Mad Max: Fury Road

BuilderPlumber

Brian? wrote: »

I find this hilarious. I wouldn't go to see Jurassic Park in a fit and can't name a Michael Bay film I'd watch if it was on telly.

If enjoying Fury Road is your measurement of taste, you'll be well served by Hollywood. They destroyed Terminator with T3 and salvation, they destroyed Predator with AvP and now they've destroyed Mad Max.

Personally, I loved Mad Max Fury Road. But I do agree about Alien v Predator. This tying of 2 different sets of films just does not work and it destroyed those two franchises. Same with Batman v Superman I predict.

Back to Mad Max: I note there are two types of Mad Max fans. The first love MM2 and criticise the others. The second love them all and are able to see the 4 films as representing different elements of a world gone wrong.

The MM films are not Police Academy so the ideas explored have to be different every time. The could have gone down the road of making MM2 again and again but they didn't. Beyond Thunderdome is very underappreciated and expanded to show other elements rather than car and bike chases such as fights, post apocalypse legal systems and possible new religious beliefs.

The irony of the situation is that people criticise Fury Road for being too chase focused and Thunderdome for not having a chase scene in it until the end. But they are telling a different story and exploring other elements in the world. The first film also focused on other elements besides chases such as Max the family man (which explains his affection for the feral kid in MM2 and the lost tribe in MMBT), a corrupt courts system and so on. The desire to help the weak is predominant in all 4 films: Max's personal losses translate into he being there to save those he can.

johnny_ultimate

There are two types of people: those who believe there are two types of people, and those who don't

Riddle101

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

There are two types of people: those who believe there are two types of people, and those who don't

Reminds me of. "There are two types of spurs my friend, those who come through the door, and those who come through the window" - Tuco, The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

pixelburp

Brian? wrote: »

Mad Max 2 would never be made today. I don't think Terminator would have been either. This is down to the studios.

No, this is down to the fact that movies like Mad Max 2, Predator and Terminator were effectively 'low-budget' flicks, sometimes made by relative unknowns, who managed to fly under the radar of the Hollywood machine. Sure, they might had varying degrees of studio backing, but it's unlikely they were thought of as success-stories in the making, or a franchise ready for juicing. These were often bootstrap productions made by impassioned creatives.

Remember, The Terminator was James Cameron's first serious film, assuming we ignore Piranha II, as Cameron was ousted by the producer and had no say in editing; The Terminator was a low-budget thriller and given Orion Pictures themselves predicted it would bomb (only holding 1 press screening in fact!), it's doubtful many seriously thought it was going to be the hit & franchise it became.

You can go into detail about the essential problems with Hollywood, and there are plenty, but it's a little unfair to criticise them for not being flighty guerrilla film-makers - that's just not their strength or the way they work. They'll latch onto a success-story all right, and in all likelihood drain it of the creativity and dynamism that made it a hit in the first place, but that's when it's up to the consumers to move on, accepting that the lightning in a bottle won't come back.

I've heard it remarked that the Entertainment Industry is often the race to be second, but I don't blame them for trying to ride the coattails of successes they can't predict - I just try not to encourage them.

To say 'Mad Max 2' would never be made today is a little hyperbolic; if anything movies now have more avenues for funding than ever before with the explosion of crowd-funding, and there are still plenty of sleeper hits out there. Oh sure, Mad Max is too big now to be a small-scale production made by a bunch of 20-something Aussies, but what can you do?

BuilderPlumber

pixelburp wrote: »

No, this is down to the fact that movies like Mad Max 2, Predator and Terminator were effectively 'low-budget' flicks, sometimes made by relative unknowns, who managed to fly under the radar of the Hollywood machine. Sure, they might had varying degrees of studio backing, but it's unlikely they were thought of as success-stories in the making, or a franchise ready for juicing. These were often bootstrap productions made by impassioned creatives.

Remember, The Terminator was James Cameron's first serious film, assuming we ignore Piranha II, as Cameron was ousted by the producer and had no say in editing; The Terminator was a low-budget thriller and given Orion Pictures themselves predicted it would bomb (only holding 1 press screening in fact!), it's doubtful many seriously thought it was going to be the hit & franchise it became.

