Saw it it's INSANE. The visual's the world building is excellent, there's so much going on it's so dense. Yet the action never stop's, never let's up, never gets dull, till your dead....and it doesnt use shaky cam, or if it does it uses it so sparingly you can always see what is going on. Watch it if you dislike some current action movies, and want to see one done right, and support the hope of more.
So.. how's the actual story? Mad Max stands on it's story more than on the car chases, which is why the original and Road Warrior are so damn good (and why Thunderdome sucked). How does this one stack up?
So.. how's the actual story? Mad Max stands on it's story more than on the car chases, which is why the original and Road Warrior are so damn good (and why Thunderdome sucked). How does this one stack up?
The story isn't a focus clearly, it's more a big car chase but in its brief moments it's sombre. Charlese Therone carries it more than Max.
So.. how's the actual story? Mad Max stands on it's story more than on the car chases, which is why the original and Road Warrior are so damn good (and why Thunderdome sucked). How does this one stack up?
It has a pretty simple story that's told very well. They don't waste a bunch of time on unnecessary exposition, everything is consistent, and all the characters' motives are very clear. I felt that the story supported the visuals and action sequences, and the visuals and action sequences did a lot to support the pretty minimal nature of the story.
There's also a lot of visual storytelling that happens, such as showing the environment and the ways people interact with it.
Best movie I've seen in years, hands down. No stupid amount of Hollywood pandering, no weird damseling or sudden evacuation of intelligence, villains with actual depth that you could have slight sympathy for, excellent soundtrack, fantastic costume and art direction and absolutely AMAZING action scenes.
I'm seeing it again, I have to, it's really really that good.
And as Swizzle said, the movie operates a lot on "show don't tell" in regards to the nuanced parts of the story, which is absolutely excellent.
So few word from Max as it should be. I feel like the build up of him finally opening up near the end in saying his name to Furiosa was awesome. Like, it actually meant something, and being near the end, you didnt have that wierd sexual tension between the characters if the movie time dragged on. He was close, he showed just enough compassion, and your left liking this guy so much, and then it doenst spoil it all but ends on that high note. so good! Felt like very little of the movie didnt have a purpose or had me rolling my eyes.
Whats up with those crows in the swamp land though? Looked like humans on stilts?
Is this also true for other modern "cool" inventions such as corny slow-mo moments?
In some way's it's the opposite, sometimes things look speeded up. From what they say they never went over 24frames and quite often used alot less. Seems to be George Millers preference. It doesnt look bad though.
Have seen it just now and its stunning. Im not sure when I was as impressed the last time ive seen a movie. Going the extra way and building all the real cars and such really paid off. I miss Mel Gibson tho. Warboy was great.
Some german reviewer described it as "Bildgewaltig" and I can't find a better way to describe it.
@whatstrue
the stilts are likely because the land is poisoned and they search for stuff that is
still there, surviving seeds maybe ? they said nothing can grow, so them being farmers does not make that much sense, but something along these lines i guess
I loved it; it was beautiful. I have not watched the other movies in this franchise, but this one was amazing. I really cared for the characters. The visuals were great and the world building and interaction between the characters and the environment was fantastic! Gonna go watch it again very soon!
So few word from Max as it should be. I feel like the build up of him finally opening up near the end in saying his name to Furiosa was awesome. Like, it actually meant something, and being near the end, you didnt have that wierd sexual tension between the characters if the movie time dragged on. He was close, he showed just enough compassion, and your left liking this guy so much, and then it doenst spoil it all but ends on that high note. so good! Felt like very little of the movie didnt have a purpose or had me rolling my eyes.
Whats up with those crows in the swamp land though? Looked like humans on stilts?
My assumption is that they were throwing in, without exposition, just more characters that live in this world. Maybe scavengers, or farmers. Very reminsiscent of certain films where they have that juxtaposition of your protagonists and side characters who are just minding their own business as this protagonist group rolls on by.
