Mad Max: Fury Road

I agree that it may not be enough of a Mad Max movie to satisfy the biggest fans of the character Mad Max, but I disagree that it's not a Mad Max movie. There is one maybe two scenes where the camera stays with Furiosa to be sure, but the movie opens with Max and the VoiceOver is Max's and more often than not when Max jumps out of the cab of the Warrig to take care of business the camera follows him. It is mostly told through his POV not hers. I would agree its a Max/Furiosa movie, but not that it's not a Mad Max movie. Charlize does have more presence and charisma onscreen though. She also has a nobler character with a clear sense of purpose, Max's head is all messed up and sometimes it's hard to follow his motivations on nearly all his decisions that don't include killing a War Boy.
I am not a huge 3-d guy and saw this in 3-d. I totally recommend seeing it in this format if you have the chance. I enjoyed the scene the others are complaining about when stuff came off the screen at me.
I agree also that overall the movie does not live up to the hype except as action movie of the decade. Ya, it's hard to imagine more action or better action over a sustained period. The movie totally delivers on action. You MUST see this on a big screen, even if not in 3-D.

SuperflyTNT wrote: The question remains - how did he end up getting his Interceptor back after saving the people of the oil city?

He didn't. After Papagallo gave him a full load of fuel in exchange for bringing in the semi truck he tried to make his escape. The bad guys caught up to him and Wez smashed in his windshield with an exhaust pipe, causing him to wreck. Then Toadie tried to tap the fuel tanks and triggered the bomb, destroying the Interceptor.

What always bothered me more was when they showed how many guns he was carrying in the beginning of Thunderdome after the scarcity of ammunition was already established during Road Warrior.

Saw it. LOVED IT. Near perfect action movie. It actually consistently thrilled me, which the CG fest stuff, esp. superheroes rarely, rarely does. Completely paid off all my hopes for it.

My friend didn't like it. He said it was the same 15 minute scene over and over with no plot and he likes Ultron a lot better. Personal taste, but I could not disagree more. Ultron may have more locations and certainly endlessly more dialog, but I honestly don't think it has much more PLOT than this film. Mistaking dialog for plot is, I think, a misjudgment. Most of these Marvel movies are just chase the macguffin plots with huge amounts of exposition tacked on.

Also, how obvious was it that this was created by a 70 year old feminist? Specifically, a feminist coming from a time when feminism meant something different---an old school, Wonder Woman "women are better" type feminist. I had no problems with it but it made a lot of sense to me that Miller is an aging feminist.

edit: Also, great casting. Hardy is an amazing Max and Furiosa was great.

Gary Sax wrote: Mistaking dialog for plot is, I think, a misjudgment. Most of these Marvel movies are just chase the macguffin plots with huge amounts of exposition tacked on.

I could not agree with this more. I had heard going in that the plot was razor thin and there was next to no dialog, but I didn't even notice. One, because of all the insane action, but two, because the looks, facial expressions, and gestures between Max/Furiosa/Nux worked much better to get the point across than throwing in unnecessary dialog. Plus you aren't going to have time to chuck around exposition trying to outrun and fend off a band of madmen.
Also on the "razor thin" plot point - is that even a bad thing? Have we become so used to bloated, overwrought, exposition riddled stories (and I say this as someone who has enjoyed a few bloated, overwrought, and exposition riddle movies) that a pretty straightforward and clear story is called "thin"?

Plus I take issue with him saying it was the same 15 minute scene over and over again because that's my biggest gripe with CG fest movies - it starts to feel repetitive. I felt that Miller kept throwing new angles at us at the right time while teasing enough things to keep you wondering when they'll come out (ie the pole vaulter guys being shown/talked about early on but not being used until near the end). It was so refreshing to see almost 2 hours of constant action but never be confused about what is going on, action wise.

What a lovely day.

(and I can't get the drum beat out of my head - where can I hire one of those mobile heavy metal concerts to follow me to work everyday)

SebastianBludd wrote: What always bothered me more was when they showed how many guns he was carrying in the beginning of Thunderdome after the scarcity of ammunition was already established during Road Warrior.

When ammo is scarce, you keep a lot of guns around because you will always have the right chamber available when you find some. There's a lot of preppers who have a SHITLOAD of different battle rifles because of this very reason.

Saw it this weekend. A bit underwhelmed actually, but still a decent movie. Perhaps its because I saw THE ROAD WARRIOR god knows how many times, but there are so many elements that I wished were present . The vehicles in the original were patched together and very real world-ish; here some of them border on fantasy. Sure they might look cool and vaguely sci fi, but it doesn't look like something crafted from the remnants of a civilization living on scraps of whatever . I also thought the original music score was better and more thematic - chaotic, unpredictable and loud.

The main villain borders on cartoon like , a combo of Baron Harkonnen and someone from the He-Man universe.

Also, as has been mentioned elsewhere, a lot has been made of the minimal use of CGI and emphasis on "practical" effects. While not nearly as CGI as say the Fast and Furious franchise, there is still some evident in places.

One plus : DOOFWAGEN !!

Msample wrote:
One plus : DOOFWAGEN !!

Some say Furiosa was the star of the movie, but clearly the star of the movie was the Doof!

Msample wrote: Saw it this weekend. A bit underwhelmed actually, but still a decent movie. Perhaps its because I saw THE ROAD WARRIOR god knows how many times, but there are so many elements that I wished were present . The vehicles in the original were patched together and very real world-ish; here some of them border on fantasy. Sure they might look cool and vaguely sci fi, but it doesn't look like something crafted from the remnants of a civilization living on scraps of whatever . I also thought the original music score was better and more thematic - chaotic, unpredictable and loud.

The main villain borders on cartoon like , a combo of Baron Harkonnen and someone from the He-Man universe.

Also, as has been mentioned elsewhere, a lot has been made of the minimal use of CGI and emphasis on "practical" effects. While not nearly as CGI as say the Fast and Furious franchise, there is still some evident in places.

One plus : DOOFWAGEN !!

Yes, there is a lot of Beyond Thunderdome in this film. In fact, I sort of consider this movie Beyond Thunderdome done right, with more Road Warrior in the mix. But it is absolutely missing a lot of that gritty something of the Road Warrior.

To my eye, there is a lot of CGI but a lot of it was for background effects and explosions---I think the critical difference is that foreground action sequences almost always were being done with practical effects. I think this is the most critical misuse of CGI---using CGI for foreground stuff means that the actors have nothing to work with. Background effects do not distort action scenes to nearly as a great an effect, except insofar as actors are not reacting properly to the insane things that are supposed to be happening in the environment, which tends to be a much lesser sin vs. trying to act with Jar Jar Binks in front of you but not having Jar Jar Binks in front of you.

Gary Sax wrote: But it is absolutely missing a lot of that gritty something of the Road Warrior.

I will also agree here. It seemed like in the road warrior, people looked dirty because they were living dirty. In this movie they looked like they were dirty because they spent some time in the makeup chair to look dirty.

Gary Sax wrote: Yes, there is a lot of Beyond Thunderdome in this film. In fact, I sort of consider this movie Beyond Thunderdome done right, with more Road Warrior in the mix. But it is absolutely missing a lot of that gritty something of the Road Warrior.

I actually like this about Fury Road. To be honest, I'm a fan of Beyond Thunderdome as well as the previous two. I can watch Thunderdome with my son, or have it on with the wife around and not worry about any inappropriate content. Sure, it may be a 'sanitized' Mad Max tale, but I don't really need rape or dead children to know that baddies are bad. I understand thier use, but sometimes I want to be entertained without that level of graphic detail. I'm totally fine with having Mad Max and Road Warrior to watch if I want that gritty, grindhouse vibe. Doing the same a third time...may have felt tired. If I really need a third movie in that vein, I can watch The New Barbarians ...ha! Plus, Thunderdome gave us...the Thunderdome, Master Blaster, and Aunt Entity! I just wish Bruce Spence's character wasn't so close to the gyro-copter pilot. That character confused me for the longest time...

