This movie is suck ! :D That tank you see in this movie is Tiger 1 . And the Tigers don't hunt alone , they hunt the allies with their pack ( a division maybe) :))
@olliephelan its a PTRD 1941. a 14.5mm (bigger then barret 50 which is 12.5mm) anti tank rifle. though in reality it couldnt penetrate a tiger, but it could penetrate Panzer IVs within 100m
wars are fought because stupid men and women, worship other men, any man who picks up a gun against another man, deserves to die. Self defense is the acceptation, but all wars are political, kill every man who orders you to war and wars will end,
@GOPrEvil From an OLD comment about war .You said "self defense is an exception" . Every war is fought under the PRETENCE of self defense. When the Romans conquered Italy they had to defend against the Goths. When they conquered GAUL they had to defend against IBERIA , then N Africa and on + On. Even the USA claims its "defending "itself when they invade VIETNAM / Iraq/ afghanistan .
You could replace all the politicians with peace loving "doves" , theyd STILL justify war. Human Nature
For the first time tanks "Tiger I» have gone into battle August 29, 1942 at Mga station near Leningrad, and began to be used en masse from the battle of Kursk, the Wehrmacht and used SS troops until the end of World War II. At the time of the machine is the strongest of arms and booking of all the tanks of the world, a position maintained until at least November 1943.
@VladNPR well , id imagine theyd have a T34 chassis etc . but its modelled on the tiger (as far as i can see ). Its "SAVING PRIVATE RYAN " . which shows a hell of a lot of slaughter on the beach and in finial scene they have a perfect AMBUSH , yet theres still only 4 left. I DO AGREE that Spielberg etc try to show germans as idiots. But hes an emotional jew. But maybe your using confirmation BIAS. We see 2 US soldiers crying for their MOTHERS ! Have you seen THIN RED LINE
@Panzermeyer123 That wasn't the point of the movie - it's not a historical or documentary...events of war are entourage to the story line...at least you saw some real tanks not computer models...and if you are from U.S. tell me, do you know much about GPW? I guess not...so what's the difference for you? Look at your war movies - good guys are always better then "noob" enemies, am I right? If you prefer nazi as good guys - you should watch some other movies
@EJCorwin Yes that are real tanks, t-55 i think, but dont realy know. I am from Germany^^whe have no war movies :D only the americans, like James Ryan and so rubbish. I havent say nazis are good guys ?!? i hate nazis, but in all fims the soldiers of wehrmacht and waffen-ss are stupid and brutal guys . also thousends of them dies, but only two americans or so...its all to patriotic from the land wich make the movie.theres no film which show the reality...all soldiers where the same
what about " das boat" and "undegang" (downfall) . Its true about film propaganda. they usually come out when the US needs public support for their wars . But in a film about allied troops you cant kill off all the main characters.
@olliephelan that arent german tigers! :D Becouse, there is not one wich is functional for films. all are new build, like the "tiger" in Soldier James Ryan...(for exaple from reeenactement groups like Stahlkrieger in England, their " tiger is t55, their sdkfz is from tschecheslowakai after war...and in that boat you see nothing patriotic for germany...and in the untergang, you see only germans dieing.and also the main characters...:P and also that are no war films in my mind.sry buts my opinion
@MarvinS1982He didnt blow it up...More of got a good shot off and hit the tanks' engines or gas tanks or something that woulda caused an explosion. It still moved and retreated didnt it
@MarvinS1982 Tiger had very thin armor on its engine, if you weren't watching that's what he hit at 35 mm of penetration an AT rifle could easily take out practically any tank's engine from that angle.
I dont think its Tiger . Tigers were rare on the battlefield and often allied and soviet soldiers confused them with Panzer IVs.Panzer IVs had relatively thin armour espacially on the sides. The anti-tank rifle used has 14,5 mm caliber ( 0.50 cal is 12,7 mm) and could penetrate up to 40 mm of armour at 100 m
Typical bad war-scene directing. The soldiers run without hesitation toward the camera, uniformly spaced, holding their weapons in awkward firing poisitions--instead of advancing hunched over in cautious rushes with long pauses to observe and return fire. The ones who get hit spin around, throw out their arms, yell and take ridiculous, theatric, grade-school falls instead of dropping like pole-axed steers, which is what would really happen. Pathetic. Why do directors suck so badly at this?
06:20 : No way an anti-tank rifle could knock out a Tiger I. Those could pierce up to 15 mm - 20 mm of armor. And a Tiger I side armor is at least 30 mm thick.
Anti-tank rifle are good for WW1-type armor or for WW2 "soft" vehicles, but not for armor like Panzer IV, V Tiger I, Sherman, S-35, etc.
@Briselance And no way could a grenade bunch knock one out either! It took 9 shermans to conqour one of these beasts when they first were unleashed onto northern france!
Well, concerning the bunch grenade, it might still be very useful, even against a Tiger I, at the condition of having the bunch grebade explode on the ventilation grids, at the back of the tank, i.e. on the "roof" of the motor compartment. In any case, a bunch grenade (7 grenades like the German "potato mashers" tied together) would be much more useful used on the tank's weakest point : it's rear.