You can go into detail about the essential problems with Hollywood, and there are plenty, but it's a little unfair to criticise them for not being flighty guerrilla film-makers - that's just not their strength or the way they work. They'll latch onto a success-story all right, and in all likelihood drain it of the creativity and dynamism that made it a hit in the first place, but that's when it's up to the consumers to move on, accepting that the lightning in a bottle won't come back.

I've heard it remarked that the Entertainment Industry is often the race to be second, but I don't blame them for trying to ride the coattails of successes they can't predict - I just try not to encourage them.

To say 'Mad Max 2' would never be made today is a little hyperbolic; if anything movies now have more avenues for funding than ever before with the explosion of crowd-funding, and there are still plenty of sleeper hits out there. Oh sure, Mad Max is too big now to be a small-scale production made by a bunch of 20-something Aussies, but what can you do?

When the early Mad Max films were made, no one was predicting how big they'd be. The very first was a low budget film that was set in an undefined future where oil was in short supply. You could not call it post apocalypse but you could feel things were radically wrong with regard to how crime was out of control. The police HQ was in poor condition and then all the statements like 'do not abuse privileges'. But other things look totally normal, like the diner, pub, house, TV, etc. scenes.

The film proved a big hit. Then Mad Max 2. While small compared to today's films, this film had a relatively big budget for its time. And for a non-Hollywood film. A backstory was added to how the world was moving into chaos. This was probably not thought out for film one. But we are now told film one takes place as a war in Saudi Arabia, Iraq or Iran is initiated. This leads to the collapse of oil and a war between 2 superpowers. Total society collapse ensues. This then rather than the normal enough world of the first film becomes the world of all the sequels.

Mad Max 2 and 3 become massive hits and define the post apocalypse world. MM2 would be virtually remade as Waterword and Beyond Thunderdome as The Postman a decade later. These were among the many poor Mad Max ripoffs that dominated the 1980s and 1990s and were the better ones. Anyone remember Metalstorm (Dojan), Cyborg, Steel Dawn or Battletruck??

Fury Road I think is very similar to Mad Max 2. A big budget film, yes, but it remains faithful to the original spirit and I for one know with this you are watching a MAD MAX film and not a Mad Max ripoff.

rockatansky

Brian? wrote: »

I'm not saying a huge amount of character development was needed. I was merely rebutting the idea that it was there in spades as some people seem to think. A little more would have been good.

I think my main issue with the film was I was simply disappointed in it. It wasn't anywhere near the film any of the 3 Mad Max films were. Even Mad Max 3 was streets ahead.

I honestly think it was a mistake to have Tom Hardy play Max. The central character didn't actually need to be the original Max, it had no bearing on the film at all.

Ah here, you're clearly on a wind up.

rockatansky

Brian? wrote: »

I find this hilarious. I wouldn't go to see Jurassic Park in a fit and can't name a Michael Bay film I'd watch if it was on telly.

If enjoying Fury Road is your measurement of taste, you'll be well served by Hollywood. They destroyed Terminator with T3 and salvation, they destroyed Predator with AvP and now they've destroyed Mad Max.

Fury Road was everything that is good about Mad Max. If you really believe that it has been destroyed then you are really are not getting what Mad Max is really about.

candy-gal1

Insane but really good movie, does what it says on the tin basically, very enjoyable and very different to anything Id seen before

Brian?

rockatansky wrote: »

Fury Road was everything that is good about Mad Max. If you really believe that it has been destroyed then you are really are not getting what Mad Max is really about.

So I've missed the point of the film? I should have switched off my brain and enjoyed all the mindless action.

I actually thought there was more to Mad Max than that. Especially 1&2.

Mickeroo

Brian? wrote: »

So I've missed the point of the film? I should have switched off my brain and enjoyed all the mindless action.

I actually thought there was more to Mad Max than that. Especially 1&2.

There was just as much going on in this in terms of story and them as MM2 if not more.

BuilderPlumber

I agree that Fury Road has all the elements needed that sum up all that is good about Mad Max. Different aspects of his personality have been explored in each film. Fury Road did indeed do all what it says on the tin. It revived interest in the franchise, was very successful and the real test: it did not feel like 2 hours and I left the cinema wanting more.

Mad Max has always been a lovely departure from the normal stuff. In the 1980s, the three Mad Max films were the antidote to all them karate, Vietnam war and buddy cop films that seemed to be made over and over. Today, Mad Max is an alternative to all the CGI-orientated action films, the romcoms and the never ending superhero films (I am just waiting for Bluebottleman to be made!!!!).

