48 reviews
I normally watch and shrug off bad movies but this was so bad I have to ask why was it made in the first place? The acting was wooden; the dialog stilted as if written by a foreigner with limited American. Every cliché was there - heroic suicides; the trusty black sergeant; the foot on the mine; the evil Nazi. At every turn the plot was more and more incredible. The heroic mother whose children run off not once but twice. There was the ticking clock which ticked way beyond the deadline. There was the baddie surviving a direct hit from a bomb. The regulation fight to the death with knives.
I am 72 with too few hours left on this earth to waste on trash like this.
I am 72 with too few hours left on this earth to waste on trash like this.
- mwbell2000
- Nov 28, 2014
- Permalink
I'm not usually one to pick on small details or historical inaccuracy, but this was too much. Having wasted 90 minutes of my life, the least I could do now is help spare someone else from the same fate.
A point form summary of why/how this film is awful, in the order I noticed them when I was watching it.
Here's the last and arguably most laughable part. I'd almost suggest you get the movie simply for this part simply because of it near- comedic aspect.
That's all I can remember off the top of my head, but there's undoubtedly so much more.
A point form summary of why/how this film is awful, in the order I noticed them when I was watching it.
- the fireballs from when tanks fire at each other are glaringly obviously CGI animations and look completely unrealistic
- the soldiers shoot at each other while standing in front of their respective tanks, while those tanks fire at each other
- the Germans are unbelievably dumb and also can't shoot for their life (literally). They're also apparently using Soviet T-34 tanks.
- the Germans also speak English. To each other. They may throw in occasional German words, like "Ja, officer" or "Granate". You know, German phrases easily understood by a typical American audience. It's ridiculous. And it occurs repeatedly, constantly reminding you of how absurd this film is.
- when three German soldiers (one an officer with an STG assault rifle) see two Americans carrying small tanks of fuel, they prefer to run after the Americans while firing single shots (and missing all of them) instead of just stopping to get a clear shot at the enemy. Oh, did I mention the two groups were running about 5 meters apart?
- when kids head loud sounds, they may or may not randomly run away from the protection of their parents and friendly soldiers, out into the woods, getting themselves killed/captured
- if a sniper shoots directly at an American in an open field, the bullet somehow manages to ricochet off his helmet.
- killing several German fire teams is no sweat, but when you meet another in your way, the Americans decide that the 4 guys standing out in an open road is suddenly too much for them to take.
- sneaking around four guys on a road by going around through the forest apparently takes an extra 20 minutes, making that a non-option
Here's the last and arguably most laughable part. I'd almost suggest you get the movie simply for this part simply because of it near- comedic aspect.
- hitting someone's head with a small MP40 submachine gun will cause their head to become a pile of gory god knows what. I couldn't even see a face. It looked like the guy's head disappeared and there was some scattered mass blood, brains, and whatever else what where his head used to be. That's the result of an injured man hitting another man with a small metal object 3 times.
That's all I can remember off the top of my head, but there's undoubtedly so much more.
Ardennes Fury is a very poorly done movie that does more wrong than it does right, but ranking it in The Asylum consistently dubious filmography it is nowhere near their worst. It at least has some very nice scenery and some of the pacing is tolerable, but Ardennes Fury had a low-budget and had little time to be made and unfortunately it does show. There are worse-looking Asylum movies around, at least the scenery looks like scenery and not like someone's basement or a deserted factory, but the camera work and editing are incredibly rushed and erratic, the special effects are artificial at best and look like over-sized toys and the movie is shot far too drably. The music is loud but not dynamic and could have done with more pulse, some of it is overly-loud drone-like, the best parts not being very memorable. The dialogue has a lot of military jargon and they're often incorporated in a clumsy way, the script itself is very stilted and disjointedly structured. There is at least a story here, the problem is it is also very basic and repetitive, granted it's good to keep things simple sometimes but when not much happens it actually feels simplistic instead. The dramatic parts lack any kind of heart and veer on overwrought while the battle scenes are erratically edited and have very little spirit and intensity. Much has been said already about the inaccuracies there are here(as well as the kitchen-sink-like clichés Ardennes Fury has), but this review is not going to comment on them other than that some of the inaccuracies are so blatant and wrong that it's ridiculous but rather on the movie's merits(or lack of). The characters are too stock and underwritten to be interesting, and while there is effort to show some conflicts and consequences there's very little if any emotional depth behind them. The acting is stiff across the board especially from the villains, who are also overacted too and hugely unconvincing as Germans. Overall, The Asylum has done much worse than Ardennes Fury, but Ardennes Fury regardless of the effort it did make had very little good going for it. 2/10 Bethany Cox
- TheLittleSongbird
- Dec 10, 2014
- Permalink
This is an obvious attempt to confuse buyers who are looking for a major motion picture with a similar name. This is not the first time this has been done, nor will it likely be the last.The hasty DVD buyer, be it for himself or purchased as a gift, will see the prominent word "Fury" and think he's picked the right one.
This is a common scam and some two-bit "production company" will make a few bucks on this junk.
You can search the word "mockbusters" and find plenty of examples of copycat films and/or titles attempting to capitalize on the publicity and public interest about a quality, big budget film.
The sad part is that once purchased it will be too late for the victims of this deception.
This is a common scam and some two-bit "production company" will make a few bucks on this junk.
You can search the word "mockbusters" and find plenty of examples of copycat films and/or titles attempting to capitalize on the publicity and public interest about a quality, big budget film.
The sad part is that once purchased it will be too late for the victims of this deception.
- mharvey-3-910706
- Nov 28, 2014
- Permalink
It's hard to write 10 lines of text about this movie, there is absolutely no story, no action in this movie. Young boys with toy guns walking in the field, "fighting" in """big""" groups (3-4 solider per act). Toy tank shutting point blank range without hit! Germans in t34 with Russian marking, panzer iv made out of wood. Effects added in post processing by some kind of overlay layer? SonyVegas may by or any other Windows Home Movie Maker Amateur software. Absolutely no recoil on the guns. Poor acting, solider standing still in middle of the filed with no cover shouting with m1 to a tank. Mixed ww2 weapons with modern. Do not bay this move... please.
- tommy-public
- Nov 18, 2014
- Permalink
Is there such a thing a "C" movie? If not then there should be for Ardennes Fury. I watched the whole thing!! There should be a medal for that!!! There were technical problems with uniforms, equipment, weapons, tanks, vehicles and even jargon. "Copy that" is not the expression that would have been used in 1945. The combat scenes were strange to say the least. Combat scenes seemed to be more an exercise in sharpshooting. The actions of both the Americans and the Nazis were - strange/different. For example people were standing up in the movie where real soldiers would have had their faces in the dirt. There was a scene where a nun had stepped on a mine. What followed was "Everything you don't do with a mine". My only addition is that I found the movie totally unbelievable.
- gee_tee_01
- Nov 14, 2014
- Permalink
I mean, how can you do anything worse than this? A bunch of G.I. running around with rifles not knowing what to do, matched by a equally idiotic bunch of German with an idiot as a major who wanted to get important information from an ordinary private. Plus a good looking nun who got panicky at every turn of events, an old nun who had to step on a mine and two kids who ran around in a battlefield like they were in an amusement park! And the tanks! Oh God, you would think they could only shoot at point blank, and miss! I just cannot understand who would invest money into making such kind of crap.
And what is more, the whole time the weather was just perfect and there was not a single American plane in sight. Guess that is why the German can afford to take it easy and hang their clothes out to dry.
Anyway, if you want a love, watch this movie.
And what is more, the whole time the weather was just perfect and there was not a single American plane in sight. Guess that is why the German can afford to take it easy and hang their clothes out to dry.
Anyway, if you want a love, watch this movie.
I don't really see a point in making a full review of this movie as others have beaten me to it. The fact that it has a rating of 2 would imply that some children have watched it and that they also had access to the internet to click the IMDb scoring system. I gave it a "1" because I cannot choose zero!!
I managed to last five minutes before I turned it off.
Since watching this movie I have applied for the Medal of Honour because I feel I deserve it for actually lasting 5 minutes!! The worst part is that somehow I have to come up with at least 10 lines to write about this movie regardless of the fact that the title summary says it all!! Yes, it is that bad!
I managed to last five minutes before I turned it off.
Since watching this movie I have applied for the Medal of Honour because I feel I deserve it for actually lasting 5 minutes!! The worst part is that somehow I have to come up with at least 10 lines to write about this movie regardless of the fact that the title summary says it all!! Yes, it is that bad!
Worst WWII movie I have seen, unwatchable. I had to stop after just six minutes because of the historical inaccuracies.
* Germans fighting in what were obviously Soviet T-34 tanks * The "German" T-34s even had the invasion stripes on the turrets even though the fight was out in a field near some forest. The stripes were only used during the invasion of Berlin. * Three Tiger tanks were lined up abreast with maybe a meter between them. In fact two looked like their treads were touching they were so close together. * The editing made it look like one Sherman Easy Eight took out a Tiger with a frontal shot * The Sherman and the tiger were both in the open and maybe 50 meters apart at best.
* Germans fighting in what were obviously Soviet T-34 tanks * The "German" T-34s even had the invasion stripes on the turrets even though the fight was out in a field near some forest. The stripes were only used during the invasion of Berlin. * Three Tiger tanks were lined up abreast with maybe a meter between them. In fact two looked like their treads were touching they were so close together. * The editing made it look like one Sherman Easy Eight took out a Tiger with a frontal shot * The Sherman and the tiger were both in the open and maybe 50 meters apart at best.
- rick-877-440458
- Sep 30, 2016
- Permalink
Of the two previous reviews of this movie, one is semi-literate and the other slates the film on the basis of historical accuracy. Therefore the first should brush up on their language skills, and the other should get a life. This is a work of fiction, not a documentary. Of course it's historically inaccurate - it was made on a tiny budget in next to no time to cash in on the contemporary release of a similarly titled movie starring a certain Mr. Pitt. The charm of Ardennes Fury lies not in its accurate depiction of events, but in its sense of almost honest naiveté in respect of modern film making techniques. Yes, the battle scenes could probably use more than two tanks, and maybe the actors won't be bothering the Academy Awards judging panels anytime soon, but they were obviously having fun, and more importantly doing their best. The movie boasted a simple storyline, proper 'goodies' and 'baddies', and enough ingenuity to convince you that Alabama really was the Belgian woodlands.
There will be a lot of garbage written about this movie by people who completely miss the point of it - it's not meant to be taken seriously, it's a kick-back, brain-out-of-gear, enjoy-watching-the-Nazis-get-splattered 90 minutes of entertainment. It delivers what it promises, which is more than many films manage to do these days.
There will be a lot of garbage written about this movie by people who completely miss the point of it - it's not meant to be taken seriously, it's a kick-back, brain-out-of-gear, enjoy-watching-the-Nazis-get-splattered 90 minutes of entertainment. It delivers what it promises, which is more than many films manage to do these days.
- ianb330-112-344579
- Nov 16, 2014
- Permalink
My God People! Yes, the title is obviously similar to the blockbuster with similar release date; And yes, there are definite historical and other inaccuracies; They could have spent a LOT more money on tanks & other era equipment, even more on special effects and explosives to blow up the vintage & reproduction equipment they bought to satisfy the WWII history experts... BUT then the entire budget would have been gone in the first three minutes! OR, they could have opted to film on 16mm or even VHS as a trade-off! Maybe Asylum doesn't have a 100-million dollar budget and opted to go with a storyline rather than a reenactment of historical events. If that's what you want, it can be easily found in the volumes of WWII documentary films (then you would probably complain about the quality of the video). While Ardennes Fury probably will not end up being one of those classics that will be viewed by generations to come, neither will FURY, with it's 100M budget...
I agree with all the other posts but I also would like to say the German uniforms were mismatched bad. The officer wore a 3rd Ss isignia but the arm band didn't say totenkomp is appeared to be Adolf Hitler! What the hell was the fake truck that couldn't out run a tank that had what looked like the front of a dodge weapons carrier w a fake axle and a humvie bed! And firing an unloaded German m-g 42 out the bank! And the airplanes come on! Or the officer shoots the lady in the back from 5 feet but then it shows them 300 feet apart!! Should I go one.... Plz quit making films u suck! How old is the private getting tortured 35? Why are they they so unable to take a direct order rather than debate it? Why do they all clump up in a mob rather than spread out so they don't all die at once? Why do they burry the kid way out in the open fearing being shot? The Ss were the most furocious fighting force way better than ours just not enough of them and you make them look like the draft is idiots! You suck
- nogodnomasters
- Sep 8, 2018
- Permalink
- jasperkuijs
- Dec 19, 2014
- Permalink
It is a war movie made by the guys who makes films for scify and it shows, really poor cgi work and some pretty bad acting. However there are some good points one of the best is the bad guy played by Tino Struckmann he is a great actor in a little film, his performance is by far the best part of this film. Some tanks and guns but the bad cgi pulls me out of the scenes. I only hope Struckmann will be really appreciated for his performance and get a chance for bigger movies worthy of his talent. I get the idea they wanted to jump on the wagon of Fury but even on a low budget they could have done a bit better, most of the actors really were bad, and the effects should have been left out, if you cant afford to do cgi well don't do it at all.
- marchusweller
- Jun 5, 2016
- Permalink
- vancouverlandlord2013
- Aug 6, 2016
- Permalink
If I could rate this film with a -negative, it would do it more justice. This is an Asylum Films "Mockbuster" Asylum Films, known for their CGI, ridiculous plot lines, huge stable of "B" actors, is best watched if you have a knowledge of what to expect from Asylum, if you don't... You will feel riped off. The problem with this film is Asylum, is out of their element. Asylum should not attempt to do a "so called serious" film. Asylum, please stick to your successful formula. Si-Fi, Monsters, Giant killer Animals, Aliens, SHARKS, and; Major production "B" movies. Unknowing film watchers will not feel riped off, and might enjoy a great!.... terrible movie, if they know it's coming.
Long live Asylum. Kings of toung-in-cheek You got a love-um
Long live Asylum. Kings of toung-in-cheek You got a love-um
- paf3150-535-549509
- Aug 21, 2015
- Permalink
Ahh, how could i describe? Well ....