Concerning the ratio, you're quite right. In Normandy, the average was about 5 allied tanks - mostly Shermans - destroyed (and many crewmen killed too, alas) for 1 Panzer. But then again, it depends on which version of the Sherman and which Panzer is involved : some versions of the Sherman have a long-barreled, British 17 pdr gun, which could take out any tank used on the field by the Germans.
@Briselance Yes, the firefly; used by Canadian and British forces. I think the first Tiger released destroyed 15 tanks and 14 light armoured vehicles in the first 15 minutes! Then they released the Royal Tiger (often incorrectly called the King tiger, which was virtually indestructable at the time!
I know about the Royal Tiger, aka Tiger II. It had a very powerful main gun - the well-known good ol' 88 mm - and a very thick armor. It weighs about 69 metric tons in combat conditions - fuel and oil tanks full, all ammo and crew onboard. But that very heavy weigh made it a very slow tank, and an easy target (but still, surely not a sitting duck) for other, faster tanks and, above all, the ground attack planes.
Not to mention the huge quantities of fuel needed for such a tank : about 5 liters for 1 kilometer. And that's just on a flat road. The gear-box system and the transmission attached to it were also well-known by the German crews to break easily and to be unreliable because of such a weigh.
And in a forest, a gun with a barrel as long as the 88 mm mounted on the Tiger II would be quite a problem to spin around.
But, of course, on open ground, without Allied airplanes, the Tiger II is one of the closest things to a absolute nightmare most Allied tank crews can face.
P.S.: Sometimes, the average of Shermans destroyed could even climb up to 10 for one Panzer !
Though, I doubt the Panzer IV, even with its long-barreled 75 mm gun, would fare as well as the Panzer V and Tiger I against the Sherman, but that's another debate, too long for 300 characters. ;-)
@Briselance He hit the engine you blind idiot, PTRD could penetrate up to 40 mm with tungsten core rounds, there was no tank in the war that had an engine with that kind of armor.
@Briselance Are you blind? He was firing at it from above and he clearly hit the engine. The engine of a tiger had maybe at most 15 mm of armor, the bullet will go through completely.
Firing at it from above ? Since when ?Look at 06:17 - 06:18, and you'll clearly see the AT rifleman is nowhere above the back of the tank.
Freeze the video at 06:18, and you'll see the AT rifle doesn't exactly look to be pointed towards the back of the tank, but rather on the side.
Besides, the Tiger I tank - the one represented here has a minimum armor of 25 mm. And the sides are 80 mm thick, which is much above the capacity of the PTRD-41 AT rifle (38 mm at 300 meters)
@Briselance The film wasn't mean to be realistic is one, the tank was slanted downwards is two and three you can clearly see its both possible to hit the engine and that the film represents it as hitting the engine. Was it possible? Yes, the tiger had almost no armor on its engine (especially since the year is 1942 I am quite sure until about 1944 all German tanks had practically no top armor)
You could never get over those female officers ? Why "As mostly Russian" ? Is it more or less forbidden, for Russian Army privates, to court their female officers ? Is there some kind of a social rule or stuff like that ?
Why do they always make men behave so pathetic in modern movies ? In real life if you behave that pathetic and have average looks you won't be getting laid at all.
Methinks the person who wrote the subtitiles graduated from the Yoda school of Language. The fim is good and entertaining...the tank would be a Panzer. Not a Tiger, they both look very different. Signed, A Yankee (Retired OCSD/Reserve Dep).
a bit too unprofessional for a german attack i think. Soldiers are standing in an upright position and moving extremely slowly... not even giving a lot of suppressing fire. i dont even think the tiger fired even once
The subtitles are terrible. They even seem lazy; in the sense of the translator being just completely lazy. Why start out with subtitles (bad as they were) just to stop and start again? This looks very interesting, but I'm going to look for this somewhere else with better subtitles. Surely someone else has this...?
The style reminds me of the Finnish film "Winter War", one of my favorites. I think I'd like this film but the subtitles seem to have been created by someone who has heard of the English language but wasn't quite certain how it worked.
The film is modern, not soviet and very good. Does anyone know the place to watch it with English subtitles? How about Dreams? (dreams of countess Prizorova) How about Golden Calf? 12 chairs? The best Russian films dont have English subtitles. I would appreciate any help! Please share if someone have any of the named above. thank you!
This is a Russian PTRD-41 anti-tank rifle firing single-shots 14.5x114 mm rounds. The type is obvious from the movie action when the rifle operator requests, receives and chambers the round.
The other type reffered to in this post is the ( also ) Russian PTRS-41 but that one has a five round magazine.
Coming back to the movie action and considering the distance to target and angle of the shot that would have been a wasted round against the glacis of the - would be - Pz.Kpfw. IV
but havent places like bollywood also produced pure crap. Im not defending hollywood but theres gotta be a reason to wy they are so big, if they are shitty and dumb why are peaople then watching?
@SiberDenis um..if the world was sick of Hollywood films then care to explain why Americans and from time to time British films are always on to of making movies?
