Friday, December 5, 2014

2014: The Year in Film: "Fury" Review

The Second World War is easily one of the top 2 or 3 film settings in the history of film. We've seen WW2 done in just about every conceivable way.. and it's easy to see why. The scale of the war is virtually inconceivable to a modern audience, and the clear morality of the conflict makes it easy to tell re-envisioned or adapted versions of virtually any myth or archetypical heroic story by using the war as a backdrop.

David Ayer, the writer/director of Fury, cut his teeth on gritty LA crime dramas. He wrote Training Day, wrote the first Fast and Furious film, wrote and directed the underrated Harsh Times, and wrote and directed End of Watch, here we see a departure (although he did write U-571) with a World War 2 tank film. Ayer's films are violent, often brutal, and hyper-masculine, so it's exciting to see his take on a well-worn genre. Ayer has also been tapped to write and direct WB/DC's Suicide Squad, kind of a superhero twist on The Dirty Dozen, and I think that's kind of an inspired choice.

Here, we are dropped into Germany in April, 1945. The war is nearly over (indeed, it will end on May 8, although our characters don't know that) and our war-weary characters have fought their way into Germany itself. As they face increasingly desperate German defense in hostile territory, the seasoned tank unit is forced to accept a raw recruit due to personnel shortages. This recruit, Norman, (Logan Lerman) has zero training or experience, which is a bit of an issue for the rest of the crew, who have been together for years. The crew, led by "Wardaddy" (Brad Pitt, in a bleak take on his Aldo Raine character from Inglorious Basterds) finds itself tasked with defending an important crossroads at the main column's rear, and desperately trying to survive the war.

The Good: first, I don't think I've ever quite seen WW2 depicted in this way. It's become commonplace in our culture, already inclined to think of veterans in a positive light, to treat every member of the "greatest generation" in a venerated air of hushed respect. That's simplistic, morally simplistic, and quite frankly disrespectful to the millions of unique individuals who served during this time representing all shades of the human condition. This film treats its characters as flawed, dark, cynical but most of all believable human beings. They aren't trying to be heroes. They're guys who've seen a lot of horrible shit and just want to do their job and go home. The film is gritty, dark, and dirty, with everyone constantly covered in filth, mud, grease and blood, the way I imagine a tank crew in enemy territory in 1945 would have been. The action sequences are tremendously and impressively choreographed, and the film features the single finest tank battle I've ever seen depicted on screen. The narrative is tight, despite the long runtime, and it's not overly grand in scope, choosing to focus on "man on the ground" realism rather than large displays. But most of all, the highlight of this film are the performances, and two in particular. Brad Pitt is, at this point, maybe the most quietly assured movie star on the planet. He eases into his roles with aplomb and brings a truly remarkable depth and humanity to a damaged yet charismatic man who easily could have become a caricature. It's become commonplace to rip on Shia LaBeouf, and the guy is no-doubt a weirdo, but in this film he turns in a legitimately great performance as "bible", the tank's gunner and spiritual leader. He's nearly unrecognizable, missing teeth, scarred, mustached and covered in mud while mumbling most of his lines, but his character feels so incredibly true to life and delivers some of the film's most powerful moments. See below. Jon Berenthal (Shane from the Walking Dead) and Michael Pena are strong as well and Logan Lerman grows up before our very eyes on screen. The combat depicted is brutal, and the gallows humor between the men galling, and in a lot of ways this film feels like a war horror movie - which I suppose is what a good depiction of war should be. The violence and gore is occasionally shocking, but I suppose it probably is pretty shocking to see the things one sees in war. By the time of the film's climatic battle, we have spent so much time with these men so intimately, that we are incredibly invested in every shot... and the battle is infinitely better for it.



The Bad: if anything, it may be TOO gory, which could lead to a legitimate criticism of the film taking relish in its disturbing visuals. I don't think that's what the film is trying to do, but there are some horror-gore level visuals that can be a little upsetting. Additionally, I liked what Logan Lerman was doing by and large, but I don't think his character was interesting or compelling enough to match what Brad Pitt and Shia LaBeouf were up to. Granted, he's an audience cipher and our window into this world, but he's just not that interesting. Additionally, I think it's worth stating that I feel the film ultimately falls a little short of its goal.... there are occasional moments of true... grace? Beauty? And profound humanity.. but at its heart it falls short of greatness, and settles for "damn fine war movie"... which isn't so bad.

Ultimately, this is a poignant, powerful, occasionally upsetting and visually thrilling film. Fans of World War 2 or war movies in any way should not miss this one, as I feel that it's a valuable addition to the war canon. Don't come to see gallant heroes vanquish evil. Come to see human beings cope with hell on earth. And for a few really great actors do some really great work.

8/10.

No comments: