MovieChat Forums > Battle of the Bulge (1966) Discussion > Not a single Tiger Tank in this film!!

Not a single Tiger Tank in this film!!


This film was a joke and not historically accurate. Tiger tanks and Panther tanks were used in the Battle of the Bulge by the Germans. The tanks in the movie were all American tanks. The dialogue in the movie is laughable and so is the acting. Even Kelly's Heroes had real Tiger tanks in it.

reply

Actually, Kelly's Heroes had Russian T-34 tanks made up to look like Tigers (as did Saving Private Ryan). But they did have real M-4 Sherman tanks.

reply

Actually, Kelly's Heroes had Russian T-34 tanks made up to look like Tigers (as did Saving Private Ryan). But they did have real M-4 Sherman tanks.

True. Have you seen the Russian made movie "White Tiger" (2012), Mad Tom? People were claiming that that the Tiger in that film wasn't real because the turret was forward on the chassis instead of towards the middle of the tank. It turns out that it was a real Tiger tank. But it was one the rare Tigers made by Porsche, (the majority of Tigers were made by Henschel) that the Russians had captured and preserved. The Porsche Tiger (in the film) was massive and lethal.


reply

You are almost right. Infact White Tiger is perhaps the most accurate Tank film I have seen. All tanks were real, except the White Tiger, which was not actual Porsche Tiger, but extremely well made mockup. War records show there has been only one Poosche Tiger served in eastern front as Command vehicle, which was lost. The tank was so realistic that I almost thought they had made repro of it. However middle of the film when White Tiger Appears on the small hill, you clearly shown wheels which are most of the film hidden and its not Porsche Tigers (just look Ferdinand / Elephant how they should look as its same chassis) but its actually Russian heavy Tank KV's wheels. But that is extremely well made. As well made as they made in Band of Brothers Jagdpanther from T-54 or T-64 (also can be id'd from wheels.

But to actual film. At least miniatures on war tables were modified as real Tiger II's and Tiger I's. Yeah there wasn't any German vehicles available that could have been driven, but at least they could have used sheet metal to shapen Patton's little bit more like Tiger's. And by then I am sure they would have had Sherman's available too, but since it was Filmed in Spain and Spanish supplied vehicles, film maker's had to do best they had. It did portray well how useless american tank gun's were against front armor of the Tiger's or generally their anti-tank weapons were useless against them, unless used from side or rear.

Although despite historical inaccuracies and shortcomings in tanks, it was fairly well made considering the era. Not best film of the actors in it but still, it can be watched.

reply

[deleted]

This movie reflects the era in which it was made. Films in the 1960's were simply less accurate. Remember people didn't have the internet to instantly pull up the picture of a real Tiger tank and compare it with the tanks in the movie. Nor were there message boards were people who were into tanks could tell them that these were not real Tiger tanks.

There are also some technical concerns here too. Today if you did a movie requiring a hundred Tiger tanks you could just build one fake one and do the rest with CGI. Back then it was either substitute a different type of tank or use minitures. There are some minitures used in BOTB, but only in scenes were they couldn't use a full sized one (on fire, etc). It's also hard to get minitures into shots with people, and there are lots of those in this picture.

I think for the era in which the picture was made the producers made the right decision. I'm more concerned about whether the actual storyline gives an accurate picture of the battle than the substitution of the tanks.

People today demand a much higher standard of accuracy in what they we are veiwing than they did back in the 60's. Part of that is because we have all so much experience at interpreting visual images. We pretty much do it from birth onward. Back then people didn't have as much expereince. Movies had been around a while, but TV was only about 10 years old.

That's why special effects (like monsters) that used to terrify audiences fifty years ago just look hocky to us.

You can see this in some of the shots were they use a blue screen behind the actor in a tank or car. We recongnize that it's a process shot immediately, but in the 60's most people probably would'nt have and it was commonly done in films and TV. That's why they are almost never done today. Even in a TV show they will put the actor in a real car and tow in around while the shoot the in-car scenes.

reply

Movies nowadays are not too accurate either.

reply

Good post.

As a person who studies military history I knew INSTANTLY (naturally) that they were not historical models, but also let my mind 'fill in the gaps'.

I Just finished watching 'Where Eagles Dare' and there is a scene where the 'good guys' end up destroying a whole bunch of FW-190's - well, they WEREN'T FW-190's... I dunno what they were, I wasn't bothered enough to check into it - they were radial engined fighter aircraft in German service... in other words FW-190's. My mind did the work the special effects team couldn't.

Now, I'd PREFER the real thing, but am vastly more interested in the story.

One thing I wouldn't be able to overlook would be something like a US Marine division at Normandy, or... let's say the same pilots who defended Pearl Harbor being on the Doolittle raid... THAT bothers me more than mediocre mockups.

reply

Now, I'd PREFER the real thing, but am vastly more interested in the story.
As usual SP you nailed it. Technological stand-ins and substitutes are simply part of movie-making. I'm not a military historian (a tank is a tank to me), but I get the idea of what the producers were trying to convey; the Germans had an advantage with their "new" tiger tanks.🐭

reply

but I get the idea of what the producers were trying to convey; the Germans had an advantage with their "new" tiger tanks.