This Russian movie looks exiciting. And I'm from europe. Many russian soldiers fought bravely against the germans in WW2. But actually this movie is exactly as 'romantised' as Hollywood war movies. There is no difference. The only difference is that you are and a number of people in Russia are extermely nationalistic. And in the west, we are more self critical.
And shall we also remember that Stalin, after Hitler was exactly as bad? Stalin killed hundredthousands of Russians!
in europe, you are just stupid, because only your society were able to produce warmongers like Hitler.
Our - not. Acually, 70% of population sure that stalin was a good leader. Once a professor asked a student, what he thinks about J.Stalin and his politics, the answer was short - "he was the best leader we ever had". Even so-called "democrats" were not able to wash brains of generation born in 1990's :D
Than do some research on your 'beloved' Stalin. You have internet, so finf out yourself all crimes that he did.
Russia's army was very weak when the nazi's invaded. Why"Because Stalin killed almost all experienced officers. Stalin was responsible for the killing of Polich offices in Katyn. Stalin was responsible for deportations and killings of tenthousands of Russians of whom was suspected they did not support the communist party. He was responsible for 'pogroms' on jews etc.
People may want to believe it or not if Stalin committed such crimes. But these crimes or not a matter of 'believing in them' anymore, for they have been documented as facts, even by the Russian government itself.
You mean the mass killing of Polish Armed Forces' officers at Katyn is a lie ? You mean the mass killing of Russian Armed Forces top brass in the 30's is a lie ?
@SiberDenis Thats not true- in Europe we are also tired of stupid Hollywood movies- at least in the Central Europe and we are not dump- we have our own good movies- Im Slovak- but Try some czech movies- we dont like Hollywood..
I'm an American and I can assure you, there are many of us who despise Hollywood and everything it stands for. I find Russian cinema to be far superior to the mindless crap produced here.
@grognardpaul Sounds like you should move to Russia and enjoy every aspect of their superior society as well. Tovarich. Just like Lee Harvey Oswald did.
Yes, I understand what your saying. But pity for the tank that it also has it's weak spots. That shot could have been a very lucky one, like they say: "a shot out of a thousand (or even milion)"
Are you blind? He hit the engine on top, at that range the PTRD can pierce 35-40 mm of armor no problem, that means the shot likely went right through to the engine .
Эти "сибтитры" ничего не стоят, даже мне, владеющему английским уже лучше русского и то тяжело их понять, это не английский. Машинный перевод, что ли?
А фильм хороший. Кстати укороченная киноверсия имхо даже лучше. Она хоть и не такая подробная, персонажи второплановые в ней не так подробно раскрыты, но она интенсивней и в ней больше драйва.
man this looks like a good movie i wonder if it will be relessed in the u.s. but thell probley fuck it up with dubed heres a lesson if your going to watch a foren movie watch the sub verson not the dub verson.
hey, all... imagine - "Oh my Gosh WTF are we gonna do?.. this is .. a real germans from Germany, - shut up idiot, keep going, we are a real russians from Russia =)))
It's is a pz38 na
killshotreviews 1 week ago
amazing fx
fschd1 3 weeks ago in playlist More videos from lepra01
very bad sub =(
infest89 1 month ago
This movie is suck ! :D That tank you see in this movie is Tiger 1 . And the Tigers don't hunt alone , they hunt the allies with their pack ( a division maybe) :))
trantrungnam612 1 month ago
so...its like quantum leap? only more russian and bloody
DaRealElChiaUSA 2 months ago
Insanely bad grammar in the subtitles.
DJSbros 2 months ago 5
@DJSbros true :))
trantrungnam612 1 month ago
lol that is one bad tiger replica.
guitarhamster102 2 months ago
Nice clip even though I don't think you would have taken out a tank that easly.
TheBernhard100 2 months ago in playlist Weitere Videos von lepra01
anywhere i can get this film?
nick21sammy 2 months ago
Hahahahahahaha this movie is a joke.
Dannerlight 3 months ago in playlist Más vídeos de lepra01
whats he doing with a barret 50 in 1942 ?
olliephelan 4 months ago
@olliephelan its a PTRD 1941. a 14.5mm (bigger then barret 50 which is 12.5mm) anti tank rifle. though in reality it couldnt penetrate a tiger, but it could penetrate Panzer IVs within 100m
nick21sammy 2 months ago
that low quality panzer IV
1234airows 4 months ago
wtf? why germans not firing they just running like noob
turkishlegend1453 5 months ago
urrraaaa!!!
90magor 5 months ago
wars are fought because stupid men and women, worship other men, any man who picks up a gun against another man, deserves to die. Self defense is the acceptation, but all wars are political, kill every man who orders you to war and wars will end,
GOPrEvil 5 months ago
@GOPrEvil From an OLD comment about war .You said "self defense is an exception" . Every war is fought under the PRETENCE of self defense. When the Romans conquered Italy they had to defend against the Goths. When they conquered GAUL they had to defend against IBERIA , then N Africa and on + On. Even the USA claims its "defending "itself when they invade VIETNAM / Iraq/ afghanistan .
