Mad Max: Fury Road - Part 2

[DarkKnight88]

I don't think anyone cares anymore.

Besides, WB distributed Edge of Darkness after what happened.

 

[samsnee]

Would WB want any involvement with Gibson after how tarnished his rep is these days?

They wouldn't advertise it but doesn't mean he couldn't have a minor cameo, especially if he's unrecognizable.

 

[Schlosser85]

I think if he had a cameo one of the advance screening reviewers would have mentioned it months ago.

 

[Marvin]

It's hard to believe that the director of this film also directed a film about a talking pig and a dancing penguin. Oh... And both were really awesome films about talking pigs and dancing penguins.

amen

 

[Mr.T]

I haven't seen any of the Mad Max movies. Should I? Have they hold up well?

I remember my Dad watching these movies when I was a kid. They never really peaked my interest then, but I plan on watching all of them before seeing Fury Road. Fury Road trailers look great. I figured the least I could do is catch up on the world of Mad Max before seeing the latest iteration...

 

[Schlosser85]

I was never that attached to the original movies. The first one especially really doesn't hold up well.

But Fury Road seems most similar to Road Warrior, so I might re-watch that one.

 

[The Endless]

For me Road Warrior is still one of the best action movies ever made.

 

[Marvin]

When you are younger, the apocalypse ridden hopeless tragic world really is something, it's just so big. Hummongus and the siege..that little kid with the boomerang. That guy with the flying helicopter cart, and Gibson just in the middle there, a man with few words passing though and helping out, fearless as he is. The struggle for gas...
It's pretty crazy if you can get into the film making. Very very easy when you are a kid. Watching it now who knows. It would be like the diff between watching terminator 1 as a kid vs an adult(in this landscape of all places).

Miller is pretty great though, really bold visualist. You can see the strong compositions and story telling in even his babe movie(s). I'm honestly not surprised the Fury Road trailers look as grabbing as they do. That first shot from the con teaser is classic(composition wise). Then there is Theron's gnarly arm. The man really goes for it. And it's enough to make one appreciate the Road Warrior I think.

 

[Black Narcissus]

For me Road Warrior is still one of the best action movies ever made.

It is.

 

[DarkKnight88]

I was never that attached to the original movies. The first one especially really doesn't hold up well.

I disagree. The first is actually my favorite one.

The third is the weakest.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

The first doesn't look all that professional. Very low rent, with an extremely cliched story and audio that is rather difficult to actually hear. The Road Warrior on the other hand, is a beast.

 

[Greens]

None of the Mad Max movies stand up, IMO. This new one might just become my favorite.

 

[DarkKnight88]

The first doesn't look all that professional. Very low rent, with an extremely cliched story and audio that is rather difficult to actually hear.

I didn't feel that way at all. It's the story that matters in the end. For me, it was the most emotional. I was invested in Max's story.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I didn't feel that way at all. It's the story that matters in the end. For me, it was the most emotional. I was invested in Max's story.

You don't feel like the story is extremely cliched? I am going to assume you never watched a western or revenge film then.

And while I am all about story, this is film. The combination of visuals and sound is what delivers the story. It is as important as the story. Some would argue more.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

The first Max film is a product of it's time and the resources Miller had available at the time. It's a good B-Movie/Grind House styled film, but yes, it's low budget is apparent. Miller's acumen can be seen in a lot of aspects in it though, as a film maker. And cliches aren't in themselves a bad thing, as many of the greatest films of all time have story elements or plot devices oe characters that are well worn to say the least.

Miller does vastly improve all aspects by the time we get to ROAD WARRIOR, of that there is no doubt. He also is working with a hell of a lot more resouces and the story is painted on a wider canvas. RW is also filled with cliches: The mercenary drifter that gets caught up in heroics and becomes involved in the lives of desperate people up against unthinkable odds and overwhelming and diabolical forces, forces of anarchy and barbarism vs a pocket of civilization. That doesn't take anything away from it I think. And the crackerjack execution helps sell it, given a main character that doesn't say much for long stretches. Miller had a good handle on story telling from the giddy up, but it's clear RW is made by a more mature film maker, sure, but his skill was also evident in MAX.