With Fury road, we have something between the Road Warrior and Thunderdome. There were a few scenes that would prevent me from taking my son to see this in the theater, but he'll be able to watch it before he does Road Warrior. Plus, in order for this to pull in modern movie audiences there had to be a little more shine on the product. I think Miller and company did a _fantastic_ job updating the franchise with the intent to be a summer blockbuster...all things considered.

(And yes, this was better than Age of Ultron)

Almost all practical effects: geektyrant.com/news/insane-behind-the-sc...or-mad-max-fury-road

I haven't seen the original films in 20+ years, so that may be a factor as far as comparison, but I thought this was incredibly riveting and intense. And I love how it created a lot of depth within the setting and characters through very brief images and allusions... hardly any dialogue or exposition. Simple plot, sure, but gripping.

Despite my hard lock down in baby jail, I made time to see this. I thought it was absolutely great, just a step or two below Road Warrior and better than the other two films.

Mostly just agreeing with everyone else covering the main highlights that they did well. The one aspect that really stood out for me was how they absolutely nailed the right amount of crazy, inbred, cult inspired flavor of the wasteland factions. The little touches really knocked that aspect out of the park... none better than the "Valhalla" ritual of the war boys.

I'm actually gonna try to see it again. Something I haven't done for a theater movie in at least 10 years if not longer.

Saw it last night. I'd heard nothing but good things, so I jumped on it.

Confession: never seen a Mad Max movie. Tried to watch the original decades ago but 10 slow minutes of mumbling stopped that. (Beyond Thunderdome ran constantly on HBO when I was a kid, and I saw bits of it, but never the whole thing.) However, I've played Fallout and Borderlands and other games that borrowed heavily from the world.

I really liked it. I need to think about it some more to fully articulate what I liked about it, but I think it's well deserving of the praise.

The more I think about it the more I like it as well.

I'm sure to butcher the message, but I agree with what a lot of folks are saying that there hasn't been a character like Furiosa since Ripley. Furiosa isn't being sold on her gender or sex appeal. There didn't even seem to be a spark of romantic interest between her and Max (respect as warriors, sure), which is almost unheard of with two leads like this.

On top of that, I feel Miller has done a masterful job of not smothering a feminist message. It would have been easy to say men 'killed the world' and all men are bad, but through Max and Nux, he shows otherwise. Even with the women though, they aren't all the same, but are distinct. People are people...

Again, I'm sure plenty can phrase this better than I.

A really, really well done film.

EDIT: I like that his car appears in more than one film, but gets destroyed. I mean, in all these legends the Max character has to arrive on the scene somehow. It also works to cast different actors in the role as perhaps various tribal/community elders recall his features differently. Wait...is this whole 'Mad Max movies are re-tellings' true? A buddy told me about this Friday night at the theater and I guess I've taken his word. Haven't looked into myself...does anyone know?

Saw it last night and loved it. My buddy, not so much. He wanted more plot (or more accurately, more description of the plot and history of the world & characters).

One thing I found interesting was that even though it was very violent, it wasn't very explicit. Lots of people die, but rarely was there graphic detail. I kind of appreciated that.

What I loved most was just the sheer audacity of it. Each stunt, vehicle, character was more crazy than the last. I was taken to a completely alien world, visually, and yet everything made sense and I kept wanting more.

I saw it in 3D (not by choice), and it was okay. Fortunately, the scenes are bright enough that you could see everything. There was good depth of field, too, which is rare. I wouldn't recommend it that way, but that's how I feel about almost all 3D. I do want to see it again, though.