Mad Max: Fury Road

Lemming

Just back from watching the film in glorious, glorious IMAX 3D.

"Nyom".

...
...

That is all (for now; still processing the absolutely bonkers sensory overload that has me grinning like a Chestershire cat).

MakeEmLaugh

Lemming wrote: »

Just back from watching the film in glorious, glorious IMAX 3D.

I can't imagine 3D helped much, especially for some of the more darkly-lit scenes, such as the sand storm.

The sooner that ridiculous fad ends, the better.

Saw it in 2D, and my enjoyment would have been significantly reduced had I been forced to watch it with a pair of plastic spectacles on my face.

ktulu123

thegreengoblin wrote: »

I'm actually wondering if it could be explained in the prequel comics that I mentioned a few pages back. There's probably a good chance, especially as those comics are co-written by Miller. If so then great, it will be cool to find out more about this fantastic world that he has created.

The whole backstory & the flashback stuff is already explained in the previous films, well the first one anyway.

Saw this last night and... Wow.

Story? Pft. Who cares?
Character names? Er. Max. Furiousa. Did the other breeding women have names? I genuinely can't remember.

It was one of the most glorious spectacles that I have seen in a very long time. The action scenes were so beautiful, the whole segment in the dust storm is up there with some of the most insanely beautiful scenes in any movie.

There wasn't much gore and, you know, it wasn't missed because the rest of what was going on was so mind blowingly insane that you just didn't notice.

What else was fantastic is that none of the women were sexualised. Sure, they were in skimpy clothes, but the camera never focused on this, like how you'd get in Michael Bay movies. They were women who happened to be dressed in next to nothing, but they were unbelievably bad-ass. The movie should have been called Furiousa Road, because Theron's character made this movie. Heck, Max was voiceless for a large portion.

In many ways this reminded me so much of 300. Some of the visual flairs were very similar and had a similar colour palette.

Lemming

MakeEmLaugh wrote: »

I can't imagine 3D helped much, especially for some of the more darkly-lit scenes, such as the sand storm.

The sooner that ridiculous fad ends, the better.

Saw it in 2D, and my enjoyment would have been significantly reduced had I been forced to watch it with a pair of plastic spectacles on my face.

The 3D worked very well as a matter of fact, and wasn't overbearing, nor did it diminish the film for me in any way. It was also used to comical effect at one point towards the end of the film (namely involving a guitar and a steering wheel ... )

Birneybau

Deleted User wrote: »

Saw this last night and... Wow.

Story? Pft. Who cares?
Character names? Er. Max. Furiousa. Did the other breeding women have names? I genuinely can't remember.

It was one of the most glorious spectacles that I have seen in a very long time. The action scenes were so beautiful, the whole segment in the dust storm is up there with some of the most insanely beautiful scenes in any movie.

There wasn't much gore and, you know, it wasn't missed because the rest of what was going on was so mind blowingly insane that you just didn't notice.

What else was fantastic is that none of the women were sexualised. Sure, they were in skimpy clothes, but the camera never focused on this, like how you'd get in Michael Bay movies. They were women who happened to be dressed in next to nothing, but they were unbelievably bad-ass. The movie should have been called Furiousa Road, because Theron's character made this movie. Heck, Max was voiceless for a large portion.

In many ways this reminded me so much of 300. Some of the visual flairs were very similar and had a similar colour palette.

I felt the exact same.

Mickeroo

Mickeroo wrote: »

I didn't think it was his own at any rate, it sounded a bit like Bane at times to me and not at all Australian.

I have to agree with you on that - he did come across as very Bane sounding. I thought, "great, if you start talking like Bane, I won't understand a word you say"

Lemming wrote: »

The 3D worked very well as a matter of fact, and wasn't overbearing, nor did it diminish the film for me in any way. It was also used to comical effect at one point towards the end of the film (namely involving a guitar and a steering wheel ... )

It always bothers me when I'm watching a movie in 2D, especially one you know were designed in that way, and then a scene arrives that you just know was only shoehorned in for the 3D. I sighed a little when I saw the scene you were referencing.

Lemming

Deleted User wrote: »

It always bothers me when I'm watching a movie in 2D, especially one you know were designed in that way, and then a scene arrives that you just know was only shoehorned in for the 3D. I sighed a little when I saw the scene you were referencing.

Sigh away. I didn't miss a thing.