You could replace all the politicians with peace loving "doves" , theyd STILL justify war. Human Nature
olliephelan 4 months ago
Good movie. Atleast better then most american crap.
Alsemenor 5 months ago
For the first time tanks "Tiger I» have gone into battle August 29, 1942 at Mga station near Leningrad, and began to be used en masse from the battle of Kursk, the Wehrmacht and used SS troops until the end of World War II. At the time of the machine is the strongest of arms and booking of all the tanks of the world, a position maintained until at least November 1943.
from WIki
VladNPR 5 months ago
@VladNPR well , id imagine theyd have a T34 chassis etc . but its modelled on the tiger (as far as i can see ). Its "SAVING PRIVATE RYAN " . which shows a hell of a lot of slaughter on the beach and in finial scene they have a perfect AMBUSH , yet theres still only 4 left. I DO AGREE that Spielberg etc try to show germans as idiots. But hes an emotional jew. But maybe your using confirmation BIAS. We see 2 US soldiers crying for their MOTHERS ! Have you seen THIN RED LINE
olliephelan 4 months ago
The subtitles are horrible.
wenqiweiabcd 6 months ago
Terrible movie. D:
heliaxx 6 months ago
i can't find this movie anywhere to buy on dvd! :(
tonymcg4 6 months ago
oh yes, the "noob" germans and the wonderful russians-.-the germans attack with two tanks?and not togehter?, wtf, some dont know history i think:D
Panzermeyer123 6 months ago
@Panzermeyer123 That wasn't the point of the movie - it's not a historical or documentary...events of war are entourage to the story line...at least you saw some real tanks not computer models...and if you are from U.S. tell me, do you know much about GPW? I guess not...so what's the difference for you? Look at your war movies - good guys are always better then "noob" enemies, am I right? If you prefer nazi as good guys - you should watch some other movies
EJCorwin 5 months ago
@EJCorwin Yes that are real tanks, t-55 i think, but dont realy know. I am from Germany^^whe have no war movies :D only the americans, like James Ryan and so rubbish. I havent say nazis are good guys ?!? i hate nazis, but in all fims the soldiers of wehrmacht and waffen-ss are stupid and brutal guys . also thousends of them dies, but only two americans or so...its all to patriotic from the land wich make the movie.theres no film which show the reality...all soldiers where the same
Panzermeyer123 4 months ago
@Panzermeyer123 Agree ;)
EJCorwin 4 months ago
@EJCorwin now... who looks stupid? LOL
Broodlord2002 4 months ago
@Broodlord2002 "who looks stupid?" - it depends on what are you talking about...LOL
EJCorwin 4 months ago
@Panzermeyer123 theyre german TIGERS . no war -movies ?
what about " das boat" and "undegang" (downfall) . Its true about film propaganda. they usually come out when the US needs public support for their wars . But in a film about allied troops you cant kill off all the main characters.
Try "the thin red line ."
olliephelan 4 months ago
@olliephelan that arent german tigers! :D Becouse, there is not one wich is functional for films. all are new build, like the "tiger" in Soldier James Ryan...(for exaple from reeenactement groups like Stahlkrieger in England, their " tiger is t55, their sdkfz is from tschecheslowakai after war...and in that boat you see nothing patriotic for germany...and in the untergang, you see only germans dieing.and also the main characters...:P and also that are no war films in my mind.sry buts my opinion
Panzermeyer123 4 months ago
LOL @ the end
xXGreyWolf 7 months ago
5:31 - DAMN, YEAH, I'D LIKE SOME BREASTFEEDING!
nazisucksass 8 months ago
lol if the wehrmacht had been that stupid they wouldn't even have defeated france
BugMagnet 8 months ago
8 people didn't require breast feeding from her
SupremeCommander360 9 months ago
Am I stupid? Where is the Sci-Fi part?
LaggyArmA2addict 9 months ago
@LaggyArmA2addict Bunch of these guys came by accident back to the WW2. Time travel and stuff.
WolfhoundMercenary 7 months ago
cute :D
hungnq1989 10 months ago
Love the dubbing...'Lie down!!!'
ironhorzmn 1 year ago
He blows up a Tiger with a tank rifle? o.O But oh well Rambo tought us that you can bring down Hinds with an arrow....
MarvinS1982 1 year ago 6
@MarvinS1982He didnt blow it up...More of got a good shot off and hit the tanks' engines or gas tanks or something that woulda caused an explosion. It still moved and retreated didnt it
laskfj 9 months ago
@MarvinS1982 Tiger had very thin armor on its engine, if you weren't watching that's what he hit at 35 mm of penetration an AT rifle could easily take out practically any tank's engine from that angle.