If there's one thing this movie can pass about the battlefield is the nauseating sentiment, the despair about humanity (today's, not even the barbarians of World War II). Sure after the war and his barbaric bestialities, here becomes the bestiality of modern times, and it is dumb stupid movies (HEEE applause!). And there are some outstanding stories about the great war, of course real histories, but real histories and real heros are not worth the audience. So they choose to create such demency, for the dements of modern times. Sure this one is the greathest crap. This movie is not even worth to call "sh*t", cause even the organic excrement is immensely more worth of merit than this toxic waste of a fu**** movie. This crap serves well for stupid children, some slaves of the television programs. The storyline is the dumbest one, putting inaccurate details and the ever present "cliché" of the "evil Nazis" (everytime is evil Nazis and never Germans), and actions in plain summer (the Ardennes offensive was in winter), the ugly 3d computer graphics, and all the deceivings for make a foul perverted idea from the past reality.
If there's one thing this movie can pass about the battlefield is the nauseating sentiment, the despair about humanity (today's, not even the barbarians of World War II). Sure after the war and his barbaric bestialities, here becomes the bestiality of modern times, and it is dumb stupid movies (HEEE applause!). And there are some outstanding stories about the great war, of course real histories, but real histories and real heros are not worth the audience. So they choose to create such demency, for the dements of modern times. Sure this one is the greathest crap. This movie is not even worth to call "sh*t", cause even the organic excrement is immensely more worth of merit than this toxic waste of a fu**** movie. This crap serves well for stupid children, some slaves of the television programs. The storyline is the dumbest one, putting inaccurate details and the ever present "cliché" of the "evil Nazis" (everytime is evil Nazis and never Germans), and actions in plain summer (the Ardennes offensive was in winter), the ugly 3d computer graphics, and all the deceivings for make a foul perverted idea from the past reality.
- spwyner-569-31055
- Jan 18, 2015
- Permalink
I was expecting the worst, but it turned out to be a pretty good movie. I see some complaining about the special effects, but I thought they were not bad at all. I am student of story writing and this story had a lot of good elements that made it worth watching. I further like the idea that it wasn't big budget Hollywood and still was able to put together a good show. A story about a group of soldiers who stand together against the odds is what makes classic war story.
I also like the fact the actors are relatively unknowns and they turned in good performances. If your a lover of war flicks than give this a try.
I also like the fact the actors are relatively unknowns and they turned in good performances. If your a lover of war flicks than give this a try.
*---------------this is a fast paced action packed movie. Yeah, it was done on a limited budget but so was citizen kane. Iget it people like to dump on asylum so screw their elitist ash asylum gives jobs to actors and lots of other people and their product is often entertaining like here
get over ur snobbish self.
The Asylum attempts to give us a mockbuster for the movie Fury, but it's bad, real bad, and not the so bad it's good bad, just bad.
Actually, to be more actuate, it's bland. It's so generically outline, and it has no spirit to it.
Forget the fact that the accents where badly done by the actors who needed to do them, and they had a series of actors who really did not look like soldiers at all. Forget that you can tell that the stunts and special effects were done for 100 bucks. forget about the fact that I'm sure they circled the same three trees 15 times as they traveled through "Nazi Germany". It's a mockbuster, so all of this can be forgiven. Doesn't help either that the tank in Fury was bas ass, but they most likely could not put that in the budget.
The bigger problem here is like Fury, despite it not being about the most current war, attempts to tug on everyone's feeling about the troops who went to war. Unlike Fury, they did a really half ass job at it. They just assumed we would all be on board because we all love our troops, and the idea of them risking their lives to save an orphanage (An Orphanage! Really? Maybe if one of the orphans had a puppy?). I know this movie is not met to be taken seriously but come on? Bad attempt at stringing are hearts.
Waste of time.
Actually, to be more actuate, it's bland. It's so generically outline, and it has no spirit to it.
Forget the fact that the accents where badly done by the actors who needed to do them, and they had a series of actors who really did not look like soldiers at all. Forget that you can tell that the stunts and special effects were done for 100 bucks. forget about the fact that I'm sure they circled the same three trees 15 times as they traveled through "Nazi Germany". It's a mockbuster, so all of this can be forgiven. Doesn't help either that the tank in Fury was bas ass, but they most likely could not put that in the budget.
The bigger problem here is like Fury, despite it not being about the most current war, attempts to tug on everyone's feeling about the troops who went to war. Unlike Fury, they did a really half ass job at it. They just assumed we would all be on board because we all love our troops, and the idea of them risking their lives to save an orphanage (An Orphanage! Really? Maybe if one of the orphans had a puppy?). I know this movie is not met to be taken seriously but come on? Bad attempt at stringing are hearts.
Waste of time.
- bbickley13-921-58664
- Jan 22, 2015
- Permalink