Loved this film so much. Got home and ordered the art book straight away. I don't really see a film more than once in the theater but I would consider it with this.
saw it. enjoyed it. It wasn't perfect, but it was far better than anything else I've seen this year. I was really reminded of the newer Judge Dredd for some reason: this film kept its scope tight and focused on doing a limited number of things very very well.
I went in to it expecting a Mad Max movie with Max kicking ass and driving the story forward, just like if I went to a Die Hard movie I would expect the same from John McClane. Max kicked so little ass it should be a crime that they're even charging for this. If it had been advertised in a more accurate way I would have seen the Avengers again instead.
Honestly, I was thinking to myself multiple times that I should just walk out and I really wish I did. The last movie I walked out on was the "Green Hornet". I wasted my money on this and got duped once again by Rotten Tomatoes scores.
I went in to it expecting a Mad Max movie with Max kicking ass and driving the story forward, just like if I went to a Die Hard movie I would expect the same from John McClane. Max kicked so little ass it should be a crime that they're even charging for this. If it had been advertised in a more accurate way I would have seen the Avengers again instead.
Honestly, I was thinking to myself multiple times that I should just walk out and I really wish I did. The last movie I walked out on was the "Green Hornet". I wasted my money on this and got duped once again by Rotten Tomatoes scores.
Poor guy. Just wondering, do you know who Max is? I mean have you watched the previous films?
I went in to it expecting a Mad Max movie with Max kicking ass and driving the story forward, just like if I went to a Die Hard movie I would expect the same from John McClane. Max kicked so little ass it should be a crime that they're even charging for this. If it had been advertised in a more accurate way I would have seen the Avengers again instead.
Honestly, I was thinking to myself multiple times that I should just walk out and I really wish I did. The last movie I walked out on was the "Green Hornet". I wasted my money on this and got duped once again by Rotten Tomatoes scores.
Haha, so are you down with "Vanityfair's" article this week
I went in to it expecting a Mad Max movie with Max kicking ass and driving the story forward, just like if I went to a Die Hard movie I would expect the same from John McClane. Max kicked so little ass it should be a crime that they're even charging for this. If it had been advertised in a more accurate way I would have seen the Avengers again instead.
Honestly, I was thinking to myself multiple times that I should just walk out and I really wish I did. The last movie I walked out on was the "Green Hornet". I wasted my money on this and got duped once again by Rotten Tomatoes scores.
Been years since I saw the older films, but I seem to recall the previous Mad Max movies being as much about him getting his ass kicked as doing the ass kicking. EVERYONE got thrashed by the end of those movies.
Maybe the initial setup of Max
of him getting beaten/captured in the first two minutes
in this film left a sour note in your mouth, because he's pretty badass throughout most of the rest. It's just that everyone else is badass too.
That never bothered me..it fits the lore...and I think that's one of the things I enjoyed the most: even the lowest of scrub villains were still VERY persistent and threatening. There weren't too many pushovers in the film.
Been years since I saw the older films, but I seem to recall the previous Mad Max movies being as much about him getting his ass kicked as doing the ass kicking. EVERYONE got thrashed by the end of those movies.
Maybe the initial setup of Max
of him getting beaten/captured in the first two minutes
in this film left a sour note in your mouth, because he's pretty badass throughout most of the rest. It's just that everyone else is badass too.
That never bothered me..it fits the lore...and I think that's one of the things I enjoyed the most: even the lowest of scrub villains were still VERY persistent and threatening. There weren't too many pushovers in the film.
I've seen them recently (~1 year) on DVD and even more recently the first and second on TV broadcast. Max always is clearly the main character, driving the story forward, doing at least SOME action. Now in the new one, he's literally unable to speak for long periods of time, then doing practically nothing the rest of the way, speaking softly and mumbling.