psychologicalshock 9 months ago
@MarvinS1982 it was anti tank grenade... look sharper
pefha 4 months ago
@MarvinS1982 and the other tiger motor was destroyed but you are right about the tiger 2 it nearly imbossible to get one down with at-rifle
pefha 4 months ago
@MarvinS1982
Its an anti tank rifle
djjayem100 3 months ago
I dont think its Tiger . Tigers were rare on the battlefield and often allied and soviet soldiers confused them with Panzer IVs.Panzer IVs had relatively thin armour espacially on the sides. The anti-tank rifle used has 14,5 mm caliber ( 0.50 cal is 12,7 mm) and could penetrate up to 40 mm of armour at 100 m
garden2010city 2 months ago
that's definitely a tiger. This movie isn't 100% accurate
CAHiredGun 2 months ago in playlist More videos from lepra01
@garden2010city that is definitely NOT a panzer IV lol. just a bad attempt at mimicking a tiger.
guitarhamster102 2 months ago
мы из будушего! I love that film!
gabsiiiiii 1 year ago
Typical bad war-scene directing. The soldiers run without hesitation toward the camera, uniformly spaced, holding their weapons in awkward firing poisitions--instead of advancing hunched over in cautious rushes with long pauses to observe and return fire. The ones who get hit spin around, throw out their arms, yell and take ridiculous, theatric, grade-school falls instead of dropping like pole-axed steers, which is what would really happen. Pathetic. Why do directors suck so badly at this?
scotpeltb 1 year ago
I'm glad to see that this movie has realistic ballistics unlike Saving Private Ryan where a 8mm round can rip a man in half, ridiculous!
muffinmanxxx321 1 year ago
Nice to see a modern movie without tremendous amounts of computer generated effects.
backbonesalsa 1 year ago 7
06:20 : No way an anti-tank rifle could knock out a Tiger I. Those could pierce up to 15 mm - 20 mm of armor. And a Tiger I side armor is at least 30 mm thick.
Anti-tank rifle are good for WW1-type armor or for WW2 "soft" vehicles, but not for armor like Panzer IV, V Tiger I, Sherman, S-35, etc.
Briselance 1 year ago
@Briselance And no way could a grenade bunch knock one out either! It took 9 shermans to conqour one of these beasts when they first were unleashed onto northern france!
billyb4223 1 year ago
@billyb4223
Well, concerning the bunch grenade, it might still be very useful, even against a Tiger I, at the condition of having the bunch grebade explode on the ventilation grids, at the back of the tank, i.e. on the "roof" of the motor compartment. In any case, a bunch grenade (7 grenades like the German "potato mashers" tied together) would be much more useful used on the tank's weakest point : it's rear.
Briselance 1 year ago
@billyb4223
Concerning the ratio, you're quite right. In Normandy, the average was about 5 allied tanks - mostly Shermans - destroyed (and many crewmen killed too, alas) for 1 Panzer. But then again, it depends on which version of the Sherman and which Panzer is involved : some versions of the Sherman have a long-barreled, British 17 pdr gun, which could take out any tank used on the field by the Germans.
Briselance 1 year ago
@Briselance Yes, the firefly; used by Canadian and British forces. I think the first Tiger released destroyed 15 tanks and 14 light armoured vehicles in the first 15 minutes! Then they released the Royal Tiger (often incorrectly called the King tiger, which was virtually indestructable at the time!
billyb4223 1 year ago
@billyb4223
I know about the Royal Tiger, aka Tiger II. It had a very powerful main gun - the well-known good ol' 88 mm - and a very thick armor. It weighs about 69 metric tons in combat conditions - fuel and oil tanks full, all ammo and crew onboard. But that very heavy weigh made it a very slow tank, and an easy target (but still, surely not a sitting duck) for other, faster tanks and, above all, the ground attack planes.
Briselance 1 year ago
@billyb4223
Not to mention the huge quantities of fuel needed for such a tank : about 5 liters for 1 kilometer. And that's just on a flat road. The gear-box system and the transmission attached to it were also well-known by the German crews to break easily and to be unreliable because of such a weigh.
And in a forest, a gun with a barrel as long as the 88 mm mounted on the Tiger II would be quite a problem to spin around.
Briselance 1 year ago
@billyb4223
But, of course, on open ground, without Allied airplanes, the Tiger II is one of the closest things to a absolute nightmare most Allied tank crews can face.
Briselance 1 year ago
@billyb4223
P.S.: Sometimes, the average of Shermans destroyed could even climb up to 10 for one Panzer !
Though, I doubt the Panzer IV, even with its long-barreled 75 mm gun, would fare as well as the Panzer V and Tiger I against the Sherman, but that's another debate, too long for 300 characters. ;-)
Briselance 1 year ago
@Briselance He hit the engine you blind idiot, PTRD could penetrate up to 40 mm with tungsten core rounds, there was no tank in the war that had an engine with that kind of armor.
psychologicalshock 9 months ago
@psychologicalshock
How can you hit the engine when you're in a trench located a few hundreds of meters in front of the tank, dude ?
Even if you can fire on the tank's side, your bullet will still have a angle of arrival (is that last word correct ?
I don't know) that will most likely make it bounce off.
It can pierce the engine, yes. If you fire at it from behind and with a 90° angle.
