Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Swastakowey wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
But Redemption for what?

While I thought it was all pretty bland, she clearly felt she needed redemption for likely aiding the bad guy. She wanted to flee so she thought she might take some of the victims with her and go back to the land of her dreams.

I can respect that. I think it's less the content that is revolutionary than the way it's delivered. I still wouldn't consider the characters or themes bland, but discovering them on Fury Road's terms was the real attraction.

In comparison, Ex Machina has more complexity in many ways, but it relies almost entirely on old storytelling formulas, and every scene comes across as a conversation between two screenwriters telling you what the film is about through a metaphorical game of $20,000 Pyramid.

I saw it last night and thought it was damn fine. It looked great, the action was immense, it made me giggle in places, it was pretty damn metal and I thought the subtlety of some of the acting (Hardy in particular) was a bit odd but also in hindsight understandable as Max is clearly a mental loner who simply gets caught up in gak.

Regarding motivations etc, here's my take. Both Max and Furiosa want to save people for different reasons, both kind of selfish. Max because he couldn't save all the people closest to him (the guilt haunting him and driving him insane) and Furiosa, even after all the gak she clearly did/went through to get to the title/position of 'Imperator', still clung to the memory of her childhood/mother and being taken away, held and god knows what against her initial will. I presumed the rank of Imperator was high, like Joe's most trusted Lieutenants, so she obviously would have had interaction with the wives and who wouldn't want to get away from being Joe's hoe

I think Furiosa saw the chance to gain redemption by defying Joe (perhaps in doing so purging all the bad things she clearly did for him/herself) and taking with her not only those that wanted to be saved from him (although one wife clearly had second thoughts during the journey) but also taking away his most prized possessions. She could have just left on her own, or possibly even killed Joe, his wives or even herself, but it clearly wouldn't have been a statement enough for her. I think she wanted to wound Joe badly and make him suffer as much as possible and not simply just leaving for some promised land - the image of which she clung to strongly and when it was taken away from her she had a bit of a 'Noooooooooo' moment. It was clear that the 'Green Place' was her final hope and possibly her final link to her humanity and, being a world without hope, was taken away - until Max re-instilled hope being the hero that he is.

I was surprised by the amount of emotion in it tbh, hell even Joe felt grief and concern for his wives/children, his aim clearly aimed at breeding a 'pure/perfect' human being to supposedly carry on his blood-line and in so doing expanding the mythology he had instilled into his little empire.

Like most films there's a lot that can be interpreted/extrapolated from it and I think the delivery in this film was spot-on - if it had a message to it (and I'm not saying it does in particular) it wasn't thrown in your face with long dialogue, or worse, a monologue. You don't have to think about it as it's a great popcorn flick and you can happily leave it at that, but if you do think about it you could pick far worse films to debate.

Nux had the fullest character arc in the film by far and I think his own story outshone both Max's and Furiosa's, which is a bit odd as as they were the main protagonists, which kind of made their own stories weaker IMHO.

But damn, those vehicles were awesome and I kind of hope that kits become available one day. Please, someone, anyone?

All the same I loved it and I heartily recommend it

In any case, I don't necessarily think movies should have to spell out or even make apparent every motivation.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
The whole barren thing is just speculation.

Let's just assume there is no explicit or implicit dialog on this subject in the film. The point is nonetheless made via indirect characterization. The role of women in the Citadel is very, very clear. It happens to be probably the most important setting detail to the plot. Not only does Furiosa not have that role, her title is explicitly gendered as male. Movies can be hard to understand if you are not really paying attention. For example, you admitted that you did not understand Furiosa's motivation. As it so happens, there is a scene in the film where Max basically says "what is your motivation?" and she responds "redemption." This is not a coincidence.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Why did she work for Joe that long?

She didn't have a choice. She was basically a slave who had worked her way up to being one of Joe's lieutenants. She was raised in the Citadel and obviously prospered in that environment until Splendid convinced her to betray Joe.

 warspawned wrote:
hell even Joe felt grief and concern for his wives/children, his aim clearly aimed at breeding a 'pure/perfect' human being to supposedly carry on his blood-line and in so doing expanding the mythology he had instilled into his little empire.