In close-quarters fighting such as that depicted in the film, a 76mm Sherman could hole a King Tiger easier than a King Tiger could hole a Sherman. And contrary to pop history, the Sherman wasn't the most heavily gunned U.S.> armored fighting vehicle in December 1944: that distinction belonged to the M36 Jackson tank destroyer, which was armed with the M3 90mm gun. (In January, new ammunition became available for the M3 gun that would defeat all plates of the King Tiger, albeit the front glacis only at the dangerously close range of 100 yards).

Shaw's character was based on the exploits of swashbuckling Waffen-SS commander Joachim Peiper. In contrast to his film depiction, Peiper was displeased with the King Tigers he was assigned, and kept them at the back of his column (which consisted of a mix of Panthers, Pzkw IVs, and King Tigers). Ultimately, his kampfgruppe's advance was stopped on a narrow road by a pieced-together unit of Shermans backed up by an M36: in the ambush, one Sherman knocked out two of the lead Panthers before its gun jammed, and the M36, armed with the new 90mm M3 gun, knocked out a third. With three machines disabled (at least one of which was in flames), the kampfgruppe retreated, for good.

reply

I'm glad there are still some rational common sense people around. I was beginning to worry.

reply

I don't get bothered by movies that used American tanks to fill in for German tanks. By 1965, most any German tank that wasn't in a museum was melted down years before as scrap metal to make pots and pans.

It's kind of like complaining that the moviemakers didn't get the real Winston Churchill or Adolf Hitler to play themselves.

reply

The reason they didn't have any Tiger's is because there was bugger all left by the time the war finished, pretty much all of Germany's equipment had been destroyed by the time they surrendered. I'm not sure how many are still in existence (let alone operational) but it'd be in the single figures. Kelly's Heroes had real Tigers but I'm pretty sure it was just one, this movie had scenes with vast columns of tanks and they would have never found the numbers to make it work. And I'm pretty sure the spearheads in the real battle were Tiger II's anyway.

On a side note it's a real shame that pretty much of Germany's gear was destroyed. There's not a single operational Messerschmitt 109 left, or a JU88, I think there a couple of 190's left.

Hmm yea anyway...


reply

Look again royu2. The "Tigers" in Kelly's Heroes were modified T-34's.

reply

Oh there you go, damn

reply

The strangest equipment substitution wasn't the 'German' tanks but the fact that M4 Shermans were played by M24 Chaffee light tanks-as people have noted, little in the way of German vehicles were available by 1965 but a few Shermans should have been possible to scrape together if the makers had tried. I suspect they were happy enough to just use whatever the Spanish army could provide at a cheaper cost than bringing them in for the film.

'What is an Oprah?'-Teal'c.

reply

Actually, I'm not that surprised that few WW2 tanks were available for the film. They likely had been long since reclaimed by the post war civilian market for cars and other less violent activities.

The real problem for this movie is it's almost total lack of historical accuracy about the battle. To a point of being a disgrace.

reply

look idiot,,,,,,,,,,,where the hell are film makers supposed to get dozens of genuine Tiger tanks from????????????

Germany was battered to a pulp by early 1945.
Since then only a handful have been renovated, and most of them were only put back in shape after this movie was made.

Every single one would have been destroyed by April 1945.

The only people who care about the use of Nazi painted American tanks in movies are live at home with mum tossers like YOU.

reply

Haha, indeed. I mean, King Tiger, Tiger I and Panther tanks, are extremely difficult even today to introduce to the big screens. It would have taken a lot of work to get that done back in 1965.

However, the creators, director and all, did claim they used authentic Tiger tanks when making this movie, which is... way out there. But none the less, historically accurate or not... I think the movie is a quite decent one.
Robert Shaw as Hessler, works like a charm:)

reply

Historical inaccuracies in this film are just a bit too much. I don't have a problem with M-48 Patton tanks in lieu of German panzers, but some of the other stuff is egregious.

The bombardment of Ambleve in the film is just laughable. The final tank battle appears to take place in a desert, looked nothing like the Ardennes.

Worst of all, this film perpetuates a lot of misconceptions about the Ardennes Offensive.

Of all the WW2 films from the 60s and 70s, this was the worst.

reply

I know that you posted originally four years ago, but you might come across this. Or, maybe someone else will. I want to put your complaint in context.

I watched a documentary on refurbishing a tank a few years ago. It was about a British organization who rebuilt and restored tanks in England. They restored anything they could get their hands on. In the episode I remember vaguely, they were restoring the ONLY Tiger tank that they could verify to be in running condition, that is ONLY as in the ONLY one in the world.

I think there are only a handful of Kpfw Panther left.

My point is that they could only make reasonable facsimiles anyway. That is what they have done for other war movies and mini-series. Thanks to events in the last 50 years we have a lot of Soviet and Warsaw Pact equipment available to disguise as WW2 German armored vehicles.


The best diplomat I know is a fully charged phaser bank.

reply

did you listen to the film? numerous times it was pointed out the germans were driving tigers.

Ok so they may have not used real tigers but the film portrayed them as tigers.

reply