An OBJECTIVE appraisal of Fury Road - Why George Miller Doesn't Understand His Own Franchise.
4710 Views25 Replies
JamietheBastard
MemberNoobNov-22-2015 1:04 PMAn OBJECTIVE appraisal of Fury Road - Why George Miller Doesn't Understand His Own Franchise.
Mad Max: Fury Road seems to have polarised opinion, people either totally love it or totally hate it. There is talk of Mens activist groups boycotting the film because of a supposed "Feminist Agenda". What a load of bullshit, it's the 21st century for god's sake shouldn't we be past this sort of crap (Feminism/Chauvinism) by now? We are ALL human beings. George Miller has stated that it was just a story, the damsels in distress that need rescuing by the hero. All the Max films have underlying themes and if Fury Road's is addressing sex slavery (which as we all know is a Bad Thing), how does this constitute a feminist agenda? Do these chauvinists support sex slavery? Would they hate the movie more if it had been men held as sex/breeding slaves by a female warlord? A female warlord is exactly what I was expecting when the first info about the movie was released, Imperator Furiosa: I thought she was going to be the warlord and the antagonist. Why was Furiosa's rank Emperor? Very misleading. Anyway I'm going off topic here as this isn't the point of this post.
Well I didn't totally hate it and I didn't totally love it, it is possible to be ambivalent towards Fury Road. It was OK for a Hollywood Mega Budget blockbuster, but it does have a lot of flaws.
Looking for some insight into Fury Road and proposed sequels, I checked out a bunch of interviews and found that based on quotes from George Miller that the guy doesn't really understand the Mad Max franchise very well at all. Some of the things he has said about the franchise make no sense (based on evidence from the films), and some of his quotes left me scratching my head in confusion, W.T.F.? I will address this but first my objective appraisal of Fury Road.
Whilst there were a lot of good things about this film, I ultimately found Fury Road disappointing (about the same level of disappointment as Beyond Thunderdome). This is how I rate the Mad Max films:
Mad Max: 3/5
Mad Max: The Road Warrior: 4/5
Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome: 2/5
Mad Max: Fury Road: 2/5
These are the elements of Fury Road I thought were very well done:
1. The stuntwork was phenomenal. Mostly all practical stunts, minimal CGI used for the stunts impossible to perform practically.
2. The Cast: Tom Hardy and Charlize Theron were very good, they managed to communicate a believable relationship with minimal dialogue. It was great to see some good Aussie talent as these films are quintessentially Australian. Hugh Keays Byrne! The Toecutter returns! (I have come across some fan speculation that Immortan Joe IS The Toecutter, but that's impossible, you don't survive a head on collision on a motorbike with an eighteen wheeler at high speed).
3. The Vehicle design was great: The Road Warrior on steroids.
4. The cinematography was stunning and George Miller can direct a damn good action sequence.
The Review (Written not long after seeing the film again on DVD).
Mad Max: Fury Road: A movie that takes a long time going nowhere, then turns around and comes back again.
Tom Hardy was great as the new Max and Charlize Theron's Furiosa was a strong female character in the tradition of the franchise, but... where I feel the film was weak was in character, drama and plot development (Nux was the only one whose character had any development throughout the film), these definitely took a back seat to the action (hah) and were not properly served by the script (I have heard the film didn't have a proper screenplay as such, it was written based on the action sequence storyboards and it shows). Sure road battles are an integral part of any Max film, but did it seriously have to be a road battle for the entire film? It got mind numbingly boring and I found myself seriously not giving a fuck what happened after two hours of non stop action. The Mad Max films are action/suspense/drama films, (they aren't deep philosophical musings on the nature of existence, but the themes they address do give your brain a little something to chew on) if I want two hours of nothing but action I can watch brain dead Fast and Furious movies! But that's what audiences want these days I suppose, all action no thinking, it's filmmaking for the ADHD generation. I expect a bit more from science fiction. In the original films the action was there to serve the drama and character development. In Fury Road, drama, plot and charatcer development are only there to serve the action.