Joe is a pretty fascinating character, although it is easy to just hate him for being a tyrant. His megalomania, however, seems driven by the sincere conviction that Citadel society is the only way humanity can survive. He is totally delusional, of course. (This is the guy who paternally advises his subjects not to become addicted to water, after all.) His kingdom may be rich and powerful but the people are all deformed, sick, and/or dying. His theology has two layers. The outer layer is oriented toward the death cult of the terminally ill warboys. Warboys are effectively genetic deadends; they spend the balance of their already short lives trying to make a glorious end of it. The inner layer is oriented toward the virility cult symbolized by Joe's ritualistic monopolies on water and female fertility. Joe juxtaposes these cults so that he is the master of life and death. He is the one who will lift humanity from the ashes, he is the one who will raise the warboys to Valhalla shiny and chrome. But in truth, his subjects are impoverished mutants, his army is made up of leukemia patients, his sons are as genetically defective as the warboys, and his wives not only hate him personally but totally reject everything about his worldview. Despite all this, Joe is willing to bet everything on getting the wives back. He knows his own empire cannot survive without them and I think he is also convinced humanity has no chance unless he can sire a healthy son.

Awesome movie. What really pisses me off is the entire discussion around it. Instead of talking about the movie and its outstanding action, it seems that discussions are way too often about SJW and anti-SJW praising / hating the gender of one of the protagonists. So annoying.

Why would anyone care about the gender of any main actor if the movie delievers /exactly/ what it promised? Constant, full-front action. That's what Mad Max is about. Cars. Guns. Explosions.

Furiosa was taken as a child and later becomes part of Joe's army. Between her missing arm and/or being barren she doesn't have value as a breeder but she has obvious talents as a warrior and climbs the ranks up the driver of the wartruck which would infer she's a top ranked badass as the less skilled end up manning guns or hanging off the sides etc.

While it's not spelled out explicitly one can very reasonably project is that it means she was out there fighting and taking others prisoner, and would have been responsible for turning over other women to Joe for rape/breeding a fate that she herself has been spared. She's basically acting as the hand of Joe and helping condemn other women to their own personal hell. That would tend to build up a guilt complex and while she can't help the masses she can at least attempt to save a few from that fate.

Which also mirrors Max's own ambitions, he can't save the world as it's too far gone but he can at least make his stand with a few that aren't yet lost. They are both out to redeem themselves for the ones they failed to save before. (it also explains why Max is haunted by the visions of past at moments where he realizes his failure will result in more innocent deaths) Think of the film as a sort of post-apoc version of Schindler's List.

Sometimes you gotta pay attention to more than just what the characters are saying, the background visuals convey a lot in a very short time.

As for the R rating the violence is fairly graphic and there's a lot of savagery in play. While there's no sex scene there are boobies (which tends to earn a R-rating easier than violence nowdays).

 Sigvatr wrote:
Why would anyone care about the gender of any main actor if the movie delievers /exactly/ what it promised? Constant, full-front action. That's what Mad Max is about. Cars. Guns. Explosions.

Uh ... the plot is that a guy's wives escape from sex slavery.

Well there is that...

Movie explains to much people complain that it is insulting to the audience.

Movie gives the audience credit for being able to think/see and people complain that it doesn't explicitly explain enough.

 Ahtman wrote:
Movie explains to much people complain that it is insulting to the audience.

Movie gives the audience credit for being able to think/see and people complain that it doesn't explicitly explain enough.

Yeah, but one of those movies has a 98% at Rotten Tomatoes.

Mrs Flashman has just returned from watching it. She was not a fan

I wasn't a big fan. It was a decent action movie with a bland script. Tom Hardy is given a few grunts for dialogue throughout the whole movie. Nicholas Hoult is very good, except that his character does a 180-degree personality turn for no apparent reason. Charlize Theron is downright iconic as Imperator Furiosa, she was great. Overall, it was just another post-apocalypse movie with decent action and bad writing. I recommend Six-String Samurai, it's more fun and memorable.