Briselance 9 months ago
@Briselance Are you blind? He was firing at it from above and he clearly hit the engine. The engine of a tiger had maybe at most 15 mm of armor, the bullet will go through completely.
psychologicalshock 8 months ago
@psychologicalshock
Firing at it from above ? Since when ?Look at 06:17 - 06:18, and you'll clearly see the AT rifleman is nowhere above the back of the tank.
Freeze the video at 06:18, and you'll see the AT rifle doesn't exactly look to be pointed towards the back of the tank, but rather on the side.
Besides, the Tiger I tank - the one represented here has a minimum armor of 25 mm. And the sides are 80 mm thick, which is much above the capacity of the PTRD-41 AT rifle (38 mm at 300 meters)
Briselance 8 months ago
@Briselance The film wasn't mean to be realistic is one, the tank was slanted downwards is two and three you can clearly see its both possible to hit the engine and that the film represents it as hitting the engine. Was it possible? Yes, the tiger had almost no armor on its engine (especially since the year is 1942 I am quite sure until about 1944 all German tanks had practically no top armor)
psychologicalshock 8 months ago
d-day --> americans saved world in 5 seconds
this movie --> truth story
leongraaf 1 year ago 2
@leongraaf Well their was canada the uk and other countrys
terminx12 1 year ago
@leongraaf hahaha thats the point :D canada just send some bombs for uk ^^ but d day you wont see uk or france
leongraaf 1 year ago
6:50 XD
whythewar1 1 year ago
@whythewar1
The nurse sergeant doesn't seem to slap him very hard, huh ? ^^ Meh ... she was a bit startled, but she enjoyed it. ^^
Briselance 1 year ago
@Briselance Lucky dude to at least get a shot at her, I guess...as mostly Russian, I could never got over those female soldiers.
whythewar1 1 year ago 2
@whythewar1
You could never get over those female officers ? Why "As mostly Russian" ? Is it more or less forbidden, for Russian Army privates, to court their female officers ? Is there some kind of a social rule or stuff like that ?
Briselance 1 year ago
the "tiger" is build around a T34 for the movie
PitbullNL 1 year ago
3:26 what tank is that?? looks like some weird early prototype lol
pkersoul 1 year ago
@pkersoul
Tiger 3
D3adtrap 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This film have 2 parts!
TheNoob978 1 year ago
Why do they always make men behave so pathetic in modern movies ? In real life if you behave that pathetic and have average looks you won't be getting laid at all.
Finn001abd 1 year ago
@Finn001abd they only do that to "white men" in the movies.
grengerx 1 year ago
@grengerx True. Should have specified that.
Finn001abd 1 year ago
Methinks the person who wrote the subtitiles graduated from the Yoda school of Language. The fim is good and entertaining...the tank would be a Panzer. Not a Tiger, they both look very different. Signed, A Yankee (Retired OCSD/Reserve Dep).
rangeclerk 1 year ago
that is a very silly german attack, this is not the first world war.
UberGeit3000 1 year ago
the subtitles are retarted and looks like the translater is just a lazy couch potatoe and eating burgers
ruskikazzak 1 year ago
for all it's faults, the director really did a good job of expressing the chaos of combat.
misterclock 1 year ago
will there be a version with english or german subs?
Ahathian 1 year ago
a bit too unprofessional for a german attack i think. Soldiers are standing in an upright position and moving extremely slowly... not even giving a lot of suppressing fire. i dont even think the tiger fired even once
zhihao1 1 year ago
Exactly. No tank fire, no flanking action, just a platoon sized attack with no attempt for cover?
tcrlaf 1 year ago
The subtitles are terrible. They even seem lazy; in the sense of the translator being just completely lazy. Why start out with subtitles (bad as they were) just to stop and start again? This looks very interesting, but I'm going to look for this somewhere else with better subtitles. Surely someone else has this...?
onikuma25 1 year ago 2
that is one badass fake tiger
and if im right, the Tiger wasn't in combat in 1942?
SweixNOR 1 year ago
@SweixNOR
First Tiger tank has been captured by the Red army in November of 1942, in swamps near Leningrad.
But there are august of 1942 :)
Scoutrussp7 1 year ago
These subtitles don't make any sense.
QuinlanRanger 1 year ago
Nothing against a beautiful german tank attack
Bowkow 1 year ago
Молодцы
june110696 1 year ago
Comment removed
june110696 1 year ago
Молодцы
june110696 1 year ago
The style reminds me of the Finnish film "Winter War", one of my favorites. I think I'd like this film but the subtitles seem to have been created by someone who has heard of the English language but wasn't quite certain how it worked.
twobluehorses 2 years ago
i lawl at the start when they freeze his hand for the shot!
TheDarklord0211 2 years ago
The film is modern, not soviet and very good. Does anyone know the place to watch it with English subtitles? How about Dreams? (dreams of countess Prizorova) How about Golden Calf? 12 chairs? The best Russian films dont have English subtitles. I would appreciate any help! Please share if someone have any of the named above. thank you!
rosie7825 2 years ago
This is a Russian PTRD-41 anti-tank rifle firing single-shots 14.5x114 mm rounds. The type is obvious from the movie action when the rifle operator requests, receives and chambers the round.