Nor did the scene do anything other than raise a smirk and show that it's not meant to be taken seriously. It's spectacle. Entertainment. Not life-or-death which a lot of people who dislike 3D seem to view anything 3D-related as being. I'm always amused by the amount of snobbery on display towards 3D. So you [not you personally boney] don't like 3D, that's fine. So you don't like 3D but others do, accept that they do, and that you're possibly going to miss something from the experience, and stop being pretentious bell-ends about it.

Don't get me wrong, I love 3D when it's done right. I've seen loads of movies like that and I still believe that Gravity and Avatar are among the greatest spectacles in modern cinema - not for the story, but for what they achieved. But what annoys me is when a movie has 3D tacked on to it. That's when it becomes a gimmick. If I'm right, the director stated how he was going to only do 2D, but then it gets released in 3D also (that may not be 100%, I'm paraphrasing someone who was paraphrasing someone else) so you know that it was the studio pushing for it to get the extra buck. That's what bothers me, because when you see those scenes, you can pretty much hear the cha-chink and the dollar signs appearing in the studio exec's eyes.

Giggernaut

I watched it and loved it! The story who cares, it was meaty in the visual sense.
Hardy went a little bane-y when he spoke more than three word and that took me out of it.
Its bonkers and had enough intrigue (flashbacks) to make me eagerly await the next installment.
I saw it in 3d Maxx and it wasn't bad at all in that format and I only went 3d as the 2d was fully booked! Pleasantly surprised :pac:

pixelburp

So by and large it's fair to say Fury Road has been a critical success, and feedback from viewers appears to be equally effusive: is there any evidence yet how it has done at the box-office? I'm too lazy to look it up, and wouldn't know what's good/bad/atari jaguar when it comes to box-office takings anyway

I'm certainly hoping the film's a commercial success too; god knows the mediocre and godawful is rewarded too often with people's money, it'd be nice if a genuinely fantastic, intelligently-made blockbuster gets its own day in the financial sun.

Joeface

worldwide currently stands at $124million and change , budget was approx $150million

only open a week so it should do its budget then some . if it gets to 300million then it will probably be consider a success.


needs to avoid the Dredd Trap , which it probably has . Dredd got a 3D only release(or very limited 2D). cost 50million to make and only made 34million worldwide, it had critical acclaim , and Viewers liked it ................still bombed . Mad Max seems to be doing a lot better

e_e

pixelburp wrote: »

So by and large it's fair to say Fury Road has been a critical success, and feedback from viewers appears to be equally effusive: is there any evidence yet how it has done at the box-office? I'm too lazy to look it up, and wouldn't know what's good/bad/atari jaguar when it comes to box-office takings anyway

I'm certainly hoping the film's a commercial success too; god knows the mediocre and godawful is rewarded too often with people's money, it'd be nice if a genuinely fantastic, intelligently-made blockbuster gets its own day in the financial sun.

124 million worldwide so far. Here's hoping it passes 300 million at least!

Johnnio13

Saw this on Monday night. Was not blown away but it was excellent.
Particularly loved the scene with Max clobbering the lad with the guitar.

A hundred miles a minute. Going to watch the other 3 on VHS over the weekend.

BMMachine

its amazing isnt it. Everyone is shouting from the rooftops about how good this is yet its still not getting anywhere near the numbers that some films do, namely transformers, spiderman, avengers etc.
Are people really programmed that badly? You can really see why Hollywood backs "franchises" like Taken and rubbish like that, which is ironic considering this is technically a franchise/reboot. It sounds cliche but standards just seem to go further and further down. Save us James Cameron!

Joeface

BMMachine wrote: »

Save us James Cameron!

Go wash your mouth out with soap ............ Cameron and Bay need to be stopped.

BMMachine

Joeface wrote: »

Go wash your mouth out with soap ............ Cameron and Bay need to be stopped.

I'm referencing the South Park episode where he raises the bar from the bottom of the Marianas Trench due to Honey Boo Boo putting it down that low.
Besides Cameron has many amazing films under his belt. Didn't rate Avatar that highly but it was a lot better than 90% of the "blockbuster" genre

Joeface

Yeah Cameron has done good with Aliens , The Abyss , Terminator , T2 ...and ok with True lies then fizzled of into a sub and the pressure on his brain gave us Avatar . Really only as good as the last movie . He needs a win. and the Ferngully Smurfs cannot save him. Mad Max is a simple light plot executed brilliantly , with no really filler . It is what what it says on the tin MAD

Sorry for taking the thread of topic but James Cameron doesn't do what James Cameron does for James Cameron. James Cameron does what James Cameron does because James Cameron is James Cameron!

thegreengoblin

Joeface wrote: »

worldwide currently stands at $124million and change , budget was approx $150million

only open a week so it should do its budget then some . if it gets to 300million then it will probably be consider a success.


needs to avoid the Dredd Trap , which it probably has . Dredd got a 3D only release(or very limited 2D). cost 50million to make and only made 34million worldwide, it had critical acclaim , and Viewers liked it ................still bombed . Mad Max seems to be doing a lot better

I think it definitely has. I don't recall Dredd having anything like the buzz that Fury Road is getting.