The one problematic film is THUNDER DOME, which I like the more I see it, but I can't lie... I was disappointed when I first saw it in theaters. It has some great moments, maybe even iconic ones. I mean there's a reason the term Thunder Dome is part of the pop culture lexicon. But yeah... Something is missing, or perhaps it's the feeling that it rehashes elements from RW? But then I think that the vehicular action is supposed to be a reason to watch the films going back to MAX, and I'm like, well of course then there's going to be some rehashing. It's not as good as RW, but for whatever reason, call it nostalgia if you will, but THUNDER DOME's stock has risen in my own estimation over the years while admitting that it's a notch or two bellow the previous film.

What excites me about FURY ROAD, aside from Hardy (a GREAT choice to take up the part) and Theron (a great talent that just seems to haven't yet risen to super star status for whatever reason) in an action film together, is that Miller is a director that has his foot in the old pre-CGI SFX era but has shown he a
So is adept in using that tool in other films. To see what someone like him can do combining both approaches, if the trailers are any indication, should guarantee a hell of a ride, no pun intended.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

The first Max film is a product of it's time and the resources Miller had available at the time. It's a good B-Movie/Grind House styled film, but yes, it's low budget is apparent. Miller's acumen can be seen in a lot of aspects in it though, as a film maker. And cliches aren't in themselves a bad thing, as many of the greatest films of all time have story elements or plot devices oe characters that are well worn to say the least.

Miller does vastly improve all aspects by the time we get to ROAD WARRIOR, of that there is no doubt. He also is working with a hell of a lot more resouces and the story is painted on a wider canvas. RW is also filled with cliches: The mercenary drifter that gets caught up in heroics and becomes involved in the lives of desperate people up against unthinkable odds and overwhelming and diabolical forces, forces of anarchy and barbarism vs a pocket of civilization. That doesn't take anything away from it I think. And the crackerjack execution helps sell it, given a main character that doesn't say much for long stretches. Miller had a good handle on story telling from the giddy up, but it's clear RW is made by a more mature film maker, sure, but his skill was also evident in MAX.

The one problematic film is THUNDER DOME, which I like the more I see it, but I can't lie... I was disappointed when I first saw it in theaters. It has some great moments, maybe even iconic ones. I mean there's a reason the term Thunder Dome is part of the pop culture lexicon. But yeah... Something is missing, or perhaps it's the feeling that it rehashes elements from RW? But then I think that the vehicular action is supposed to be a reason to watch the films going back to MAX, and I'm like, well of course then there's going to be some rehashing. It's not as good as RW, but for whatever reason, call it nostalgia if you will, but THUNDER DOME's stock has risen in my own estimation over the years while admitting that it's a notch or two bellow the previous film.

What excites me about FURY ROAD, aside from Hardy (a GREAT choice to take up the part) and Theron (a great talent that just seems to haven't yet risen to super star status for whatever reason) in an action film together, is that Miller is a director that has his foot in the old pre-CGI SFX era but has shown he a
So is adept in using that tool in other films. To see what someone like him can do combining both approaches, if the trailers are any indication, should guarantee a hell of a ride, no pun intended.

When the film is one big cliche, yeah they matter imo.

The most exciting thing about Fury Road imo, is that Miller has the tech and budget to lose his mind as much as he wants. A rarity for these kind of projects.

 

[Schlosser85]

Aside from the first film, when he's another cliche (the tragic hero/anti-hero who loses his family, a very cliched plot development in itself), Max has always been the classic Western archetype of "the man with no name", "the dark stranger of the prairie", riding in out of nowhere to (grudgingly and partly for his own interests) help the poor pilgrims escape the bandits, just transplanted into a post-apocalyptic setting. That was the case in Road Warrior and Thunderdome, and Fury Road looks to fit right in.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Aside from the first film, when he's another cliche (the tragic hero/anti-hero who loses his family, a very cliched plot development in itself), Max has always been the classic Western archetype of "the man with no name", "the dark stranger of the prairie", riding in out of nowhere to (grudgingly and partly for his own interests) help the poor pilgrims escape the bandits, just transplanted into a post-apocalyptic setting. That was the case in Road Warrior and Thunderdome, and Fury Road looks to fit right in.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

When the film is one big cliche, yeah they matter imo.

