T-34 Movie Trailer

14 Responses to T-34 Movie Trailer

1. ERWIN F SELL says:

   August 14, 2018 at 4:48 PM

   Putin russian propaganda film had increase w many super heroes war movies made recently. …
   There comic movies x me..
   My thought.
   Best

   Reply
2. Mark T. says:

   August 14, 2018 at 5:11 PM

   The recruiting prisoners to drive the tank thing makes it seem like they might have stolen some ideas from the Sven Hassel novels and The Dirty Dozen. I’ve seen a lot of those Russian WW2 films and propaganda or not, they are very entertaining. “White Tiger” is probably my favorite. I’m more used to East Front stories from the German POV like Cross of Iron, Sven Hassell books and the 1993 Stalingrad, but the Russians know how to make darn good war movies.

   Reply
3. denitz says:

   August 15, 2018 at 4:51 AM

   What is good for ’60, strange for 21st century…

   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lark_(1965_film)

   Reply
4. r smith says:

   August 15, 2018 at 12:35 PM

   me and several hundred others really appreciate,,,it,,

   Reply
5. Greg Liska says:

   August 16, 2018 at 8:19 AM

   Another war movie with over-the-top CGI and yet another tank duel done at pistol duel distance. Absurd. As to the plot, if it’s even 10% based on actual events, I’d be surprised. My opinion, don’t let it stop you from enjoying the film.

   Reply
   • admin says:

     August 16, 2018 at 8:30 AM

     I saw an article on it in one of the movie trade paper thought it might be of interest to someone. Most movies are over the top anymore.

     Reply
   • Don Perkins says:

     August 16, 2018 at 8:53 AM

     Greg, what was your opinion of “Fury”, with Brad Pitt?

     My own opinion, admittedly only semi-informed as to armor tactics, is that tanks do not typically operate singly, in isolation from other tanks, or without infantry support.

     But whether that part of the movie was realistic, I still thought other parts were, and that the movie was entertaining, even though I felt the movie director made the newly assigned clerk act a little too babyish.

     Reply
   • ERWIN F SELL says:

     August 16, 2018 at 9:08 AM

     That is why I enjoy SFC movies more…
     Best

     Reply
6. Greg Liska says:

   August 17, 2018 at 10:52 PM

   I described Fury as the worst movie with the best props I’d ever seen. I’ll try to be brief about the many parts that made me call BS.
   1. The disgusting behavior of the crew and the LaBamba facial hair on the Hispanic guy was out of character with the 1940’s. With all the effort to make it time period, they had them talking and acting like it was a GWOT battle.
   2. What good would a completely untrained clerk be to a tank crew? He would have had a week to get shown what was what before they stuck him out there. The job is simple, he just would have to learn the other positions on the tank with time.
   3. The attack on the prepared German defenses started out looking good, but how did those PAK-40’s just keep missing, when they had been hitting stuff all day, as per the CO that briefed Brad? You see the hulks of the M-3 halftracks out there, but not one tank got anything more than crap knocked off the bustle rack. This could have been saved if: They called in arty and/or called smoke in from that mortar platoon that they PASSED BY when they went to see the CO.
   4. The ‘kill an SS man’ thing has a basis in truth. A lot of allied soldiers had that quest, but it was never done so out in the open. That was just a big dramatic scene that Hollywood simply must have. Nobody was going to force you to do it. With an element that big, where in Hell were the officers or senior NCOs to get handle on that crap? For that matter, where were they EVER? There’s just this one guy they go see who’s comfortably out of the fight. No CPTs, no LT’s, no PLT SGTs, nothing. Everywhere Brad goes, he seems to just take charge.
   5. Having a single Tiger I out there was clearly possible that late in the war, the absurd 5 meter range fight was absurd. That would have happened at 300 meters with the M-4 ducking around buildings and trees. They could have made this a great and credible scene, but drama won out over authenticity.
   6. That whole sordid scene in the town with its unnecessary sex and crude behavior of the crew was over the top. I’m not saying we behaved like angels, but the manner in which it was done, the openness of it, the scope of it, was highly unlikely. Once again, where were the officers and senior NCOs? WWII or not, I personally have not seen US soldiers behave like that. Maybe not because they wouldn’t, but because they couldn’t. Leaders doing their jobs. I’ve got 11 combat tours and I’ve never seen anything like that and from all the interviews, discussions and readings I’ve done on WWII, morally it was even less likely.
   Then there’s that final battle…..Jeez! OK, why would you LET them walk up on you before you start to defend yourself? Knowing that the tank has close-in blind spots and knowing the Germans had the very best hand-held AT weapons in the world and in large numbers? Once again, they find themselves with no indirect fire available or radio contact with any other units. That’s NOT how it’s done. But let’s buy off on that unlikely scenario for a bit. Here’s what they should have done to make it look like they were more than just a crippled tank, and stall off the enemy for a few hours: dismount one or both of the MGs, set them in covered and concealed positions where they can mutually support each other. The Germans crest the hill, they get hit with a tank main gun and they get MG fire from the woods on the left and the right. “Scheisse!” Cries Sturmbahnfuehrer Rotznase, “Ein Panzer und Es gibt Infantrie im Wald!” He thinks there’s infantry out there hiding in the woods. What will he do? Try to either flank them or clear one side out to get to the tank with an AT weapon. That’ll buy you an hour as they put together a plan and then try to maneuver through the woods. Now, displace the MGs, either forwards or backwards, wider or narrower front with regards to the tank’s position, be where they don’t think you are and surprise them. They may back off. It may buy you another hour. If you get them to attack in the right place, the tank main gun could assist you in making them regret it. Didn’t bring the tripods for the MGs? Improvise and also use those Thompson SMGs you have to make more noise and increase your volume of fire. The idea is to seem like you’re much more than you are and get them cautious. After that: LEAVE THE TANK. It was NOT Brad’s ‘home’ for the whole war. That is a very late model M-4A3. There was nothing like that N. Africa or Sicily and was a late show in Italy, too.
   That movie was originally supposed to be about a true story. The last surviving vet that the story was based on said, “I never saw nothing (sic) like that”. Hollyweird took what could have been a tribute to those vets and turned it into garbage. There would still have been plenty of room for their standard ‘War is bad’ message. The telling of the story truthfully would have made that statement clearly enough. I apologize for the rant. I sincerely tried to be brief.

