a5c7b9f00b A grizzled tank commander makes tough decisions as he and his crew fight their way across Germany in April, 1945.
April, 1945. As the Allies make their final push in the European Theatre, a battle-hardened Army sergeant named Wardaddy commands a Sherman tank and his five-man crew on a deadly mission behind enemy lines. Outnumbered, out-gunned, and with a rookie soldier thrust into their platoon, Wardaddy and his men face overwhelming odds in their heroic attempts to strike at the heart of Nazi Germany.
I will not made many points on the cheesy last quarter of the movie, as there has been said enough on it. It just destroys this quite good war action movie.<br/><br/>But what really shocks me is the IMDb score of this mediocre stuff. I saw tons of war movies since I was a kid, but guys come one - 7,8 points for THIS?<br/><br/>It should be rated in average somewhere around 5 points and then it would be just fine for all the people how like such movies.<br/><br/>I totally lost any trust in the IMDb rating score as this one is far from reality, even covering different opinions and personal preferences. The end was just a joke, I never saw something stupid like this before.<br/><br/>Thinking of the strong break in the plot and storytelling in the last quarter, I felt like watching a new sort of &quot;From dusk till dawn&quot;.<br/><br/>Maybe that&#39;s it, how this movie should be seen; it&#39;s a trash movie.<br/><br/>The crossroad scene starts on a cloudy day, and 5 seconds later we got deepest night. WTF? Are we really supposed to be THAT stupid?
1. The level of violence: The level of violence in this movie is quite accurate. Hollywood has &quot;taught&quot; us in the 60s and 70s that the battles fought in WW2 were somehow of mild violence and conducted by &quot;gentlemen&quot; who were highly educated, mannered and fought with honor and respect for the opponent. We all know today that this &quot;portrait&quot; is light years away from what really happened then. In 1998 Steven Spielberg has &quot;destroyed&quot; this idealistic picture with the best war movie ever made, a movie in which the brutality of combat was shown almost at the &quot;correct&quot; level. Almost. This was later corrected in the Band of Brothers mini-series, which contains even more graphic and brutal scenes. But even in this 2 titles the portrayal and description of soldiers was &quot;softened&quot; and though they were not as well &quot;educated and mannered&quot; as their &quot;counterparts&quot; from the 60s and 70s movies, they were still too &quot;tenderhearted&quot; for their own good and completely not in tune with the times and with the magnitude of a world war. I am somehow astonished that some people are still &quot;shocked&quot; in the era of internet, Live TV and portable cameras by the brutality of the war and by the manner in which humans can slaughter each other. Just look at the violence, intensity and brutality of the 3 major wars of the last 10-11 years: the War in Iraq, the War in Afghanistan and the War in Syria. And these wars are &quot;limited&quot; wars, not world wars.<br/><br/>2. &quot;Summary&quot; executions: Some people talk about how in this movie the US soldiers kill unarmed German prisoners. There are 2 scenes in which captured Germans are killed apparently with no reason: one in which a German soldier is captured while wearing a US army uniform and another scene in which a SS officer is shot after he had surrendered. The first case is simple: any enemy soldier captured wearing an allied uniform has to be executed after interrogation or if the situation can&#39;t permit otherwise on the spot. This was the standard procedure on both sides, because once a soldier is dressing up in the uniform of the enemy he is no longer a simple soldier, he is an infiltrator and he must be punish exemplary. The second case is that of an SS officer shot dead after the US forces have captured a town. Before the US forces enter the town, bodies of German teenagers executed by hanging can be seen on the roadside. All these teenagers were executed by the SS officer that was later captured and killed, because they didn&#39;t want to &quot;fight for Germany&quot;. It must be emphasized that the SS members were treated differently than regular German army soldiers, primarily because their fanaticism was one of the last things that hinder the rapid capitulation of Germany at that time and secondly because in April 1945 most of the concentration camps were already discovered and the atrocities committed by the members of the SS were well known by all allied soldiers. That is the case for the so called &quot;Dachau liberation reprisals&quot; episode (check the history books or search online) that happened at the end of the war.<br/><br/>3. The US tank crew in the movie seem to be cold and brutal: Maybe, if you look at it from the outside. They are fighting in the War for 3 years now (1942 North African Campaign) and at the beginning of the film we find out that one of the crew members has just been killed. So it is normal to see them sad and not very interested in the outside world. Also they know very well that the War will end soon and are frustrated by the fanaticism of their enemies. All these feelings and manifestations are very legit and credible. Again the realism is there. To truly understand them and care about their suffering imagine that you are one of the original crew members, or imagine that you are the fresh recruit that &quot;has never seen the inside of a tank and who is just a typist trained to type 60 words a minute&quot;. Try to understand their sadness, their fury, the visible signs of post-traumatic stress disorder and their initial unwillingness to accept a new member in their &quot;family&quot; after 3 years of combat. Do that and at the end of the movie I guarantee your eyes will water.<br/><br/>4. Some combat scenes look exaggerated and not very realistic: Overall the combat scenes are very well made and quite realistic. If you analyze in detail the combat scenes from other great war movies like Saving Private Ryan, Band of Brothers mini-series, The Thin Red Line etc., you will also find some exaggerated things in them, but that is nothing uncommon, there will never be a war movie 100% accurate. Plus a war movie should make you feel very engaged in what you see and this is not possible without a little dose of extra drama, like the way in which this movie ends.