Out of interest, has anyone seen it more than once yet? I'm definitely going to go again, might leave it for another week or two though.

e_e

It actually beat Pitch Perfect at the US box office on Monday and Wednesday, think it'll stay strong with good of word of mouth around it.

Hate to sound like a studio executive but I'm gunning for films this strongly made and interesting to do well. :P

pixelburp

e_e wrote: »

It actually beat Pitch Perfect at the US box office on Monday and Wednesday, think it'll stay strong with good of word of mouth around it.

Hate to sound like a studio executive but I'm gunning for films this strongly made and interesting to do well. :P

Hmmm, you're gunning for a hard-edged, intelligent, basket-case of a blockbuster that doesn't speak down to its audience ... you couldn't sound more unlike an executive tbh

If anything, Fury Road feels like 2015's Snowpiercer, minus a Weinstein and plus a sh*tload more money at the box office

Looper007

pixelburp wrote: »

So by and large it's fair to say Fury Road has been a critical success, and feedback from viewers appears to be equally effusive: is there any evidence yet how it has done at the box-office? I'm too lazy to look it up, and wouldn't know what's good/bad/atari jaguar when it comes to box-office takings anyway

I'm certainly hoping the film's a commercial success too; god knows the mediocre and godawful is rewarded too often with people's money, it'd be nice if a genuinely fantastic, intelligently-made blockbuster gets its own day in the financial sun.

I think Fury Road has got some of the best reviews for a blockbuster since the Dark Knight. It's made 124 million in its first week and that's for a R rated/15 rated film which is pretty good. I think many people are forgetting that, could you imagine what this would have made if it was a 12A.

It hasn't opened in Asia yet which is a big market. It's done well but it wasn't ever going to be a Billion dollar grossing film. I think if it gets to 300 million and does great business on blu-ray/DvD then it be considered a success. Plus I think many will be talking about this rather then Pitch Perfect 2 in the next 20 years.

rossc007

Saw it last night, best movie I've seen this year for sure. Cant see why some people need the whole flashback situation explained, does it really matter? Seems to me the flashbacks where the only indication that Max was mad. Max: Fury Road sounds pretty ****.

PhiloCypher

With prequel comics on the way to flesh out the backgrounds of some of the characters one wonders whether Miller is planning to follow traditional hollywood wisdom and see any sequels build off the characters introduced in this film rather then how he approached the previous films ?

johnny_ultimate

To be that pedantic guy: Max wasn't 'mad' as in mentally disturbed in the first film, but 'mad' as in 'furious and vengeful'

Frank Bullitt

Can we now change the face in the title of the thread to actually reflect how awesome this movie is???

MakeEmLaugh

pixelburp wrote: »

If anything, Fury Road feels like 2015's Snowpiercer, minus a Weinstein and plus a sh*tload more money at the box office

I've always said Snowpiercer was Mad Max on a train.

Dave_The_Sheep

Watched it last night in the Odeon, cracking stuff.

Driving home, I pulled down the slipway onto the N3 - load of cars cruising behind me. After two hours of watching someone getting chased by cars filled with psychos behind them, they freaked the **** out of me looking in my mirrors.

Chain Smoker

I've been viewing fury road pretty much as snowpiercer done right tbh. Snowpiercer dragged like hell at points and it's attempts at any kind of depth in a narrative sense fell flat on their arse. Still would be interested to see what weinstein wanted changed because the film definitely could've done with an edit.

Fury Road, on the other hand, straddles some very fine line throughout (amount of exposition, when to take a break from the action, etc) and managed to rope me back into it every single time I was beginning to feel a bit jaded. I'd say everyone involved asides from Miller and the editing team were a bit terrified they were after making a huge pile of ****e.

Kylo Ren

Saw it last night. It's absolutely fantastic. The best Mad Max film? I think so.

Guitar Guy for an Oscar nod? A crappy Grammy at least.