   Reply
   • Wayne W says:

     August 18, 2018 at 1:06 AM

     What Greg said, totally.

     I haven’t been able to watch it a second time when it was on TV.

     I don’t have nearly the time in combat Greg has had, but I have been deployed and had some interesting experiences – even got myself clinically killed jumping in a training exercise. Still, I’ve always felt humbled by the generation(s) of soldiers who preceded me and came after.

     One thing I will add is that I’m sick and tired of Hollywood showing our troops as a bunch of war criminals. Maybe it’s the fights I got into in high school when my dad and brother were called baby killers because they were in the Army and in Nam. Maybe it was being called a baby killer myself as late as 1977 not five minutes after landing at JFK on leave after two years in Germany.

     Stuff happens in combat – as one person once put it it’s hard to turn the “kill” off at will. Most incidents involving US soldiers appear to have occurred in the heat of the moment and tend to be isolated at that. It would not have been so open as Greg has said.

     I’ve tried to give the producers and writers the benefit of the doubt by thinking they were trying to portray the way continuous combat dehumanizes men. Maybe they were trying to make a statement. The problem is, it appears they had no idea of what they were talking about and what they were dealing with. They end up adding to the perception of soldiers (and by that I’m talking about anyone in uniform) as being some sort of animals or machines – the term I heard a lot in the 60s and 70s was “green machine – trained to kill!”

     I’m not saying they shouldn’t have had that scene if it reflected a reality of the war – but I DO have a problem with the idea of portraying the incidents in that town as being accepted and normal – I think our veterans living and dead deserve better than that. But that’s just me.

     Reply
   • ERWIN F SELL says:

     August 18, 2018 at 7:44 PM

     Greg i agree almost 100 % with al you say and you are very well correct step by step,in fact i left before movie end during the zombie WSS attack on sherman.
     as can not take more and later saw in TV the rest after …
     In my opinion the director mix a video game call of duty with the part of a movie (desert rats ) where a lonely tank crew stand and defeat an entire German army unit for water .but director brain was drunk playing zombies games during production and direction at all time .
     it amaze me how much money is spend in such trash today with so much technology and resources .
     Even so the movie used many realistic tanks else the mix hybrid of various Sherman’s at that stage of the war in american units platoon level looks odd to me as well all tactical data you explained already as well .
     Yet i like add my rant if is ok and apologize to those dont like or not accord as is my view only please
     The movie use laser color tracer to differentiate who is shooting AKA star wars effect and non realist of course.
     the beginning was so ridiculous with a prussian uniformed pre WW2 german officer riding a horse to be kill by a cowboy off a sherman but i assume was intended in figures way ,not realist so i had to lough on that.
     the PK38/40 not penetrating and hitting the sherman point blank several times is very absurd but more absurd is the sherman attacking head on a already tested AT opposition,never was done as that but using either air force or artillery cover of overpowering it with either before and then using outflanking approach with infantry and armor .
     The Tiger was used as a long lange AT killer and it superior long large 88mm was the main purpose to use it in a hide position.The tiger will never advance towards a enemy head on but use static or try reverse/retreat as normal tactic if was being attacked by several others tanks,no need to advance to face odds as it will lose it advantage of distance .The sherman indeed could penetrate the front tiger at 200 meters and was done ,the TIGER was non a bunker wall ,the front was not easy penetrated at long and medium range but below 200 meters as shown in films could be easy using standard ordnance from any 75/76 mm.In the film the sherman can not even penetrate the sides at point blank=FALSE very wrong and false .
     Simple easy extracted data had been posted in this link to explain same i say.

