Fury

Buckle up – I have a lot of thoughts.

I’ll say it up front – I didn’t want to watch this movie. But, I told my husband to pick any movie he wanted and I would write a review about it. He had already seen the movie on a plane (usually the place we watch movies the other would never watch with us), but he wanted to watch it again with me.  And, I’ll say it, I’m glad he did.

Surprise: I did not like this movie. I’m not glad because I liked the movie. But if I only wrote about things I picked to watch, there would be nothing but happy butterflies and rainbows in the reviews, and we know how boring that would be. I’m glad I get to write about something I didn’t love.

At this point I’m pretty good at knowing what I’m going to enjoy, more or less. That’s not to say I can’t be surprised by a film. Frequently, I’ll like something more than I thought I would, or less than I thought I would. But, more often than not, I have a sense of the direction I’ll be going in.

So, going into this movie, I guessed that I probably wasn’t going to like it. From the moment I saw the trailers when it was released, my impression was “Why do we need this movie.” That being said, I was also extremely intrigued by Shia LaBeouf’s role in the film and had an overwhelming sense that I wanted him to succeed. I’ve always been a fan – he’s incredibly talented and interesting to watch. I’m so glad he’s making movies again.

Please know - I was ready to like this movie. I was ready to be surprised and discover a new, fantastic war film that I had over-looked. I really was.

In case this is your favorite movie, or your ready to tell me why it’s not that bad – there were absolutely things I loved about the movie! But, unfortunately, in this case, the good couldn’t compensate for the meh.

SPOILER ZONE

Right away, the soundscape and music felt modern. I actually appreciated this. I felt like the film was letting me know “Hey – this isn’t your Grandpa’s WWII movie.” That plus Brad Pitt breaking a dude’s neck in the first few minutes set the tone. So far, even though a bit jarring, I was looking forward to a WWII movie that I maybe hadn’t seen before. Again, I was ready to like this move.

Another thing that hit me immediately  – why do actors love to do “southern” accents in war movies? I don’t understand this and it almost always sounds forced to me. I’ll just say, I pretty much hated Jon Bernthal’s accent. Shia’s was ok. Brad’s came and went depending on how command-y he was being in the scene.  I just don’t understand why southern accents seem to be the go to – especially in war movies.

I have no real theory here other than some guesses: 1) they need a crutch for their performance or 2) it’s a weird socio-economic judgment about who they think soldiers are. An actor cast to play an architect doesn’t think “I bet he has a southern accent”. But when he’s a soldier – let’s lean into the country. It doesn’t sit well with me to be honest. Even if it’s a crutch, that’s not like, a better reason.

Listen, I have nothing against making a choice to do an accent in a film, especially if that choice is informed by some actual information we know about your character (I know most of these guys were written that way). But if you are going to do a southern accent, please get the regionality correct. Texas does not sound like Kentucky does not sound like Alabama does not sound like Virginia. And even within those states, there are regional differences. Actors (since I know you are totally listening): If you’re going to do this, treat the accent as if you are doing a British period piece and will be judged for the accuracy - study the accent and actually do it for real. For Real. Not as an after thought.

Changing gears – I did actually love the claustrophobic nature that much of this film has. The time we actually spend in the tank is cramped and really ramps up the tension in a great way. While we do get a lot of this from the movie, but I kept wanting even more. To me, this is what makes this film different from every other (so many) WWII movie. The focus on the tank was so interesting to me.

Similarly, I loved the moments where we get to see the tanks in battle. I love watching how the soldiers fell in line behind them, the strategy of a tank battle. I WANTED MORE OF THIS!

What I wanted less of was blatantly obvious shots of the tank’s gun with the word FURY strategically placed. Honestly. We get it. FURY is the tank. After I think three of these shots in less than 20 minutes, I became annoyed. After I got to 8 shots, checked the time, and saw there were 45 minutes left - I just stopped counting. ONE would have felt heavy handed to me. Put it in the background. We will get it. We don’t need EVERY shot to have FURY strategically framed and in focus, even when it’s in the background.

While the tank battles were very cool, the rest of the fighting was… confusing? I swear – the gunfire looked like laser beams to me. I found it really distracting and truly baffling.

Shia’s performance was another bright spot in this film for me. I found him to be the most compelling and sincere of the whole team in the tank.  As I not so subtly alluded to earlier, the rest of the team (Brad Pitt included) seemed like they were play-acting as a rough southern guy who’s seen some shit. However, in his best moments, I actually did enjoy Brad Pitt’s performance. There’s one moment in particular towards the beginning of the film that I particularly love. It’s after he’s given what seems to me like a pretty standard performance as the leader of his tank team. Then, he takes a few steps away behind a truck, and his face completely shatters. This was some Grade A acting and a truly interesting moment. I remember thinking, if this is what they are going to do with this character, I’m here for it. Unfortunately, I don’t think they were very successful in where the character developed from here.