Fury Road introduced some rather interesting concepts and then failed to explore any of them adequately as there was no time to with the constant action:
Immortan Joe's Society: how did it evolve so quickly after the war? Why were they addicted to mother's milk? The Matriarchal society: (the Vulvalini, seriously George? Mad Max character names have always been a bit over the top I suppose). The Bullet Farmer: (how the hell do you farm bullets?). The Green Place: It sank into the swamp and the only evidence that there had been a settlement there was one dead tree? no ruins? one tree? it can't have been very green then. The Spiky Car Tribe: These guys were pretty cool, I would have liked to find out a little bit of their backstory. The People From Max's Flashbacks: No, the little girl wasn't his murdered child, as a lot of Fury Road fans assume, his child Sprog was a boy. This isn't a reboot as George Miller has emphatically stated, and she calls him Max in the flashbacks "Where are you MAX" she says, I checked on the DVD subtitles, she says MAX not Dad. The Stiltwalkers: Suitably eerie. All of these should have gotten more screentime, and if they had it would have been a much more satisfying film.
Also I feel it was way too over the top and didn't fit in with the gritty, more realistic tone of the earlier films in the franchise (My dear old mother who loved The Road Warrior commented whilst watching Fury Road "It's not very realistic"). It was a comic book version of Mad Max (Which makes sense as it was written by Brendan McCarthy) eg: The enormous amounts of fuel wasted in the film: that jerk with the Guitar/Flamethrower was just ridiculous, in the post apocalypse wasteland fuel would be a resource strictly rationed not shot out of bloody Guitars: As the dude sitting in front of me in the cinema rightly stated "What a load of bullshit". EXACTLY.
I believe that when filmmakers are working without a mega budget, they produce innovative, interesting films but when they get a huge budget they go over the top and produce Hollywood mega blockbusters that fail to live up to the quality of their low budget work e.g. Mad Max: a pretty cool low budget Aussie dystopian action movie, The Road Warrior: A low budget all time classic Aussie post apocalypse action/drama, Beyond Thunderdome and Fury Road over the top Hollywood blockbusters, OK for what they are but definitely not up to the standards of the first two.
Certain things just take me straight out of these films: Tina Turner, The Gyro Captain who wasn't the Gyro Captain, Angry Anderson's ridiculous comic relief character, the car wreck Max and Nux survive (no one could ever walk away from a wreck like that alive let alone without any injury), the totally ludicrous idea that you could carry enough extra fuel on motorbikes to travel for 160 days, flamethrowing Guitars, wasteland settlements that mysteriously disappear leaving no sign whatsoever that they were ever there (except one solitary dead tree). Even in escapist fantasy I still want realism and some sort of internal logic, keep that unbelievable crap for action films and superhero movies. I think I need to take a Valium and have a nice lie down!
So, Mad Max: Fury Road, the best Action film ever made? Quite possibly. The best Mad Max film ever made? Not even close.
With The Road Warrior George Miller struck gold and unfortunately he has been repeating himself ever since, trying and failing to recapture what made the Road Warrior a worldwide hit by plagiarising himself. It started with Beyond Thunderdome and has continued with Fury Road.
Beyond Thunderdome: The Pilot. I didn't get this at all, I wondered why he and Max didn't recognise each other and what the Gyro Captain was doing there anyway, as he was supposed to be up north leading The Great Northern Tribe. Later I discovered that it was supposed to be a different character, who just happened to be... a pilot, played by the same actor!
The Feral Kid: The Feral Kid was cool in the Road Warrior, so in Thunderdome we get a whole tribe of them!
The Toady: A comic relief character who get's hurt to provide laughs (his fingers getting chopped off by the steel boomerang), in Thunderdome we get Angry Anderson's Ironbar, who goes through the whole film taking slapstick comedy pratfalls.
At least he did something a bit different with the road battle at the end, and I could have lived with the recycled bits from the Road Warrior if Thunderdome had been a better film.
Fury Road gets even worse with the self plagiarism, ripping off scenes from Mad Max, Road Warrior and Beyond Thunderdome:
The Film Going Out Of Focus as Max crawls away from the wreckage of the Interceptor.
Actors From Previous Films Playing New Characters: At least Immortan Joe was a totally different character to the Toecutter. In Thunderdome Bruce Spence plays almost exactly the same character as in Road Warrior, a thieving pilot: This was just confusing, many people assumed he was the Gyro Captain as the two characters were so similar.