 TheSilo wrote:
I wasn't a big fan. It was a decent action movie with a bland script. Tom Hardy is given a few grunts for dialogue throughout the whole movie. Nicholas Hoult is very good, except that his character does a 180-degree personality turn for no apparent reason. Charlize Theron is downright iconic as Imperator Furiosa, she was great. Overall, it was just another post-apocalypse movie with decent action and bad writing. I recommend Six-String Samurai, it's more fun and memorable.

I think the heel turn for Nuz was that he failed 3 times, the biggest infront of joe.
But when one of the wives showed genuine compassion, he realized joe wasnt a god anymore.

Exactly. He finally broke down, and the redhead picked him up. Thus the 180.

Love conquers all, especially when in that situation it was essentially motherly love.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
Exactly. He finally broke down, and the redhead picked him up. Thus the 180.

Love conquers all, especially when in that situation it was essentially motherly love.

I guess it's a pretty common movie trope, still felt a little ridiculous to see in a character who was willing to die for his religious conviction change so dramatically so quickly.

 TheSilo wrote:

I guess it's a pretty common movie trope, still felt a little ridiculous to see in a character who was willing to die for his religious conviction change so dramatically so quickly.

And yet, the same thing happens in real life. Remember we're not given the exact precise timeline in the movie, this could be happening over days or weeks, maybe even months (with the way characters talk of distance). And even in real life, when a person realizes that their religion is bull gak, the switch tends to be flipped pretty quick.

I saw it,

let me preface by saying, I LOVE mad max, I know remakes tend to suck,

all I wanted was a half decent story, some good cool villains and that dystopian feel...


I was very VERY let down... this movie was bad...

may as well just call it " some dudes you never heard of drive a truck and fight some other dudes you never heard of, that the story barely even explains for 2 hours. oh and this guy named max does barely anything and seems like a minor character in the movie"


seriously.... I took 3 people who never saw the originals, and they were just lost and it was basically just gore/action porn was all of our conclusions.

nothing was explained,

we dont have the really cool scenes like the barter town stuff where, oh i dont know,

people talk to each other! do some plot, dialogue, heck, even comedic bits...

they could have explored the setting a bit more, bullet farm, gas town, I was excited to see the towns and so on, but no... the entire movie is them diving a damn truck.

no memorable characters like master blaster, or the feral kid... even max is stupid in this one...

as a brainless action flick its good visually, the fights are great, the way they film the car crashes and fights is TOP NOTCH@! the costumes and production value are high, but they really missed the mark on the theme/tone/feel...





Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheSilo wrote:

 AegisGrimm wrote:
Exactly. He finally broke down, and the redhead picked him up. Thus the 180.

Love conquers all, especially when in that situation it was essentially motherly love.

I guess it's a pretty common movie trope, still felt a little ridiculous to see in a character who was willing to die for his religious conviction change so dramatically so quickly.

yeah its a trope, a ridiculous one... most character arcs had poor reasoning behind them... they really should have spent at least *some* time in the bad guys citadel going over daily life so at least we know where they are coming from... it really did not do a good job portraying a realistc arc for that half life guy.




so much wasted potential, really bitter taste in my mouth after this to be honest.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ahtman wrote:
Movie explains to much people complain that it is insulting to the audience.

Movie gives the audience credit for being able to think/see and people complain that it doesn't explicitly explain enough.

I wouldnt say the movie lack explanation,


it lack *exposition* and it lacked any sort of depth that we had in the prior movies.


barter town, the crashed plane tribe, that pilot dude and his son, and many other things from the originals that actually suspended my disbelief and added depth just had no equivelent in this movie. It was straight up just an action/gore porn flick.. and almost all the action was repetitive driving based stuff which got old after two hours of it.

 easysauce wrote:


I wouldnt say the movie lack explanation,


it lack *exposition* and it lacked any sort of depth that we had in the prior movies.

I definitely disagree with you here.... I think that this movie excellently explained what needed explaining, with as few words as possible.

If you can't fill in the rest, that doesn't mean the movie is bad or terribly done.

Plus, since we didn't see the Bullet Farm, or Gastown, and it's not overtly explained how the three became "business partners", this leaves plenty of opportunity for follow-on films within the MM world.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 easysauce wrote:


I wouldnt say the movie lack explanation,


it lack *exposition* and it lacked any sort of depth that we had in the prior movies.