Mad Max 2 will always be the most preferred. It is to post apocalypse films what Citizen Kane is to dialogue films. But there is a tendency to underrate the other films in the series. Fury Road does not disappoint in my opinion. I have come out of the cinema feeling less than satisfied with other revisits such as 2006's Miami Vice (it was ok but nowhere near the best of the original series) and Alien V Predator.

BuilderPlumber

Personally, I think all the 4 Mad Max films are excellent in their own way and all have something new to offer. But thinking of things like combining Batman and Superman as well as Alien and Predator, here are two clear ways of messing up a Mad Max film:

A film called 'Mad Max meets Rambo'. Set in the near future, Mad Max teams up with war hero John Rambo to take on a vicious biker gang. Set around the time of the first movie, Max is a dedicated cop and family man who has to take down the vicious gang of the Nightrider. Rambo after doing in rogue cops in the US, commies in Vietnam, Russians in Afghanistan and military dictators in Burma has relocated to Australia where he thinks he can enjoy peace and quiet. Max and Rambo set up a Max and Furiosa style partnership against the baddies. Only thing is: this was kinda done already in the form of the little remembered Cobra where Stallone plays a cop with Rambo qualities taking on a gang of bikers.

A film called 'Mad Max v The Terminator'. In the post apocalypse, machines take over the world. They have defeated Sarah and John Connor and have taken over all the world bar Australia. Only one man can replace John Connor and that is Mad Max who then takes down the machines forever.

I better stop now .. in case these get made!!

rockatansky

Brian? wrote: »

So I've missed the point of the film? I should have switched off my brain and enjoyed all the mindless action.

I actually thought there was more to Mad Max than that. Especially 1&2.

I don't think you've missed the point. I think you're looking for something that wasn't going to be there with Fury Road, and never was with the first 2 either.

Mad Max 1 - A fairly straight forward low budget Road / Revenge Movie. Is there really any more to it than that?

johnny_ultimate

rockatansky wrote: »

Ah here, you're clearly on a wind up.

rockatansky wrote: »

If you really believe that it has been destroyed then you are really are not getting what Mad Max is really about.

Final warning: no more little digs like this at individual posters. Absolutely challenge points made, but no need to make it personal.

johnny_ultimate

BuilderPlumber wrote: »

It is to post apocalypse films what Citizen Kane is to dialogue films.

What a peculiar description of Citizen Kane...

Brian?

Mickeroo wrote: »

There was just as much going on in this in terms of story and them as MM2 if not more.

I don't agree. But we can go around in circles on this for ever. There's every chance I'm romanticising the first 3 films and my taste has evolved. A Mad Max marathon may be in order.

Mickeroo

Brian? wrote: »

I don't agree. But we can go around in circles on this for ever. There's every chance I'm romanticising the first 3 films and my taste has evolved. A Mad Max marathon may be in order.

Agree to disagree I guess The originals are very much due a re-watch from me too.

Fysh

I think rewatching the originals is definitely a good idea; Beyond Thunderdome has some creaky Ewok-like bits but overall was better than I remembered it being, with Mad Max and Road Warrior being better still. But the interesting thing that gets highlighted by watching all of them after watching Fury Road is that Mad Max is possibly the only franchise I can think of where I've enjoyed all the installments, and each installment has tried to tell a different sort of story (as opposed to the tiresome notion that sequels should be basically the same film again because that's what worked the first time around).

It also makes you realise that even in the first film, the almost cartoonishly villainous biker gang already had a sort of proto-camp aesthetic going on, and the fetishistic treatment of modded vehicles builds up throughout the film series to the extremes that we see in Fury Road.

Most importantly, the second and third films explicitly state that Max is a folk hero/legend, with the implication that the stories are oral histories or fireside tales - with this explaining the larger-than-life aspects of the story.

Ipso

Fysh wrote: »

Most importantly, the second and third films explicitly state that Max is a folk hero/legend, with the implication that the stories are oral histories or fireside tales - with this explaining the larger-than-life aspects of the story.