The most exciting thing about Fury Road imo, is that Miller has the tech and budget to lose his mind as much as he wants. A rarity for these kind of projects.

My question is why does RW get a pass as it too is a very well worn type of story. There have been a crap ton of films like it before and after? Again, if we're talking purely about story, not the issues that are dependent on budget. Just story wise, we've seen all that before. Granted, I have NO problem with formula or cliche. As long as the execution story wise is on point and the formula is running on all cylinders that is, which I would say is the case in RW... But again, strip away the post apocalyptic setting and the bare bones of RW has elements of many a western or other kind of genre action film also.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

Aside from the first film, when he's another cliche (the tragic hero/anti-hero who loses his family, a very cliched plot development in itself), Max has always been the classic Western archetype of "the man with no name", "the dark stranger of the prairie", riding in out of nowhere to (grudgingly and partly for his own interests) help the poor pilgrims escape the bandits, just transplanted into a post-apocalyptic setting. That was the case in Road Warrior and Thunderdome, and Fury Road looks to fit right in.

Yeah, that's what I mean. I don't think, if you want to color "cliche" in a negative light, that RW has them any less than the first film.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

My question is why does RW get a pass as it too is a very well worn type of story. There have been a crap ton of films like it before and after? Again, if we're talking purely about story, not the issues that are dependent on budget. Just story wise, we've seen all that before. Granted, I have NO problem with formula or cliche. As long as the execution story wise is on point and the formula is running on all cylinders that is, which I would say is the case in RW... But again, strip away the post apocalyptic setting and the bare bones of RW has elements of many a western or other kind of genre action film also.

You can't rip away the post-apocalyptic setting. It is the entire point.

The Road Warrior takes a cliche, but plays with it. It is a unique world with a think layer of strangeness, which adds a level of freshness. It is also shot far more deliberate, far better manner imo. It is why so many things have ripped off The Road Warrior. Not Mad Max, but specifically The Road Warrior. The world presented was something new and engaging.

The first film is one huge cliche. Not anything about it is fresh. Hollywood had made that film many times, and to far better results. Hollywood never made The Road Warrior.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

So you are saying that WITHOUT the post apocalyptic setting it would be cliched? Since what I stated is pretty much what Schlosser said I really don't see your point. RW's story is at it's root a "cliche/formula", just dressed up in that post apocalyptic setting. As previously stated, the story beats, the characters... In RW they do conform to A LOT of stuff that's come before. It's like saying, The feudal Japan setting is the point of MAGNIFICENT SEVEN (Kurosawa's). The Sturges version would be a strong argument against that.

Again, I can't see how RW is any less cliche than MAX is in any appreciable way, since it's been established that Max as a character and the general gist of the story in RW (pocket of civilization amid a world of barbarism) has been done before, mostly in the western genre which you say is the weakness of MAX.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

So you are saying that WITHOUT the post apocalyptic setting it would be cliched? Since what I stated is pretty much what Schlosser said I really don't see your point. RW's story is at it's root a "cliche/formula", just dressed up in that post apocalyptic setting. As previously stated, the story beats, the characters... In RW they do conform to A LOT of stuff that's come before. It's like saying, The feudal Japan setting is the point of MAGNIFICENT SEVEN (Kurosawa's). The Sturges version would be a strong argument against that.

Again, I can't see how RW is any less cliche than MAX is in any appreciable way, since it's been established that Max as a character and the general gist of the story in RW (pocket of civilization amid a world of barbarism) has been done before, mostly in the western genre which you say is the weakness of MAX.

What you seem to be missing is that the post-apocalyptic setting plays into everything. The look, the characters, how they function. Get rid of the space in Star Wars, and suddenly it is very similar to a lot of things. Heck considering Lucas ripped many of the ideas and specific scenes from other places. But Star Wars is a landmark in filmmaking, a true turning point, and something cinema has never seen before. In 1977, there was nothing fresher then Star Wars. Now think about Harry Potter or Pirates of the Caribbean, or GotG. All are referenced to Star Wars.

Max is the cliched "Man With No Name". But he is different, a product of a very different environment. The characters who populate a very different world, and because of that they are different. The Humungus is a flippin' pro wrestler. Look at his speeches, his attire.