The advertising on TV and trailers before other movies led me to believe that this was a MAX movie like the others. Since I go out of my way not to read any reviews or see any review videos before I see new movies, I was blind sided by his total lack of anything in the movie. Like I said before, if you go to a Die Hard movie you expect to see a John McClain movie or a Rambo movie you expect to see a John Rambo movie.
What happened was I found myself watching a bloodless (literally, the same amount of blood you see on a broadcast TV show) movie, with max chained up, with a one-armed woman kicking way more ass than max, and then saving some other women, and then driving into the desert to meet some old women, and then one of the "war boys" started having a romance plot. I mean, I couldn't even BELIEVE what I was seeing. The trailers were so far off from the reality of this movie I felt like I had been robbed.
all the female character is like-able !
mad max is the answer how badass female should look like.
it is all goes natural, no drastic physical and behavior upgrade or downgrade,
all they need is do what normal male character do. that includes changing truck wheel while tired and pregnant .
full respect.
the only problem in this movie is there is little room for calm. most of the time you got high speed action with little time to explain the background and deeper character development .
I saw the movie last night and I thoroughly enjoyed it. I don't think it's the best movie ever, as others here see it as, but enjoyable. Honestly though, the movie should be renamed to 'Furiosa: Fury Road' cause Max was just there...tagging along lol. There's clearly going to be a sequel, so maybe we'll get Max in a Max movie lol.
Two things though, Charlize Theron looks good with really short hair and the guitar guy is da real MVP!
Guitar guy is the real MVP. Just came back from a showing. I loved the film. To me, Mad Max has always been more about the setting and the badass things that happen in it, rather than the character of Max himself. And in that respect, this movie aces the test. The visual direction, and the cinematography are beautiful, and the plot is presented in a way where you're expected to know everything ancillary to it already (which you should, because of the intro sequence).
What an amazing movie. No words will do justice on trying to describe the vision and execution of this movie. All characters have something interesting about them. The colors, and composition, the sequences, and how badass everyone is. Just bliss. I really loved it, and you guys should go watch it if you have not. Seriously worth my 9 bucks, and i'll be going to watch it again if i get a chance.
No kidding, aesir. Personally, I'd rather just have a good movie. Honestly, I find that when a franchise feels the need to rehash a singular character over and over again it forces ever more convoluted character writing..and Hollywood is an IP graveyard of examples of how bad that can go.
....Like I said before, if you go to a Die Hard movie you expect to see a John McClain movie or a Rambo movie you expect to see a John Rambo movie.
I was happy visiting the Mad Max world and having it be bigger than Max. If anything, I feel like they didn't do ENOUGH opening up of the Lore...everything was too tidy by the end of Fury Road--too many doors-to-interesting-followups were closed. There are a lot of stories they could tell in the Mad Max "franchise", regardless of whether Max is even IN them...because the world of Mad Max ISN'T like Die Hard...Die Hard is a great action film set in familiar "hollywood reality" and McClain is really the only common thread. That franchise has nothing WITHOUT him.
Mad Max, on the other hand, spawned the whole entire subgenre of post-apocalyptic bondage-death-car wasteland sci-fi...that "world" is why I, personally, want to see Mad Max movies. Not Max. He's just a cool common link between the movies, but they make it very clear in the Max sequels that the wasteland is much, much larger than him. It's unfortunate the "Lore" is named after him.
As for the war-boy romance-I can see what you mean...it was a bit sudden, but I think it wasn't supposed to be romance as much as "redemption" -- she was pulling him away from his religious zealotry after he'd been rejected/cast-out by his God-figure. I think if they hadn't been so cuddly, it would have worked better.
This is just the kind of storytelling I enjoy, and I think a perfect use of the visual medium. Instead of spoon-feeding the audience with details about the world and characters through exposition and ham-fisted dialogue, these details are expertly conveyed through the visuals. Even if you aren't paying attention to the details of the world or character development it still works on a surface level as an amazing action film.
