|
|
T-34
Feb 2, 2020 15:07:29 GMT -8
Post by timothylane on Feb 2, 2020 15:07:29 GMT -8
Much would depend on the tank. I've mentioned the incident in June 1941 when a KV-1 got onto the supply line of a German armored division and knocked out a dozen anti-tank guns, including an 88, before another 88 finally got it. But that was a heavily armored tank. There's a reason the Germans called the Sherman the Tommycooker.
But in war, as in other things, "time and chance happeneth to them all."
|
|
kungfuzu
Member
Posts: 10,469
Member is Online
|
T-34
Feb 2, 2020 17:45:55 GMT -8
Post by kungfuzu on Feb 2, 2020 17:45:55 GMT -8
The tank in the movie was a later version Sherman. The turret and gun were different from the first couple of models. I think this one looks like a British "Firefly."
|
|
|
|
T-34
Feb 2, 2020 20:24:21 GMT -8
Post by timothylane on Feb 2, 2020 20:24:21 GMT -8
The Firefly was a more powerful Sherman, with a gun comparable to the German 75/48 of the Panzer IV and antitank guns and the Soviet 76.2 mm antitank guns, though not as powerful as the Panther or Tiger. But I'm not sure the armor was better, and it still used highly flammable aviation gas for fuel.
|
|
|
|
T-34
Feb 3, 2020 7:58:40 GMT -8
Post by artraveler on Feb 3, 2020 7:58:40 GMT -8
I watched this several weeks ago. It was surprisingly good, although, the translation was a bit weird. The best way to watch this movie is to imagine it as a made in the USA movie in the 70s. It could just as easily be named Patton or Sherman instead of T-34.
Over the last few years the Russians have made some very good movies, Sophia series was one of the best, but others series and movies have been good. Most of them end up on Netflix. Yes, there is a propaganda element but it lacks the Soviet style conviction. For that you have to turn to Hollywood. Doesn't it seem strange to laud Russian entertainment as more free market than American ?
|
|
kungfuzu
Member
Posts: 10,469
Member is Online
|
T-34
Feb 3, 2020 15:44:48 GMT -8
Post by kungfuzu on Feb 3, 2020 15:44:48 GMT -8
I previously wrote:
Maybe not. It would seem that the movie might have been inspired by the heroism of this fellow.
|
|
|
|
T-34
Feb 3, 2020 16:40:29 GMT -8
Post by timothylane on Feb 3, 2020 16:40:29 GMT -8
Impressive. The Naktong was part of the Pusan perimeter (it's a long north-south river, so the northern line of the perimeter was not along the river). This is why the Army official history of the first two phases of the war was unimaginatively titled South to the Naktong, North to the Yalu.
I see no mention of which part of 9th Armored Kouma was in, and thus where he fought during the Battle of the Bulge. CCB under Bruce Clarke fought in defense of the important road/rail junction of St. Vith (Sankt Vith), probably the second most important junction in the battle zone after Bastogne. Clarke in fact was given charge of the overall defense of the town even though there were 2 division commanders there. I'm not sure where the rest of the division fought. Not defending Bastogne or in the Elsenborn ridge area, I think. Echternach, which the article mentioned, was at the southernmost part of the line initially attacked ("from Monschau to Echternach").
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,238
|
T-34
Feb 4, 2020 8:40:05 GMT -8
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 4, 2020 8:40:05 GMT -8
It did seem over-the-top, Mr. Kung. But I have little idea what actual battle is like. I’m going to assume movies/series such as “Band of Brothers” and “We Were Soldiers” are realistic portrayals. And I’m not sure that “Kelly’s Heroes” didn’t exist in pockets here and there.
There had to have been real-world John Wayne heroes and there were probably goofball officers such as played by Carrol O’Connor in “Kelly’s Heroes.”
In retrospect, I would put “Fury” as the kind of movie to see once but not again. Some movies are like that.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,238
|
T-34
Feb 4, 2020 9:15:16 GMT -8
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 4, 2020 9:15:16 GMT -8
The translation/dubbing was indeed terrible. Almost badly humorous. And you’re so right that this resembles an American movie from the 70’s. That means when it is mediocre, it is mediocre in a far less irritable way than modern movies.
|
|
kungfuzu
Member
Posts: 10,469
Member is Online
|
T-34
Feb 4, 2020 12:46:35 GMT -8
Post by kungfuzu on Feb 4, 2020 12:46:35 GMT -8
Nor do I. I can only go on what I have read and heard from the few men I knew who experienced combat and told me a bit about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by artraveler on Feb 4, 2020 14:29:59 GMT -8
But I have little idea what actual battle is like.
Band of Brothers, We were soldiers once and young and the opening of Saving Private Ryan are the closest to actual combat ever done on screen. What is missed is the human element, that is impossible to describe. Of the three we were soldiers, IMHO, comes closest but only in parts. Combat is a 24/7 total immersion until you're out of it. |
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,238
|
T-34
Feb 12, 2020 8:57:28 GMT -8
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 12, 2020 8:57:28 GMT -8
Yesterday I watched Panfilov’s 28 on Amazon Prime Video. It’s along the same lines as “T-34.” It’s pro-Russian (crowd-funded including Russian state support). It has bad American dubbing of the voices. And it’s somewhat on the low-budget side. “T-34” has a budget listed as $10,000,000 and “Panfilov’s 28” is listed as $1,700.000. Don’t get me wrong. I think they squeeze an awful lot out of that $1,700,000. The problem is that they are indeed squeezing. I don’t mind a pro-Russian film, even one that is apparently based on a complete myth. But the dialogue gets pretty corny. It’s as if Joseph Stalin is looking over everyone’s shoulder as they give the perfect pro-Russian, heroic answer. It all gets a bit much. Besides that, they do a poor job giving you a sense of the overall battle. There are some good and gritty scenes of the Russian soldiers existing in, and firing from, their heavily embattled trenches. But there is never any sense as to how 28 men and basically one magic machine gun could hold out against these forces. Apparently they never did, which is the reason. A Wiki article notes that this has been outed as a complete fabrication. They are meant to be a Grecian “300” but it lacks realism. But apparently it was good propaganda for the time and endures unto this day. So my note to Artler, in particular, is that if you liked “T-34,” watch this one only on a very rainy day. One reviewer says the budget for this film was actually $4.1 million, not $1.7. That may well be. But if his data is accurate, he further notes that the gross for this film in Russia was $5.8 million, so they weren’t much hot on it either. One honest reviewer (I consider all the 10-out-of-10 reviews to be dishonest) notes: Yes, basically all of the dialogue in this is boring. But when you do get to the actions scenes, the movie picks up. |
|