I think the problem for me is inconsistency. His performance ranges from layered and moving, to cartoonish.

Plus, I wish he could have left Lt. Aldo in Inglorious Basterds and found a different WWII character to portray here. We see some snippets of what might have been – like in the scene I mention above and in many of his interactions with Shia’s character.  But, once again, I was left wanted more.

As I’m rounding out my thoughts on performances: quick shout out to Jason Isaacs! Love him always and I was so happy to see him in this movie. (Just as American actors playing soldiers love to do southern accents, it seems Brits playing American LOVE to do a kind of New York-y accent.)

So, I can’t get any further without talking about what was an extremely problematic scene for me. When Logan Lerman and Brad Pitt go to the apartment of the two German women after their victory, my radar was UP right away.  We’ve already established up front that the soldiers believe German women will sleep with them for a cigarette. And from the moment the two soldiers enter the apartment, it’s clear that the women are terrified.  Of course they are. They realize they are probably going to have to sleep with these men or be shot or maybe both.

Then Brad Pitt’s character tells Norman “if you don’t sleep with the German girl, I will” (not a direct quote). Yikes. This girl obviously doesn’t want to have sex with anybody, but we are supposed to be glad it’s the gentle young guy rather than the rougher old guy?

She’s obviously not happy going into that bedroom, but somehow Norman touches her hand for a few moments and then she’s DTF? Then leaves the room happy and basically infatuated with him?

What is the point of this scene? Genuinely. Are they trying to show that even innocent Norman is capable of some questionable behavior after being in combat? The inevitability of the soul’s corruption after exposure to such evil and violence? Maybe that in war there are no moral absolutes, more grey than black and white, and everyone’s human?

Here’s my take – if your going to show me how everyone is corrupted in war time and truly want to show a darker side of war, then actually show that Logan Lerman’s character has raped the German girl. Let’s not magically change her from scared and unwilling to happy and (seemingly) consenting after a few moments of hand holding.

Plus, let’s be real on the consent front - any sex that this girl is having with an enemy soldier she just met and who she fears may kill her is not consensual. So, if were going to touch on the lack of moral absolutes in wartime, the corruption of an innocent soul, let’s show her with that context. Show her upset, unsure, afraid, resigned. I’d prefer the ambiguity, or a challenging scene, rather than what we got.  

And maybe that’s what they were going for instead. Wanting to show Norman is a “nice guy” who would never take advantage of women the other guys do. Well, if that’s the case, then they are way off. In that case you would show him not touching her at all. You wouldn’t (shouldn’t) show such a morally questionable action and then try to show, “well, it’s ok, because she’s smiling when she leaves the bedroom”.  It feels like the filmmakers are giving the audience an out and letting them know we don’t have to feel weird about what just happened.  Frankly, it’s irresponsible. Not to mention the less interesting film choice.

Of course, I understand there wasn’t the same awareness of consent in the 40’s. That’s kind of my point. Honestly, it seems that the bigger issue is that the filmmakers in 2014 didn’t seem have a solid awareness of consent or how problematic this scene was.

I’ll move off this topic for now, but suffice it to say, even if the rest of this film had been note-perfect, this scene would have ruined it for me. Problematic AF.

Moving on as promised…Fury’s “last stand” was, admittedly, cool as an action scene. But, like so much of this movie, it fell short on the emotional pull for me. I loved the idea of the Trojan Tank. I loved the idea of a last stand. I love the idea of the few against the many.

But, it’s a tall order to keep the emotional stakes high when right before the battle, the whole team gives each other a nod saying they are willing, ready and expecting to die. I’m not saying it can’t be done, but it’s hard to make us care if these folks live or die when they don’t seem to care themselves. Granted, they probably do care, it’s just that they don’t expect to and they are ok with this.  Plus, the movie spent so much time showing us how dark and damaged this team was, that by the end, I’m not even that sad to see any of them go (with Shia’s character excepted maybe).

After reflecting on this movie for longer than I ever thought I would, I think what I keep coming back to is this: I can see that they were trying to go for a grittier, darker WWII movie with the Tank as the backdrop / structure. But, rather than just go fully into the unique and interesting film that that would be, I felt they kept leaning on war movie tropes in spite of themselves. It felt to me like they were hedging without fully following their idea through to fruition. Or, maybe there was confusion on what the idea of this film even was.

The most frustrating thing is that there was so much potential in this movie – a gritty WWII movie? One that focuses on the un-sung heroes operating tanks on the front line? Doing the dirty work? Maybe with a few anti-heroes in there? I’m here for it… In theory. The problem is, the meat and potatoes that filled out this concept in the movie just didn’t work for me.

THE BOTTOM LINE:

If you love war movies in general, or WWII movies specifically, you will probably enjoy this. Otherwise, skip it. There are countless examples of better and more interesting looks at WWII and honestly, I don’t think this one is worth our time. The positives (SHIA’s performance, some cool tank battles) aren’t quite enough to outweigh the negatives here.