Anyone else see the new Mad Max?

  • Thread starter Jimster41
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Max
In summary, the conversation is about the film "Mad Max: Fury Road" and the overall consensus is that it is a very good film, with most people giving it a rating of 9/10. The film is recommended to be seen in 3D, if possible, and it is praised for its high-octane action and Charlize Theron's performance. There is some discussion about the honesty of Hollywood and the main character of the film, Max. There is also appreciation for the art direction, cinematography, and overall immersion of the film. Some people were initially hesitant to see the film based on the trailer, but were pleasantly surprised by its quality. However, there is a difference of opinion on the level of
  • #36
meBigGuy said:
I suppose I should have watch the trailer.

Or watch the original ones :smile:

This is one of those movies where you have to let yourself go. You can't analyze anything. Just sit back and enjoy the roller coaster.

meBigGuy said:
The film technology was impressive. If you are going to see it, see it in 3D in the theater.

I saw it in 2D. Most are saying stay away from the 3D because it wasn't shot in 3D
 
  • Like
Likes Ryan_m_b
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
OH GOOD GRIEF !

Rotten Tomatoes now shows it as, based on a poll of critics, the 10th best move of all time. Now although I haven't seen it I expect it to be fun since I like movies where lots of things go boom, but seriously ... 10th best of all time? I just can't imaging that. I mean if you look at some of the movies that follow on their list, the idea that a road warrior movie could be better than them is laughable.
 
  • #38
Hey man that flaming guitar guy was totally plausible - he was just the analogue of the fife and drum, in the post industrial waste-land. :wink:

I thought the use of 3D was one of the selling points. It had a somewhat intentional, stage-set construction feel to it - very specifically applied. Like the guitar curtain on the crucial scene. I loved that, not because it was over the top, but because of the way it punctuated the scene just before, and suddenly made you aware of yourself sitting in the seat, watching a story. Very funny, but not ha ha funny.

There are all kinds of reasons not to like it (and everyone has their own taste), but as pure film craft assessment (which to my thinking needs to be genre neutral or genre-inclusive, and also agnostic with respect to many aspects of story and purpose) it was brilliantly made.

I can't stand Pulp-Fiction, or Reservoir Dogs, but I get why Quentin Terrentino is a film-making genius. Like-wise, Wes Andersen isn't going to be to everyone's taste, but he's also a master of the medium. I think these assessments represent the best self-awareness of the arts - how quality can be assessed across subjective experience. Oh, yeah, I can't stand any story about gangsters or mobsters, no matter how well the story is told. But I've seen The Godfather, and I agree it is brilliant.

This was very fine craft.
 
  • #39
It's good to see some comments that aren't extremely positive. I have never had such a strong negative reaction to a trailer as I had to this one, so all the positive comments made me feel like one of those Star Trek robots that started thinking about the liar paradox.
 
  • #40
meBigGuy said:
WOW ---- it must be a generational thing. That movie was the biggest DUD I've seen in a long time. No Plot, no character, no theme. Just a 95% car chase fight scene movie. (Yes, easily 95%).

Maybe it is just an expect-something-else thing. The trailer leave no doubt what kind of movie it is. Thus I switched my brain off and had a lot of fun.
 
  • Like
Likes Ryan_m_b
  • #41
Fredrik said:
It's good to see some comments that aren't extremely positive. I have never had such a strong negative reaction to a trailer as I had to this one, so all the positive comments made me feel like one of those Star Trek robots that started thinking about the liar paradox.
I saw the trailer and thought it would be horrible. I was wrong. But I will admit, it's not for everyone.
 
  • #42
I was killing time waiting for a new muffler to get installed. Saw the Avengers Age of Ultron (which was pretty fun!) , but the car still wasn't done. So decided to check out Mad Max, which I had originally not been interested in seeing.

That's probably why I enjoyed it as much as I did. I had zero expectations.
 
  • #43
Greg Bernhardt said:
I saw the trailer and thought it would be horrible. I was wrong. But I will admit, it's not for everyone.
OK, that's interesting, as is your earlier comment about how you don't like The transformers or the Fast and Furious movies. That comment poked a hole in my theory that the only reason this movie is getting good reviews is that it has only been seen by Michael Bay fans and people who cheer out loud in the movie theater every time Vin Diesel or Paul Walker does something. And the comment you made now is an interesting contrast to the fact that in the extremely positive review that I quickly scrolled through today, the reviewer said that he had been looking forward to the movie for months, and had to restrain himself to not watch the trailers more than a few times per day.
 
  • #44
Greg Bernhardt said:
Or watch the original ones :smile:

I was fine with the originals, Mad Max, Road Warrior (the best), Thunderdome. A co worker saw it and said it was great, he was on the edge of his chair through the whole thing. I went with few, if any, expectations (people not liking movies because of expectations is a pet peeve of mine). I was just bored by the battles that others found exciting. Not sure why.
 
  • #45
GTOM said:
So it is true, that Max isn't even the main character. They should have been honest at least, and rename the fim...

I just saw it last night night in 3D, what a wild ride. Great CGI, they got the post-apocalyptic feel and colors just right. Great action. But the plot and character development, IMHO, were severely lacking. Maybe I was just a bit hypersensitive to this because I had high expectations considering RT 98% score, but I thought they could have done better here.

Clearly Charlize was the main character, but it was awkward because it seemed as they felt obliged to force some kind of a main character role on Max. Who in my opinion, was a hollow character. We really had no history of him other than him being "haunted by the faces of those he couldn't save." That wasn't really compelling nor was the fact that Charlize had no history we could bite on either.

But perhaps the thing that irritated me the most was that these post-apocalyptic "mortal" humans somehow had no need of either food nor drink, except for the occasional beetle or lizard. That wouldn't seem to add up to the calories needed for such a high octane existence. The most absurd comment in the movie, however, was when the main evil guy said "Don't get too hooked on water." Really? You're going to say this to thousands of mortal human beings in the desert? I don't care if this is the movies, this is portrayed as post-apocalyptic real human-like situation, not complete fantasy. I think they could have done better in that respect.
 
  • #47
I finally saw it. The two long action scenes were intense, but far too long. I was already sick of them a few minutes into the second one, and just wanted the movie to end. The characters were paper thin. Their vehicles and their society didn't make much sense. I realize that we're supposed to ignore that last part and just enjoy the ride, but I wasn't quite able to. All things considered, I'd say that it was watchable, but not more than that. The 8.6 at IMDb, the 89/100 at metacritic.com, and the mind-boggling 98% at rottentomatoes.com still don't make sense to me.
 
  • #48

Similar threads

  • Science Fiction and Fantasy Media
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • Feedback and Announcements
Replies
13
Views
861
Replies
0
Views
221
  • Electrical Engineering
Replies
22
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
1K
Replies
34
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Classical Physics
Replies
4
Views
990
Back
Top