Isn't there a quote from the history men at the end of Fury Road?
http://madmax.wikia.com/wiki/History_Men

BuilderPlumber

Fysh wrote: »

I think rewatching the originals is definitely a good idea; Beyond Thunderdome has some creaky Ewok-like bits but overall was better than I remembered it being, with Mad Max and Road Warrior being better still. But the interesting thing that gets highlighted by watching all of them after watching Fury Road is that Mad Max is possibly the only franchise I can think of where I've enjoyed all the installments, and each installment has tried to tell a different sort of story (as opposed to the tiresome notion that sequels should be basically the same film again because that's what worked the first time around).

It also makes you realise that even in the first film, the almost cartoonishly villainous biker gang already had a sort of proto-camp aesthetic going on, and the fetishistic treatment of modded vehicles builds up throughout the film series to the extremes that we see in Fury Road.

Most importantly, the second and third films explicitly state that Max is a folk hero/legend, with the implication that the stories are oral histories or fireside tales - with this explaining the larger-than-life aspects of the story.

Agree 100% here ... Each Mad Max film had something new and different to offer. The first film was a revenge film set in the last days of a normal world where organised crime is a rebel movement taking on law and order. Film 2 seemed to be set just after the fall of society with a group of refugees fleeing the warlords that take over. This could be modern Iraq or Syria or any country where a regime has collapsed and filled a vacuum. We are told a major war has happened and fuel is in scarce supply. Film 3 focused on a post nuclear future and no oil at all with new societies forming. As Max takes on Blaster in the Thunderdome, we are in a very different world to what we see in the first film.

Fury Road follows aspects of the second and third films with a Bartertown like society controlled by a Humungus type warlord who happens to be played by the actor who played film 1's villain Toecutter.

Mad Max is indeed one of the few series I can think of too that has 4 strong components with something new to offer. It has inspired countless other films and along with Star Wars, Bladerunner and Terminator, is the most influential sci fi films of its era.

The only downside with Mad Max is the number of poor, crude copies it inspired like Battletruck (a New Zealand version that combines MM1 and a typical Western), Metalstorm aka Dojan aka Dogen (basically MM2 married to Star Wars, esp. Return of the Jedi), Cobra (Stallone's Rambofied take on MM1), Cyborg (an ultraviolent mix of MM, the death of Jesus, and karate films), Steel Dawn (MM meets swordfighting films), Waterworld (MM2 on water), The Postman (Beyond Thunderdome in reverse), etc. There are various Italian ripoffs of it too I cannot recall.

Bandana boy

BuilderPlumber wrote: »

(I am just waiting for Bluebottleman to be made!!!!)..

Close enough

Kev W

Fysh wrote: »

Most importantly, the second and third films explicitly state that Max is a folk hero/legend, with the implication that the stories are oral histories or fireside tales - with this explaining the larger-than-life aspects of the story.

I believe George Miller has said somewhere that he deliberately has all of the films contradict each other to play into the oral history idea, as if parts of one story are being misremembered as parts of another. Hence you get things like multiple instances of the same vehicle being destroyed and the gyrocopter pilot from Mad Max 2 turning up again in Beyond Thunderdome as a separate yet identical character.

BuilderPlumber

Kev W wrote: »

I believe George Miller has said somewhere that he deliberately has all of the films contradict each other to play into the oral history idea, as if parts of one story are being misremembered as parts of another. Hence you get things like multiple instances of the same vehicle being destroyed and the gyrocopter pilot from Mad Max 2 turning up again in Beyond Thunderdome as a separate yet identical character.

He certainly leaves it rather vague and it is often up to the audience to interpret where it all fits. So far, Mad Max himself is the only definite character that is in all the movies. But some of the actors played different characters or maybe not?

Bruce Spence played 2 pilots as you point out correctly. It is assumed that the one in MM2 went off to the north coastal area (which is implied it is a better place) lead his tribe and settle with his girlfriend who he met at the refinery. Early on in the film, he is 'arrested' by Max and they do a deal to share knowledge of a fuel source thus leading to the rest of the film and they becoming friends and allies eventually. In MMBT, he uses a plane as a missile to knock Max off and capture his vehicle and camels. His stealing of Max's goods leads Max to his adventures in Barterown, the Thunderdome and with the lost tribe. Again, he becomes Max's ally at the end!

Now, could this be one and the same character (he joking around with Max at the beginning to get back for he being shackled to a tree and dragged around in the car with a gun controlled by a dog in his face). Max does not greet him as someone he knows however but he does not say he does not know who he is either.