Also, Max was the vessel through which the story was told. We see it through his point of view. By some of your logic the "Hobbit" movies should have been called "Thorin Oakenshield" or "Gandalf". Also, Furiosa's goals are basically the same from the beginning to the end, we see more of an arc with Max as his plans and motives gradually change. That's usually something that indicates a main character.
As for the war-boy romance-I can see what you mean...it was a bit sudden, but I think it wasn't supposed to be romance as much as "redemption" -- she was pulling him away from his religious zealotry after he'd been rejected/cast-out by his God-figure. I think if they hadn't been so cuddly, it would have worked better.
1. 80's movies have this amazing atmosphere that today movies can't copy.
2. It was the worst Mad Max movie from all four.
3. To many main strong characters.
As a sole movie it was good, but not something I will miss/come back to years from now. Can't say the same about original trilogy, to which I come back happily once in a while.
I took the 'romance' thing not as romance but more of a mother figure to someone who was essentially a child. didnt really seem/feel like a romance plotline at all, although maybe I was too busy paying attention to explosions.
Now this is how you do a big, flashy summer blockbuster right. Keep the plot simple and straightforward. Keep the cast limited and focused. Keep the action tight and watch-able. Keep the caffeine away from the cameraman so that we don't get constant shaky-cam.
Everything that the Michael-Bay/Platinum Dunes school of movie-making does wrong, Mad Max: Fury Road does right. While the stunts are over-the-top and bombastic, the world-building is surprisingly subtle and well handled. It's the kind of world building I would normally expect from a Guiermo Del-Toro film, where all of the visual design and character actions serve to expand on the world that the characters inhabit. (show, don't tell) There are very few, if any exposition dumps.
Just a solid action flick from top to bottom. Charlize Theron steals the show in her role, delivering a fantastic performance. And the costume choices for the female leads were across-the-board well thought-out, each being appropriate for the characters in question, and not focused on making them sex objects.
Mad Max is not explored very much as a character. But anyone familiar with the previous films can tell you that is how his character usually works. He shows up, gets involved in other characters lives, helps them out somehow, and then walks off into the sunset. This was the structure of Road Warrior and Beyond Thunderdome. In that respect it stayed true to the structure of the franchise. And while Mad Max did not have a lot of development, Tom Hardy played the role very effectively. I would be quite happy to see a sequel in the same vein as this film.
Saw it it's INSANE. The visual's the world building is excellent, there's so much going on it's so dense. Yet the action never stop's, never let's up, never gets dull, till your dead....and it doesnt use shaky cam, or if it does it uses it so sparingly you can always see what is going on. Watch it if you dislike some current action movies, and want to see one done right, and support the hope of more.
Agreed 100%. It was such a good movie, and from the trailer I never thought they would be able to suspend my disbelief with so much ridiculous imagery, but somehow, they did it.
One of the best films I've seen, instantly went into my top 10. Such amazing designs, visuals, just, wow... Even the wife loved it, dragged me to see it a second time (Dragged? lol, more like ran with me).
I saw the movie last night and I thoroughly enjoyed it. I don't think it's the best movie ever, as others here see it as, but enjoyable.
I feel the same way. I really enjoyed the film, and I would recommend it to anyone who enjoys "summer explosion flicks", but people are acting like it's the second coming of film making... and I just don't see it. Maybe I'm missing something or maybe people really want to keep feeding into their own hype... I don't know.
Definitely go see it in the theater, if you're looking for a fun action flick.
My only real complaint is that Tom Hardy speaks like he has shit in his mouth for 90% of the movie. I wanted the ability to rewind, just to hear what he said.
Saw it today...Great Movie. The thing I like the most was how they injected bits of the world without interrupting the pace...Just from a few shots, you got a sense of your villain and the world he had created..it was a genius way to tell the back story without breaking the pace.
The spots of stillness really baked in long action sequences.\
I agree that it not the second coming of action films....but this film had an awesome sense of what it was, and it played to it's strengths without missing a beat.