     http://knowledgeglue.com/dispelling-myths-surrounding-m4-sherman/

     Mr Brad Pitt happy pretty face can not be even showed with blood after several grenades explode inside his tank and the Other crew take a blast from a Panzerfaust and looks intact plus stop the Faustpatrone from further damage.False trash again .
     The german SS unit approaching use few napoleonic head on approach scout instead use outflanking maneuvers and the Panzerfaust are not used till very late night apparently they are too heavy to be used from beginning .So wrong !!!THEY LOOKS like zombies wasp around a car .so funny made …
     More important the sherman has not IMPORTANT purpose in its position with death tracks and infantry no need to destroy it as the entire surrounding area hikes/hills.Would it be position in a bridge entrance or town entrance maybe pose a threat .But it was not .So entire attack in tank is a waste x nothing .=zombie hungry attack .
     Then at the end WSS soldier let the only survivor alive after losing s many his kamerdanens !!???What in Hell was that !!?
     The entire language used in film is off era complete ..the soldiers looks as like wasted US murders from dirt dozen not true US honorable soldiers ,WITH is that about !!!
     The building where the womens are is only place a “”HUGE mortar single shell destroy one building in town and that is it ,so are germans wasting one Huge cannon mortar shell for fun ,testing or what!?
     The more logic would had been a series of shells falling in town as typical ,not a single particular lucky bad shot that kill the girl and mother and they -claim is a “mortar”!?(WOW! ) that is a hell of big mortar as knock down and entire in good condition stone brick building .

     i can go on x days but as expert Greg says not worth continued…
     my thoughts..

     Reply
     • admin says:

       August 18, 2018 at 8:18 PM

       I pass on it in the movies and only have watch bits of it on tv. I have passed on that as well as 300 and Rise of the 300.
       If you like any of those movies great. I will pass on them.

       Reply
7. Greg Liska says:

   August 18, 2018 at 6:56 AM

   Thank you, Wayne! I’d like to add that when Hollywood does this garbage, it has the opposite effect. Instead of it making the acts seem so horrible, it sends the message to young potential soldiers and the populace at large, that this is ‘how it is’ and just OK. It isn’t and that’s a huge part of why discipline is so important, it’s why an army is not a leaderless mob.

   Reply
   • Wayne W says:

     August 18, 2018 at 10:53 AM

     Once more I find myself in total agreement with you Greg. I am aware of and know personally of incidents where US soldiers put their own lives at risk to avoid killing innocents and non-combatants. I am reminded of Navy LT Michael Murphy as probably the best known incident. Had he taken the attitude of the goobers in “Fury” he and his operators would still be alive. The expedient thing would have been to have killed those herders.

     I know wherever I’ve gone in service we would always get swarmed by local kids, from Germany – where I remember whenever we were training in the countryside the kids would swarm our positions as soon as school let out. I remember one joint NATO exercise we were on where the local kids ignored our French, British, and German allied soldiers to swarm around us – to third world nations where our intentions weren’t always peaceful.

     When we were in Grenada I remember the people dancing in the streets singing “God Bless America” after the curfew was lifted. The kids would come up with shopping bags getting C-ration and MRE (our first) goodies from troopers. But you never see Hollywood show that.

     I heard numerous stories from Vietnam vets like my dad and brother as well as guys I served with about how Charlie would use our “GI’s” “soft hearts” for children against them. My brother lost a buddy who was playing baseball with village kids. He was at bat and a kid tossed a hand grenade instead of the ball…

     Then there were numerous incidents of our guys handing out candy bars when a kid would pull a gun and shoot them. I could go on. I know from talking to some of the “kids” serving today who talk to me that similar stuff is going on today.

     Sorry to rant on – but that movie in particular hit a nerve with me – it is such an insult in my opinion.

     Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.