You bring up Seven Samurai. A film you seemingly haven't seen, and then miss the point. It is all about the setting, the characters, the Samurai culture. The Magnificent Seven is a remake, and still doesn't have the same tone or character of Seven Samurai. Yojimbo and A Fistful of Dollars are far closer, and that would be because Yojimbo is very much a Japanese Western.

I know this is wiki, but I can't find it anywhere else. Here is Kurosawa on the Magnificent Seven:

Seven Samurai was a technical and creative watershed that became Japan's highest-grossing movie and set a new standard for the industry. Its influence can be most strongly felt in the western The Magnificent Seven (1960), a film specifically adapted from Seven Samurai. Director John Sturges took Seven Samurai and adapted it to the Old West, with the Samurai replaced by gunslingers. Many of The Magnificent Seven's scenes mirror those of Seven Samurai.[19]

However, in interview with R.B Gadi, Kurosawa expressed how "The American copy of the The Magnificent Seven is a disappointment although entertaining. It is not a version of Seven Samurai".[10]:42 Stephen Prince argues that considering Samurai films and Westerns respond to different cultures and contexts, what Kurosawa found useful was not their content but rather he was inspired by their levels of syntactic movement, framing, form and grammar.[20]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Samurai#cite_ref-20

Also, who calls Seven Samurai, the original and far superior film, Kurosawa's Magnificent Seven. What the hell?

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

What you seem to be missing is that the post-apocalyptic setting plays into everything. The look, the characters, how they function. Get rid of the space in Star Wars, and suddenly it is very similar to a lot of things. Heck considering Lucas ripped many of the ideas and specific scenes from other places. But Star Wars is a landmark in filmmaking, a true turning point, and something cinema has never seen before. In 1977, there was nothing fresher then Star Wars. Now think about Harry Potter or Pirates of the Caribbean, or GotG. All are referenced to Star Wars.

Max is the cliched "Man With No Name". But he is different, a product of a very different environment. The characters who populate a very different world, and because of that they are different. The Humungus is a flippin' pro wrestler. Look at his speeches, his attire.

You bring up Seven Samurai. A film you seemingly haven't seen, and then miss the point. It is all about the setting, the characters, the Samurai culture. The Magnificent Seven is a remake, and still doesn't have the same tone or character of Seven Samurai. Yojimbo and A Fistful of Dollars are far closer, and that would be because Yojimbo is very much a Japanese Western.

I know this is wiki, but I can't find it anywhere else. Here is Kurosawa on the Magnificent Seven:



Also, who calls Seven Samurai, the original and far superior film, Kurosawa's Magnificent Seven. What the hell?

I see as per your usual M.O. you feel the need to be a *****ebag where polite conversation would suffice. Yep, I've seen Kurosawa's film... In Japan the title is in fact THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN.

I am through here since as ALWAYS you capriciously feel the need to be an asshat for no good God damned reason other than ****s and giggles. Which is a shame as you are obviously a knowledgable and passionate fan but your need to perfect the art of *****ebaggery online apparently trumps everything else and you just can't help yourself. Good day sir.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I see as per your usual M.O. you feel the need to be a *****ebag where polite conversation would suffice. Yep, I've seen Kurosawa's film... In Japan the title is in fact THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN.

Uh no, the original title is "七人の侍" or "Shichinin no samurai". RKO labelled the film "The Magnificent Seven" when they originally released it in the US. This was fixed when MGM made the remake.

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplayl...-about-akira-kurosawas-seven-samurai-20120426

http://www.tcm.com/tcmdb/title/89649/The-Seven-Samurai/articles.html

I am through here since as ALWAYS you capriciously feel the need to be an asshat for no good God damned reason other than ****s and giggles. Which is a shame as you are obviously a knowledgable and passionate fan but your need to perfect the art of *****ebaggery online apparently trumps everything else and you just can't help yourself. Good day sir.

Oh please. I made my point and now you are going to play the, "you're being mean" card. What did I say that was so bad? Pointing out you probably have never seen Seven Samurai? Or am I to believe that you are in your 70s and watched the original RKO American release? If so, may I suggest watching the full version, as it was heavily cutdown back then.