I also love the fact that when Max went off to kill the lord of bullet town, that they didn't show it. Also, that they didn't have some huge mano e mano fight with Max and Imortal Joe..the whole video gamey boss fight is so overdone, I squealed a little bit when he just got his face torn off
2. It was the worst Mad Max movie from all four.
.
Thunderdome is the worst:
1. Miller's heart wasn't in it after the death of his friend and producer
2. It had a music video
3. It was originally another movie which was an adaption of a short story, Mad Max and Barter Town was stapled on to it
Saw it a second time this weekend. I definitely didn't like it AS much the second time through--but I still had a blast. But a few things I casually dismissed the first viewing stuck out way more to me on viewing two; namely some of the more contrived plot issues and some really overwrought music in (non-action) places. That said, the action, sets, acting, cars, and especially the visual world-building all held up really well for repeated viewings. In twenty years I don't think this will be considered the best action movie ever made, but I do think it will be considered an "influential classic". It's pretty great.
This forum is a big group of people from all different ages and walks of life so it's super interesting to see what people's perspectives are on the movie, the character and the franchise in general.
What I loved about the series is that Mad Max was always a sort of folk hero that just appears in times of need. He is an agent of chaos that changes the situation he happens to be a part of. When it's all over he just kind of wanders around into the next situation and everyone who has met him tells tales of a legendary road warrior that rides alone. And that is it. Super simple character, kind of like the Man With No Name Clint Eastwood guy.
All that said, the guy is pretty self sufficient and really boring on his own. That's why after the revenge bit in the first movie Max just can't do that shit again and he is used in other movies as the hand of fate wild card that wrecks plans and motivations, for good and bad. I guess that's why a lot of people are confused about the movie and who the real hero is.
As for the movie itself, it kicks so much ass and it feels so alien compared to the mindless explosions we watch now. And there's also the fact that a whole lot of shit isn't explained at all, it's just inferred, or explained way later if at all, and that was cool. It kept the movie mysterious and magical and kept your brain guessing. The movie is also cool because you kind of have to redirect your brain's logic and put it into a world where a bad guy will do things like waste already scarce resources to prove that he means business. Everything else falls into place almost perfectly.
I mean really, who nowadays can make a 2 hour long car chase in a desert interesting?
Replies
Is this also true for other modern "cool" inventions such as corny slow-mo moments?
The story isn't a focus clearly, it's more a big car chase but in its brief moments it's sombre. Charlese Therone carries it more than Max.
As for slo-mo moments there are not many.
It has a pretty simple story that's told very well. They don't waste a bunch of time on unnecessary exposition, everything is consistent, and all the characters' motives are very clear. I felt that the story supported the visuals and action sequences, and the visuals and action sequences did a lot to support the pretty minimal nature of the story.
There's also a lot of visual storytelling that happens, such as showing the environment and the ways people interact with it.
I'm seeing it again, I have to, it's really really that good.
And as Swizzle said, the movie operates a lot on "show don't tell" in regards to the nuanced parts of the story, which is absolutely excellent.
I wanted it to be 2 hours longer.
Whats up with those crows in the swamp land though? Looked like humans on stilts?
In some way's it's the opposite, sometimes things look speeded up. From what they say they never went over 24frames and quite often used alot less. Seems to be George Millers preference. It doesnt look bad though.
Some german reviewer described it as "Bildgewaltig" and I can't find a better way to describe it.
@whatstrue
the stilts are likely because the land is poisoned and they search for stuff that is
still there, surviving seeds maybe ? they said nothing can grow, so them being farmers does not make that much sense, but something along these lines i guess
@whatstrue - there's a real-world precedent for the stiltwalkers. Check this out http://tinyurl.com/of3p5cq
www.youtube.com/watch?t=773&v=_Wc58__rEFQ
Honestly, I was thinking to myself multiple times that I should just walk out and I really wish I did. The last movie I walked out on was the "Green Hornet". I wasted my money on this and got duped once again by Rotten Tomatoes scores.
