie - I have not seen it yet, and still look forward to doing so. However … the movie scenario posted on the Bovington Museum’s main site is hardly promising - looks a lot more improbable (to say the least) than that of “Cross of Iron” -

“In the film, it is 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. The film is written and directed by David Ayer and produced by Bill Block, David Ayer, John Lesher, and Ethan Smith.”.

Well, it should still be interesting. Best regards, JR. PS - for anyone who has not done so, a look at www.tiger-tank.com (the Bovington project website for the restoration of Tiger 131) is very, very well worth a look. Best regards, JR.

#20

Though they really hated the SS. I don’t think in reality they would of stayed in the tank and even before that, when facing the tiger; they should have turned back and told them "hey the other 3 Sherman tanks were knocked out we can’t hold the point. They would have sent some infantry I bet along with fury if they went back. Just a opinion, I though of while talking to some other guys about the movie. I feel as if they did really good at the beginning but towards the end it kind of went a like downhill. Still really flipped good mates!