The other type reffered to in this post is the ( also ) Russian PTRS-41 but that one has a five round magazine.
Coming back to the movie action and considering the distance to target and angle of the shot that would have been a wasted round against the glacis of the - would be - Pz.Kpfw. IV
mjipescu 2 years ago
good copying from wikipedia ;)
subscriber44 2 years ago
@mjipescu know it all wikipidi scum bag!
TheDarklord0211 2 years ago
I can't use this gun to eliminate any tanks in COD5,instead of that,it was a....sniper riffle :))
boyyeudoi101090 2 years ago
My friend who is Russian looked at the subtitles and laughed his ass off!
whitesoxfan5 2 years ago 2
@whitesoxfan5 you're friend can't english!
im Russian and the subtitles are ok
ferahh987 2 years ago
where did you find english subs???
nickzarkre 2 years ago
Где можно скачать английские субтитры к этому филму?
Спасибо!
turkjey5 2 years ago
Отличное кино.
Чем американы снимают тупее блокбастеры, тем точнее и глубже становится кино всего остального мира.
Российское на примере этого фильма. Мы просто не знаем. Может быть где то в Бразилии уже сняли Брат-3)?
SiberDenis 2 years ago 2
I guess this movie could run excellently in all the world except the U.S and Europe. China, India, Arabs would LOVE this film, I guarantee that!
The reason why?
Because the whole planet is sick and tired of your shitty stupid soulles Hollywood blockbusters, cos they are dumb, that's why.
SiberDenis 2 years ago 27
but havent places like bollywood also produced pure crap. Im not defending hollywood but theres gotta be a reason to wy they are so big, if they are shitty and dumb why are peaople then watching?
mafre029 2 years ago
you are right :)
Johntsarev 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
you are right! :D
Johntsarev 2 years ago
i completely agree, and im from europe, the shit we get over here.
i know it s a kids film but wtf is "alvin and the chipmunks the squekwel"
MrRobbo246 2 years ago
@SiberDenis um..if the world was sick of Hollywood films then care to explain why Americans and from time to time British films are always on to of making movies?
Dogmeat1950 1 year ago
@SiberDenis
u r wrong our chinese like this movie,Cos no one can understand it better than us.
Russia and china had very simillar history and belief in 20 century.
On the one hand CCCP did be not friendly to china after 1960. But on the other hand russia did help us a lot
I'm personally respect the russia for their Courage and strength.
Russia will not fall as long as they keep their own way to overcome all the barriers.
Kleinlxn 1 year ago
@SiberDenis
This Russian movie looks exiciting. And I'm from europe. Many russian soldiers fought bravely against the germans in WW2. But actually this movie is exactly as 'romantised' as Hollywood war movies. There is no difference. The only difference is that you are and a number of people in Russia are extermely nationalistic. And in the west, we are more self critical.
And shall we also remember that Stalin, after Hitler was exactly as bad? Stalin killed hundredthousands of Russians!
Change6609 9 months ago
@Change6609
lololol
in europe, you are just stupid, because only your society were able to produce warmongers like Hitler.
Our - not. Acually, 70% of population sure that stalin was a good leader. Once a professor asked a student, what he thinks about J.Stalin and his politics, the answer was short - "he was the best leader we ever had". Even so-called "democrats" were not able to wash brains of generation born in 1990's :D
Scoutrussp7 9 months ago
@Scoutrussp7
Than do some research on your 'beloved' Stalin. You have internet, so finf out yourself all crimes that he did.
Russia's army was very weak when the nazi's invaded. Why"Because Stalin killed almost all experienced officers. Stalin was responsible for the killing of Polich offices in Katyn. Stalin was responsible for deportations and killings of tenthousands of Russians of whom was suspected they did not support the communist party. He was responsible for 'pogroms' on jews etc.
Change6609 9 months ago
@Change6609
people are sure that it's a lie of "liberal shitocrats (instead of democrats)", how they call it.
Scoutrussp7 9 months ago
@Scoutrussp7
People may want to believe it or not if Stalin committed such crimes. But these crimes or not a matter of 'believing in them' anymore, for they have been documented as facts, even by the Russian government itself.
Change6609 9 months ago
@Change6609
no one trusts the goverment lol
Scoutrussp7 9 months ago
@Scoutrussp7
You mean the mass killing of Polish Armed Forces' officers at Katyn is a lie ? You mean the mass killing of Russian Armed Forces top brass in the 30's is a lie ?
Could stop denying the obvious, mate ?
Briselance 8 months ago
@SiberDenis Thats not true- in Europe we are also tired of stupid Hollywood movies- at least in the Central Europe and we are not dump- we have our own good movies- Im Slovak- but Try some czech movies- we dont like Hollywood..
tobar888 9 months ago
@SiberDenis
I'm an American and I can assure you, there are many of us who despise Hollywood and everything it stands for. I find Russian cinema to be far superior to the mindless crap produced here.
grognardpaul 8 months ago 2
@grognardpaul Sounds like you should move to Russia and enjoy every aspect of their superior society as well. Tovarich. Just like Lee Harvey Oswald did.
peejay1954 6 months ago
@SiberDenis I'm American and this looks epic!
planetary109 6 months ago
3:06 guy fires a 50 caliber LOL
asf4321 2 years ago
its not a 50 cal. its a WW2 Anti-Tank rifle.