Poor guy. Just wondering, do you know who Max is? I mean have you watched the previous films?
Haha, so are you down with "Vanityfair's" article this week
"How Mad Max: Fury Road Could Become the Most Surprising Feminist Triumph of the Year"
I've watched all of them, even the awful Beyond Thunderdome.
I don't read Vanityfair articles, nor do I take that site seriously.
Been years since I saw the older films, but I seem to recall the previous Mad Max movies being as much about him getting his ass kicked as doing the ass kicking. EVERYONE got thrashed by the end of those movies.
Maybe the initial setup of Max
That never bothered me..it fits the lore...and I think that's one of the things I enjoyed the most: even the lowest of scrub villains were still VERY persistent and threatening. There weren't too many pushovers in the film.
I've seen them recently (~1 year) on DVD and even more recently the first and second on TV broadcast. Max always is clearly the main character, driving the story forward, doing at least SOME action. Now in the new one, he's literally unable to speak for long periods of time, then doing practically nothing the rest of the way, speaking softly and mumbling.
The advertising on TV and trailers before other movies led me to believe that this was a MAX movie like the others. Since I go out of my way not to read any reviews or see any review videos before I see new movies, I was blind sided by his total lack of anything in the movie. Like I said before, if you go to a Die Hard movie you expect to see a John McClain movie or a Rambo movie you expect to see a John Rambo movie.
What happened was I found myself watching a bloodless (literally, the same amount of blood you see on a broadcast TV show) movie, with max chained up, with a one-armed woman kicking way more ass than max, and then saving some other women, and then driving into the desert to meet some old women, and then one of the "war boys" started having a romance plot. I mean, I couldn't even BELIEVE what I was seeing. The trailers were so far off from the reality of this movie I felt like I had been robbed.
Edit: Metascore of 92 apparently O.o
mad max is the answer how badass female should look like.
it is all goes natural, no drastic physical and behavior upgrade or downgrade,
all they need is do what normal male character do. that includes changing truck wheel while tired and pregnant .
full respect.
the only problem in this movie is there is little room for calm. most of the time you got high speed action with little time to explain the background and deeper character development .
Two things though, Charlize Theron looks good with really short hair and the guitar guy is da real MVP!
https://vimeo.com/127381179
[vv]127381179[/vv]
I forgot Tina Turner was in Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome
www.youtube.com/watch?v=innzSEX-zU0
Max Max game release date: September 1, 2015. Really looking forward to this, hope it plays as good as it looks.
I was happy visiting the Mad Max world and having it be bigger than Max. If anything, I feel like they didn't do ENOUGH opening up of the Lore...everything was too tidy by the end of Fury Road--too many doors-to-interesting-followups were closed. There are a lot of stories they could tell in the Mad Max "franchise", regardless of whether Max is even IN them...because the world of Mad Max ISN'T like Die Hard...Die Hard is a great action film set in familiar "hollywood reality" and McClain is really the only common thread. That franchise has nothing WITHOUT him.
Mad Max, on the other hand, spawned the whole entire subgenre of post-apocalyptic bondage-death-car wasteland sci-fi...that "world" is why I, personally, want to see Mad Max movies. Not Max. He's just a cool common link between the movies, but they make it very clear in the Max sequels that the wasteland is much, much larger than him. It's unfortunate the "Lore" is named after him.
This is just the kind of storytelling I enjoy, and I think a perfect use of the visual medium. Instead of spoon-feeding the audience with details about the world and characters through exposition and ham-fisted dialogue, these details are expertly conveyed through the visuals. Even if you aren't paying attention to the details of the world or character development it still works on a surface level as an amazing action film.
Also, Max was the vessel through which the story was told. We see it through his point of view. By some of your logic the "Hobbit" movies should have been called "Thorin Oakenshield" or "Gandalf". Also, Furiosa's goals are basically the same from the beginning to the end, we see more of an arc with Max as his plans and motives gradually change. That's usually something that indicates a main character.
https://www.facebook.com/MovieCarCrashes/videos/899890343387330/
http://www.thecredits.org/2015/05/heres-how-they-built-the-beastly-machines-for-mad-max-fury-road/
1. 80's movies have this amazing atmosphere that today movies can't copy.