The Wind Up Music Box.
Max Pulls Out A Hundred Concealed Guns.
The White Painted Guy.
Granny With A Shotgun.
The Shotgun Misfires.
Max Tied To The Front Of The Vehicle.
Max Buried In The Sand.
A Character Finds Redemption By Becoming A Hero, Inspired By Love. The Gyro Captain was a sleazy, no good thief who was only looking out for himself until he stepped up and became a hero, the leader of The Great Northern Tribe, inspired by his feelings for the cute blond girl. (A good character arc, but why reuse it? Nux's character arc could have been handled slightly different within that same framework and still be dramatically satisfying).
The Road Battle: Fury Road is basically nothing more than a feature length remake of The Road Warrior's climactic road battle.
There were more but these are all I can remember off the top of my head.
I'm willing to wager my life savings on the certainty that in the Fury Road sequels we will see:
1. A Pilot Character. (Played by Bruce Spence more than likely).
2. Some sort of Thunderdome style Cage Death Match.
3. A Feral Kid.
4. A Community of Noble Survivors besieged by wasteland scum.
5. A Flyover of a Nuked City.
6. More Bloody Pop Stars: Tina Turner, iOTA, Angry Anderson (At least Angry is a Rocker not a talentless Pop Star). Who next? Kylie Bloody Minogue and Katy Perry as wasteland warriors? The musician who should be in it is Russell Brand, he would make an awesome wasteland war chief!
7. An antagonist who is revealed to be a character from the previous films. (this actaually isn't a bad idea, if handled well it could make a good twist ending) This isn't to far fetched, it's an idea George Miller has had before: The Humungus was really Max's old friend, Jim Goose, he wore the mask to disguise his burnt face (he must have spent a hell of a lot of time at the Gym though). Also there was some speculation that The Humungus was really Fifi Macafee, Max's old boss (Big guy, bald, could be). People are speculating that Immortan Joe is The Toecutter, but that doesn't make sense as I explained previously. Personally I think that under the mask Immortan Joe is really.......Aunty Entity (Tina Turner's really let herself go)!
If Fury Road was a reboot of the franchise, I could understand George Miller recycling scenes from the earlier films. But he has stated that it isn't a reboot just another Max adventure, so he's just blatantly ripping himself off by repeating the good bits from previous films, a practice he began with Beyond Thunderdome.
Why George Miller Doesn't Understand His Own Franchise.
After reading a bunch of interviews with George Miller I have come to realise that he really doesn't understand the franchise he created:
First up (and this a common misconception) is the mistaken belief that the original Mad Max is a Post Apocalyptic film. It isn't, the Apocalypse takes place between Mad Max and The Road Warrior. The first film is Dystopian: Society is in terminal decay, but there is still Government and law and order. The Nuclear War hasn't taken place yet, we find out about that in the prologue to the Road Warrior, Old Feral Kid narrator: "For reasons long forgotten, two mighty warrior tribes went to war. They touched off a blaze that engulfed them all".
"Miller also talks about the earlier movies, stating that the reason the first movie was shown within a POST APOCALYPTIC future was determined by cost". Maybe he should go back and watch it again to refresh his memory (or check the dictionary for the difference between Dystopian and Post Apocalyptic).
"The previous three films exist in no clear chronology, because they were all conceived as different films". Really? That's total garbage Mr. Miller, the first three films are in strict chronological order, let's examine the evidence:
1. Mad Max: Civilisation still exists, there is Government and Law and Order. The Interceptor is brand new.
2. The Road Warrior: The Interceptor is dirty, dented and has been modified. There's been a Nuclear Holocaust. Civilisation is gone. In this movie it can't have been that long since the war, because Max and the gangs are still scavenging fuel and fuel has a limited life span, It goes bad and is no longer combustable.(maybe they had ripped off another community of survivors who just happen to have an oil well and refinery, but that is a bit far fetched). The Interceptor is totally trashed then it blows up KABOOM gone.
3. Beyond Thunderdome: Max no longer has the Interceptor. He's grown a wicked mullet, has new items of clothing, new transport and acquired a small arsenal of weaponry. Primitive forms of trade and civilisation are starting to emerge. We see the nuked ruins of Sydney. Water sellers are selling water contaminated with radiation.