As regards the Great Northern Tribe: could the pilot actually be the same man in the second film and poss. Captain Walker as well? Maybe, maybe not. But not too many with planes would be around and the damages of nuclear war could have finally affected the normality of the land where the tribe were (again, the reference to the green place being gone in Fury Road hints this: the green place may well be the world of the first film).

With regard to the vehicles: yes, Max drives 2 in the first film. A black and a yellow. We don't see the yellow ones again. Max has the black one in the second and fourth films and a camel drawn new vehicle in the third. Chances are more than one of these existed and ex cop Max may well know where to look for them. Rogue cops gone biker gangster in the wasteland!

It has been said before where does all the fuel, guns, vehicles, etc. come from? Again, there is a major explanation: we are NEVER explicitly told how the rest of the world fared. We see a war happen, anarchy in parts of the world, a reference to a nuclear winter and devastation in Australia (or part of it). Chances are if this was the real world situation, some places would remain fairly normal, some superpower would start invading other places to gain resources and a sort of neo-colonialism rich/poor divide would develop. Perhaps, The Middle East, Asia, Australia and Russia are decimated to save America or Europe?

Perhaps some new fascist regime occupies Europe and America with its people living off the rest of the world? Perhaps like always it sells arms to third world failed states? This seems likely as vehicles are new, the guns work (even in the fuelless society of MMBT) and the bad guys in films 2 and 4 seem to be very well connected and have resources not available to anyone else. Australia is probably depicted here as the nation that fared worst. Of all the 4 films, Beyond Thunderdome probably was by far the most apocalyptic as it is implied every side had it tough and have had to make their own resources. In the others, the baddies go around without a care in the world and have PLENTY of what they need. The place Pappagallo wanted to go to further indicates that the world of the second film was certainly a two tier one. Perhaps, we saw the better world in the first. The fourth may well be set on the absolute brink where the entire world incl. any remaining normal countries collapsed and/or where Australia is a fallout-polluted warzone the rest of the world ignores. MMBT is set furthest out in the ever decaying world of this future Australia imo.

thegreengoblin

Looking forward to seeing it on blu ray. I'm not too sure of the exact details as to what's on each set but the four film anthology sounds great.

http://www.scified.com/site/madmax/mad-max-fury-road-home-release-sets-revealed

Chain Smoker

thegreengoblin wrote: »

Looking forward to seeing it on blu ray. I'm not too sure of the exact details as to what's on each set but the four film anthology sounds great.

http://www.scified.com/site/madmax/mad-max-fury-road-home-release-sets-revealed

Only half read it, but there's no mention of Miller's proposed dialogue free B&W version there, is there?

Looper007

Chain Smoker wrote: »

Only half read it, but there's no mention of Miller's proposed dialogue free B&W version there, is there?

Sadly its not getting a release (I think the studio gave it a thumbs down). Sad would have been a good extra.

Looper007

Looper007 wrote: »

Sadly its not getting a release (I think the studio gave it a thumbs down). Sad would have been a good extra.

It will get released and the studio will be laughing all the way to the bank as people double dip on it.

Fysh

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It will get released and the studio will be laughing all the way to the bank as people double dip on it.

Goddamnit. I hate when they pull stupid crap like that.

Having said that, I've just read about the Gravity "silent space" alternate audio on the blu-ray-release from last year, so I reckon you're right. Annoying too, because I'll gladly pay well over the usual odds for a blu-ray set of the film and the B&W version, but I'm not buying it twice. Oh well, so much for this being a launch-day purchase for me

BuilderPlumber

Fysh wrote: »

Goddamnit. I hate when they pull stupid crap like that.

Having said that, I've just read about the Gravity "silent space" alternate audio on the blu-ray-release from last year, so I reckon you're right. Annoying too, because I'll gladly pay well over the usual odds for a blu-ray set of the film and the B&W version, but I'm not buying it twice. Oh well, so much for this being a launch-day purchase for me

Yes, these 2 will be issued separately along with other variants. Fury Road is definitely the best action film of this year so far (and probably joint best along with the new Bond at the year end).

Barely There

Finally got to see it at the weekend.
Holy Moly that was fun.

What a visceral experience. During the first hour one barely had time to breath, much less question the plot/dialogue.

Loved it - but can see why others might not - the OH certainly didn't think much of it.
Some of the shots were jaw-droppingly good.