www.madmaxmovies.com

MWFV8 wrote:I don't think that many people are willing to accept it, and I don't think you are in a minority. Cinema is in a very sad state right now. Audiences are sick of remakes, overly leveraged franchises, and shallow sensation orientated story lines. But it's the only way the big studios can secure healthy returns. But even this model is starting to flounder. It's all looking very bleak and nobody knows what the answer is.

It will be very interesting to see how The Rover performs. It's had virtually zero response here.

Fury Road has massive global box office appeal in my opinion. Maybe in the ten figure range, maybe not.

I'm not happy about any of it personally. I feel mostly the same as you. I find it a shame. I feel like an outcast on here to suggest that maybe two headed lizards, robotic arms, and exploding lightning tornados, aren't what Mad Max is about.

pauli77 wrote:

MWFV8 wrote:I don't think that many people are willing to accept it, and I don't think you are in a minority. Cinema is in a very sad state right now. Audiences are sick of remakes, overly leveraged franchises, and shallow sensation orientated story lines. But it's the only way the big studios can secure healthy returns. But even this model is starting to flounder. It's all looking very bleak and nobody knows what the answer is.

It will be very interesting to see how The Rover performs. It's had virtually zero response here.

Fury Road has massive global box office appeal in my opinion. Maybe in the ten figure range, maybe not.

I'm not happy about any of it personally. I feel mostly the same as you. I find it a shame. I feel like an outcast on here to suggest that maybe two headed lizards, robotic arms, and exploding lightning tornados, aren't what Mad Max is about.

Well, I really started it to see if others felt the same, so I'm glad a couple of others do.

I actually think there is a market for intelligent blockbusters. If you look at the Dark Knight, The new Apes films, and even Godzilla had something to say.

Yes, I see The Rover really isn't performing too well; it could probably do with a few more explosions and painted faces lol.

It seems to be trading on the name, but wants to be seen as a very different film. Of all the things I've heard, Max getting captured in the first 5 mins and strapped to the front of a car like those poor guys in Road Warrior, seems like one of the worst ways for a title character to start a film lol.

MWFV8 wrote: The intelligence thing is very much subject to the brands surrounding the material itself and those who are in the driver's seat. The question is, does the Mad Max brand lend itself to something that should be preserved in terms of these qualities you, I, and a few others want to see? And then the next question is, does the Miller brand carry enough weight that he can demand these elements form a key part of his movies?

There's chance development meetings went something like this;

McCarthy: -and at this point we see Max at his lowest, he's lost everything he has, but it's reminding him of everything he has lost, like ever, in his whole life up to this point.
Miller: We're stripping him right back, it's his whole belly of the whale moment. It's giving us something to build his anger from, it's opening up all this dark repressed torment he's been suffering, and it's forming him into a hero.
Executive #1: And he's strapped to a car.
Miller: Sure, he's chained to a Marauder's car.
McCarthy: Like he's been crucified. You know, symbolic. It's bordering on religion.
Executive #2: Religion like the rapture?
McCarthy: Well not that specifically but-
Executive #1: -Like the end is coming?
Miller: No, but it is a story about humani-
Executive #1: I like the rapture part.
Miller: But we didn't-
Executive #2: Biblical destruction on a global scale.
Executive #1: This guy knows the deal.
McCarthy: Well there is sandstorm Nux loses Furiousa in and-
Executive #1: You know what sandstorms work well with, lightning.
Executive #2: You know what else sandstorms work well with, being turning it motherf**king tornados.
Executive #1: Motherf**king lightning sandstorm tornados.
Miller: Guys, I know Sharknado was a hit but-
Executive #1: Could like, the lightning be triggering explosions in the rapturenados, yeah I just coined the phrase rapturnado.
McCarthy: Well you see we've built the world so gas is a dying commodity-
Executive #2: Yeah but there's gas right, everyones got to be carrying some explosion gas with them.
Executive #1: We should have like, just everyone pile into the rapturenado, they should be in the story more. There should be loads of them. And they should all be on fire.
Executive #2: Have like, Furiousa chasing them all in or something.
Miller: But what about Max?
Executive #1: Who?
McCarthy: Max.
Executive #2: Well he's going to be there, right? I mean, he's chained to a freaking car.
Executive #1: We could probably trim a lot of the Max stuff back here.
Executive #2: Yeah, trim it. Trim it right back. It's slowing the whole picture down.
Miller: It's supposed to be slow.
McCarthy: It's bleak.
Executive #2: Well I tell ya this, I wouldn't want to be going slow if a rapturnado was on my ass.
Executive #1: Especially if it was on fire.
Executive #2: And Furiousa behind it.
Executive #1: Not sure which is hotter!

pauli77 wrote:I'd firstly like to say that I'm obviously a big fan of the originals and respect Miller - though the only films of his I like are the Max films, and I'm sure many of you will the be the same.

Everyone seems to be getting really excited by the action elements of the film, but I haven't heard much mention of the other elements that make films interesting: story (beyond there's a chase and Max gets caught up in it and then helps this woman going from point A to point B); character - Max has apparently 18 lines of dialogue and with only a montage setup and a fairly inauspicious start to the film doesn't seem the most brilliant hero you've seen; and now from hearing the comments from people who have seen the footage, it seems that the focus is entirely on the visual and creating a sense of on screen vehicular madness.

There's nothing really wrong with that, but it seems many fans, who I really think will be disappointed, are desperate to like this film and not questioning whether, if this wasn't a Max film, they'd actually want to see this film. Certainly when I think back to those original films, I think of the V8 and the chases and so on but they wouldn't have resonated so much if they weren't genuinely good stories with interesting characters and counter points and themes.

The first film really speaks for itself: I think we could all agree that it was a dark and interesting movie. I really can't remember seeing anything like it beyond American horror like Texas Chainsaw Massacre. The second film though had wonderful character and emotional attachment,think we all forget how important Pappagallo is to the story and has real depth and creates a real emotional counter point to Max's initially cold and uncivilised ways. Max was the middle ground, the outsider, that helped the civilised escape the uncivilised. He's almost a Clint Eastwood figure in the way he rides into town, the man with no name and no home but with great skill. I think if you don't have the emotional grounding - the first film had Max's family and the second had Pappagallo's people - it will play like a live action cartoon.

I don't write this to get flamed - or whatever the forum term is lol - I just wanted to present a different side to a film that I'm trying to judge on its merits, but can only judge, like us all, what I've seen and heard. So far, I've seen a lot of the imagery, that everyone is now raving about, before:

And of course, many things have borrowed/stolen heavily from Max (some of the above) but what made the originals mean so much to us is how unique they were, surely? And I'm not suggesting Miller is stealing or anything like that, I'm just suggesting so far it seems like the makers and us as fans are getting excited about the wrong things. I remember seeing the Terminator Savlation trailer and thinking it was going to be so great and it just wasn't, but it looked great. And that's my point really. I'm looking forward to seeing a action film with cars, but I just wanted to voice my reservations about its quality and depth based on what I've seen and heard so far, that's all.

Something can look good, but it doesn't mean it will have the emotioanl impact of a film that had images like this - not that I now think that's what they're going for:

MWFV8 wrote:I'm not happy about any of it personally. I feel mostly the same as you. I find it a shame. I feel like an outcast on here to suggest that maybe two headed lizards, robotic arms, and exploding lightning tornados, aren't what Mad Max is about.

MachRider wrote:Fury Road is practically a CGI-free movie.