That seems to me to be pretty clear indication of these films all being in srict chronological order, it's like a jigsaw puzzle, there's no other way they could fit together chronologically. Beyond Thunderdome can't be set before the Road Warrior or Mad Max, Mad Max can't take place after Road Warrior or Beyond Thunderdome, Road Warrior can't be set before Mad Max. That's a stone cold fact, the logic is indisputable.
"If the film (Fury Road) had to be fit into the timeline of the other three films where does it go?" George Miller: "It's not precise chronology, because I never intended for there to be, but after the last one. After Thunderdome".
Really? Did the Interceptor magically reconstitute itself (LIke Christine in Stephen King's novel)? Or did he just happen to find another one that had been identically modified? Fury Road has to take place between Mad Max and the Road Warrior, HE STILL HAS THE INTERCEPTOR.
The films in chronological order:
1. Mad Max. 2. Fury Road. 3. The Road Warrior. 4. Beyond Thunderdome.
The evidence proves this, it would withstand cross examination in a court of law: George Miller doesn't know what he's talking about. Proof positive that he doesn't really understand his own franchise or what made the Road Warrior a classic film (If he did he wouldn't need to constantly recycle all the good bits from previous films).
Fury Road was a smash hit worldwide, but I think it was a fluke. I believe if George Miller had succeceded in making Fury Road 15 years ago it wouldn't have been anywhere near as popular. He may not really understand what made the Road Warrior so good, but he had a good feel for the global zeitgeist and what modern audiences want: Minimal drama and dialogue, plenty of action. Most Fury Road fans aren't Mad Max fans as such but action movie fans ("I have never seen the original films, but Fury Road was awesome") I've read countless posts like this. All the Aussie Mad Max fans I've talked to were disappointed with Fury Road for all the aforementioned reasons (Aussies must have better bullshit detectors), and some also felt that Max's character is sidelined in favour of Furiosa. I have not as yet come across an Australian Mad Max fan who loved the movie unreservedly, only ACTION movie fans.
I just hope that in Mad Max: The Wasteland he reins in some of the more over the top excess, devotes a bit more time to exploring the concepts and characters in a little more depth. Show us more of this world, we've seen the desert wasteland in 3 films let's see some new locations. Bring back the more realistic tone of the earlier films. No more dickheads with flamethrowing guitars please George, leave the unbelievable comic book stuff for Mad Max Comics. Bring back the screenwriter you co - wrote The Road Warrior with and maybe Mad Max: The Wasteland will turn out to be another 4/5 classic. Here's hoping.
After posting this review in other forums, I received nothing but hate and venomous bile in return: "You suck coz you don't like my new favourite movie you jerk" (not that at any stage have I stated that I disliked the film, just that I found it disappointing, there were good things about Fury Road) "You hate Fury Road and you call yourself a Mad Max fan? Try harder moron" (who is the moron? Try harder learning to read properly MORON, where does it state I Hate Fury Road?) the way these fools react it is like you have insulted them personally and they are offended that you dare to have an opinion that differs from theirs, or perceive that you have insulted their precious film "How dare you criticise this awesome film you self righteous prick" etc. this usually comes from idiots who don't actually read and understand what you're saying, they just skim and take certain points out of context to bash you over the head with, Get. A. Life. Losers. I am not so anal that I can't handle any criticism of the Films, Novels, Music, Art etc that I am passionate about, I welcome debate with those whose opinions differ from my own and am quite happy to admit I am wrong when I am proved wrong. At the end of the day it's only a movie.
Now this is all only my opinion sure, and we're all entitled to them, but if you disagree present rational evidence of why I am wrong and refute the points I have made. If I am wrong and you can prove it I am more than happy to admit it. I don't count presenting positive reviews as evidence. I want valid, well thought out reasons why I am wrong, as all my points are valid and logically derived from the available evidence, just regurgitating other people's opinions and insulting me won't convince me of anything but the fact that you are an idiot.
But I realise that on Scified people are more open to criticism and debate on movies. I disliked Prometheus and posted detailed reasons why, and got many intelligent replies on the pros and cons of the film, none of which resorted to insults and generated some intellectually stimulating debate. So all feedback welcome, whether you agree or not, let me know.