DarkHour404 2 years ago 19
@DarkHour404 ptrs-41 to be percise
EGCNoScope 6 months ago
I just know because I have done the same thing in red orchestra = P
psychologicalshock 2 years ago
No problem, you can tell by the sight, the German one has it on top.
psychologicalshock 2 years ago
Comment removed
psychologicalshock 2 years ago
On the panther the rear top armor was 16 mm so the tiger was likely close to that, the movie is completely accurate in the portrayal.
psychologicalshock 2 years ago
No it isn't, PTRS is Russian, look it up yourself. The Top of the engine would be 25 mm at most, dumbass, tanks had thin armor on top.
psychologicalshock 2 years ago
It hit the top of the engine, moron.
psychologicalshock 2 years ago
more?
SweixNOR 2 years ago
lol
qzpm1980g 2 years ago
is the film anywhere with subtitels or enlish/german language available?
Towe85 2 years ago
lol shot from that small rifle to tiger!
very inteligent.
its like to shot to elephant from gas pistol
mistrzyoda87 2 years ago
That rifle is an anti tank rifle 12.7 caliber PTRS...
DmitriyUA 2 years ago
But that nothing change.
Dude many guns over 75 caliber have problems to hurt Tiger.
That rifle was good for panzer II not Tiger
mistrzyoda87 2 years ago
Yes, I understand what your saying. But pity for the tank that it also has it's weak spots. That shot could have been a very lucky one, like they say: "a shot out of a thousand (or even milion)"
DmitriyUA 2 years ago
Are you blind? He hit the engine on top, at that range the PTRD can pierce 35-40 mm of armor no problem, that means the shot likely went right through to the engine .
psychologicalshock 2 years ago
Both PTRS and PTRD were 14,5mm
nameless6666 2 years ago
He hit the engine if you didn't notice, at the range he was firing it could have easily caught fire from a shot like that.
psychologicalshock 2 years ago
Whats the movie called? it looks awesome, What is it about?
dcardelhac 2 years ago
i LOVE !! the mosin nagant ! its a great weapon !!
Norguy77 2 years ago
No. It's PTRD - Degtyarev's 14,5 mm antitank rifle.
Kykovner 3 years ago 2
omg why is he kissing that medic woman he has to relaise she in relaity she could be his grandmother i mean i c mon
nounever 3 years ago 2
Are you talking about that big heavy rifle on the tripod? Well, it's antitank rifle, actually it was designed to penetrate the armor.
gunzcontrol 3 years ago
Эти "сибтитры" ничего не стоят, даже мне, владеющему английским уже лучше русского и то тяжело их понять, это не английский. Машинный перевод, что ли?
gunzcontrol 3 years ago 2
А фильм хороший. Кстати укороченная киноверсия имхо даже лучше. Она хоть и не такая подробная, персонажи второплановые в ней не так подробно раскрыты, но она интенсивней и в ней больше драйва.
gunzcontrol 3 years ago 3
i´m sorry
because i´m german :( :/
888thejoker888 3 years ago 2
Great film!
BreezyTwilight 3 years ago 2
The Russians were always the best to film war scenes.
PernatyZmey 3 years ago 3
Comment removed
june110696 1 year ago
ok, i'll keep watching this...quantum leap anyone?
darkmarkrammstein 3 years ago
Just there and back again. Not a kind of another "Sliders".
yourtuber1974 3 years ago
What a wonderful movie, a blockbuster.
Saving private ryan move for the real master.
If it was not in Russian but english it would be a world best seller.
Made me glade that I studied russian.
ranlaen 3 years ago 7
lol the tank at 2:53 isnt even anything its a wierd mix of a panzer IV and a tiger
jackobrien47 3 years ago
Sorry, too few Panzers left. In Soviet time they were made a bit more realistic. Anyway, it's better than M48 with crosses :).
yourtuber1974 3 years ago
oh it still looks ok... i mean even in spielbergs movies the tanks often look wrong.
jackobrien47 3 years ago
hey russen people r not bad!
misskiss98 3 years ago
ya translations pretty bad...
Pockets215 3 years ago 4
man this looks like a good movie i wonder if it will be relessed in the u.s. but thell probley fuck it up with dubed heres a lesson if your going to watch a foren movie watch the sub verson not the dub verson.
SGTSAM101ST 3 years ago
What shitty translation.
reliccoaster 3 years ago 3
Is it possible to find an english subtitles? And where?
Saibere 3 years ago
hey, all... imagine - "Oh my Gosh WTF are we gonna do?.. this is .. a real germans from Germany, - shut up idiot, keep going, we are a real russians from Russia =)))
Pavedich 3 years ago 2
Mosins are supposed to kick like hell they make it look like a .22
babybop996 3 years ago
что там за ебланы озвучивают на 2ом плане?
pussyfiesta 3 years ago