2. It was the worst Mad Max movie from all four.
3. To many main strong characters.
As a sole movie it was good, but not something I will miss/come back to years from now. Can't say the same about original trilogy, to which I come back happily once in a while.
Everything that the Michael-Bay/Platinum Dunes school of movie-making does wrong, Mad Max: Fury Road does right. While the stunts are over-the-top and bombastic, the world-building is surprisingly subtle and well handled. It's the kind of world building I would normally expect from a Guiermo Del-Toro film, where all of the visual design and character actions serve to expand on the world that the characters inhabit. (show, don't tell) There are very few, if any exposition dumps.
Just a solid action flick from top to bottom. Charlize Theron steals the show in her role, delivering a fantastic performance. And the costume choices for the female leads were across-the-board well thought-out, each being appropriate for the characters in question, and not focused on making them sex objects.
Mad Max is not explored very much as a character. But anyone familiar with the previous films can tell you that is how his character usually works. He shows up, gets involved in other characters lives, helps them out somehow, and then walks off into the sunset. This was the structure of Road Warrior and Beyond Thunderdome. In that respect it stayed true to the structure of the franchise. And while Mad Max did not have a lot of development, Tom Hardy played the role very effectively. I would be quite happy to see a sequel in the same vein as this film.
Agreed 100%. It was such a good movie, and from the trailer I never thought they would be able to suspend my disbelief with so much ridiculous imagery, but somehow, they did it.
LOVE IT.
I feel the same way. I really enjoyed the film, and I would recommend it to anyone who enjoys "summer explosion flicks", but people are acting like it's the second coming of film making... and I just don't see it. Maybe I'm missing something or maybe people really want to keep feeding into their own hype... I don't know.
Definitely go see it in the theater, if you're looking for a fun action flick.
My only real complaint is that Tom Hardy speaks like he has shit in his mouth for 90% of the movie. I wanted the ability to rewind, just to hear what he said.
The spots of stillness really baked in long action sequences.\
I agree that it not the second coming of action films....but this film had an awesome sense of what it was, and it played to it's strengths without missing a beat.
Thunderdome is the worst:
1. Miller's heart wasn't in it after the death of his friend and producer
2. It had a music video
3. It was originally another movie which was an adaption of a short story, Mad Max and Barter Town was stapled on to it
I think I saw this in the right town:
[ame]
Nope, this was the worst, because it wasn't even a Mad Max movie. This was Furiosa movie.
4. Thunderdome is rated PG-13, the post apocalypse the whole family can enjoy!
What I loved about the series is that Mad Max was always a sort of folk hero that just appears in times of need. He is an agent of chaos that changes the situation he happens to be a part of. When it's all over he just kind of wanders around into the next situation and everyone who has met him tells tales of a legendary road warrior that rides alone. And that is it. Super simple character, kind of like the Man With No Name Clint Eastwood guy.
All that said, the guy is pretty self sufficient and really boring on his own. That's why after the revenge bit in the first movie Max just can't do that shit again and he is used in other movies as the hand of fate wild card that wrecks plans and motivations, for good and bad. I guess that's why a lot of people are confused about the movie and who the real hero is.
As for the movie itself, it kicks so much ass and it feels so alien compared to the mindless explosions we watch now. And there's also the fact that a whole lot of shit isn't explained at all, it's just inferred, or explained way later if at all, and that was cool. It kept the movie mysterious and magical and kept your brain guessing. The movie is also cool because you kind of have to redirect your brain's logic and put it into a world where a bad guy will do things like waste already scarce resources to prove that he means business. Everything else falls into place almost perfectly.
I mean really, who nowadays can make a 2 hour long car chase in a desert interesting?