The film's best moments are those focused on combat, and Ayer does a tremendous job of creating the details of daily life for a combat tank team in the waning days of WWII.
His tank was the first one destroyed in the battle with the Tiger tank. These are not laser beams, they are &quot;tracer rounds&quot;. They are typically loaded in machine guns and tank shells as a way to determine where the rounds are actually firing. Should they miss, you can adjust your aim accordingly by watching the direction the round is firing. The average lifespan can&#39;t really be confirmed. But it is a generalization that Allied tank crews suffered heavy losses at the hands of the superior German armour, which is true. The Sherman tank was used by the Allies in every theatre of World War 2 and was famed for its speed, maneuverability, reliability, ease of mass production and ease of repair/maintenance. However, its&#39; initial 75mm, and later on 76mm gun, was generally incapable of penetrating the main armour of its&#39; German counterparts, the Panther, Tiger 1E, and later King Tiger. The Panther&#39;s high-velocity 75mm gun, and the Tiger and King Tiger&#39;s 88mm gun (initially designed for anti-aircraft roles) could easily defeat the Sherman&#39;s armoured protection, as could German infantry anti-tank weapons. The Sherman&#39;s high profile also made it comparatively easy to spot, and its&#39; use of a petrol (gasoline) engine gave it an unfortunate propensity to burst into flames when hit. British and Canadian troops nicknamed them &#39;Ronsons&#39; due to this fact in reference to a brand of cigarette lighters that are guaranteed to &#39;Light every time&#39;. The Germans rather more bluntly referred to them as &#39;Tommy cookers&#39;. The German tanks also used petrol engines, but one model of the Sherman, the M4A2, did use a diesel engine, but most of its production went to the US Marines in the Pacific, and the Russians.<br/><br/>You can find the armor stats for almost any armored fighting vehicle in history online. Look up the Tiger I, King Tiger, and the Panther; both later models had sloped armor which greatly added to deflecting armor piercing rounds, compared that with the Sherman. It was simply pitiful for the General in charge of Ground Forces, Lesley McNair, to be allowed to send so many soldiers into battle in such an inferior weapon, that was practically obsolescent after the introduction of the Tiger. But the Sherman was designed as an infantry support tank, not a tank-vs-tank unit, like its German opponents (and most modern-day &#39;main battle&#39; tanks).<br/><br/>Generally, German tanks were technically superior to Allied tanks. The problem the Germans had was that with a war on two fronts, and heavy Allied bombing, they simply couldn&#39;t produce the tanks quick enough. Their tanks were also over-engineered, and units produced towards the end of the war tended to break down too easily. Additionally, on the last year, they also ran out of manpower to crew the tanks. The Tiger tank was a heavy tank at 54 tonnes, versus the Sherman at 30-33.5 tonnes but (as shown by the film) it could only be knocked out by the Sherman&#39;s cannon at close quarters, from the side or behind where the armor was thinner. The Sherman could also do it with the specialized 76mm High-Velocity Armor-Piercing ammunition (type M93 HVAP) but this was in very limited supply, and priority went to the M36 &#39;Jackson&#39; and other tank destroyers. Battlefield comments from Normandy onwards showed that on average it took the loss of 7 Shermans to knock out one Tiger tank. The US did, however, have a lot more tanks than the Germans. The German antitank weapon called the Panzerfaust (seen in the film, being pulled from its packing crates in the darkness) was also greatly feared by Allied tank crews. The one-shot LAW-type device had a hollow charge and could knock out any Allied tank at close range (the Panzerschreck was a heavier reloadable bazooka-like weapon). During the last months of the war in Europe, the Allies also had greatly superior air power as well and this helped to negate the tank advantage on the ground that the Germans had. The film showcases the Sherman&#39;s main strengths in combat - bristling with machine guns (including the powerful .50 M2HB, nicknamed the &#39;Fifty&#39; or &#39;Ma Deuce&#39;) and its maneuverability, which made it an excellent infantry support weapon.<br/><br/>Its interesting to note that the tanks shown in the movie were a mixed bag: &#39;Fury&#39; was an M4A2E8 (76)W HVSS Sherman tank, and &#39;Lucy Sue&#39; an M4A2 Sherman, but as you don&#39;t see the engine decks, so for sake of the story, they could be mistaken for petrol-fueled units (the A2&#39;s carried a diesel powerplant. &#39;Matador&#39; is an M4E8 (76)W HVSS Sherman, &#39;Murder, Inc.&#39; an M4A4 Sherman, and &#39;Old Phyllis&#39; an M4A1 (76)W Sherman. All but Lucy Sue were later &#39;W&#39; or wet-stowage ammunition types, and only Matador and Fury had the main gun capable of doing serious damage to the Tiger, and the later HVSS wide suspension track system. They carefully did not use the up-gunned British Shermans, which got a powerful 17-pounder QF gun of equivalent calibre to the 76mm, but with considerably more penetration - this Sherman was called the Firefly.
Download Urduja full movie in hindi dubbed in Mp4Bolha Assassina movie downloadCyberzone telugu full movie download2nd Annual Dusty Rhodes Tag Team Classic: Round Two - Part Two telugu full movie downloadEpisode 1.61 full movie in hindi downloadBad Program online freeBulletproof full movie hd 720p free downloadSix full movie downloadReign full movie in hindi 720p downloadPaid in Blood download