I definitely disagree with you here.... I think that this movie excellently explained what needed explaining, with as few words as possible.

If you can't fill in the rest, that doesn't mean the movie is bad or terribly done.

Plus, since we didn't see the Bullet Farm, or Gastown, and it's not overtly explained how the three became "business partners", this leaves plenty of opportunity for follow-on films within the MM world.

you are not reading what I wrote,

it didnt lack *explanation* it lacked *exposition* and depth..

I dont need it to explain what is happening, because its pretty self evident that the only thing happening is a bunch of car chase and action scenes..

thats the point, mad max has more to it then just car chase action scenes, which I do enjoy, but that wasnt 100% of the movies originally, they had other elements to them.

in fury road we get no exposition of the world, and the movie is 100% action oriented instead of exploring the world/theme/ect

the moments we had in thunder dome, or when entering barter town, or master blaster, the crashed plane tribe, or any of the memorable things from the other MM moves just isnt there, there is no personality to it, its just a brainless action flick riding the coat tails of the MM name



it wasnt even thought out well, the original mad max really gives you the feeling that this is *the end* things are really really bad... humungoid the most powerful warlord has like 5 shots left for his magnum pistol. everyones using bows+arrows and reusable weapons, his 1st officer was awesome too... the little details like him losing his lover and freaking out, the side characters like the guy who tried to catch the feral kids boomerang... those things add *DEPTH* and fit into the setting/theme.

fury road everyone is shooting so many rounds the apocalypse may as well have never happened, they seem to have infinite explosives too, they have so much stuff to shoot, so much fuel, cars, food, water, that its like, wtf? did the world even end?

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
The first 30 minutes are pretty much action with no meaning.

In the first minute of Mad Max we seem him suffer PTS, get captured and almost escape - that's enough story for the first hour of most movies. The next ten minutes sets out Immortan Joe's empire, and it's trading set up with the other two empires. Then we get Furiosa's attempted escape, and shows how she gets rid of her escorts, the beliefs of the War Boys, and Max's escape - all told through the simple narrative technique of exploding cars.

We barely know furiosa, to the attack on the convoy is meaningless. as is madmax being strapped to the hood of a car(Why did he need to be a blood bank again?)
After that it got better, with the action having stakes, people actually dying.

Yeah, this kind of thinking is pretty much the plague of modern films - this idea that every piece of detail needs to explained in complete detail with no further questions possible. They're obviously sick, and the blood helps. So they take blood from captives. That's enough.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 trexmeyer wrote:
Yes and Thunderdome is better imo.

Wow, you are genuinely the first person I've met who admitted to liking Thunderdome (apart from one guy who it turned out hadn't seen any of the films for about a decade).

Thunderdome has a great start and some excellent setting elements. But the last act is just fething terrible, and so far removed from the rest of the Mad Max series that, well, they didn't make another for 30 years.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
It isnt that clear. Why did she steal the wives in the first place.

I really have no idea why you think it's necessary to have a scene to show that a person finds sexual slavery wrong, and might act against it.

Hell, HOW did she get into the vault?

Yeah, that's more of that 'plague of modern movies' thing I mentioned above. We don't need to have absolutely every goddamn thing explained. Pacing and focus matter way more than explaining detail.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
This movie is very big on giving you enough to know what's going on without having two people talk out every plot point. That's one reason why it's so innovative; Fury Road trusts the audience. Sometimes that trust is misplaced, I guess.

Yes, this perfectly sums it up. Well said.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dreadwinter wrote:
She worked for Joe that long because she was working on a plan to get the wives out. Plus, being an Imperator for Joe is probably a pretty cooshy job as in that world. I mean, that seems like something you could just assume.

Personally, I assumed that given she was taken young (and her mother quickly died), she would have been raised in that society. She would have taken on its values and acted according to them, raiding and pillaging like those around her. It generally takes time and maturity to realise how messed up the society around you might be. Hence her need for redemption.

But that’s only one explanation, the couple you give work just as well, and there’s probably plenty of others. It is, as you say, something the audience can just assume – and come up with their own background explanation if they want.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheSilo wrote:
I wasn't a big fan. It was a decent action movie with a bland script. Tom Hardy is given a few grunts for dialogue throughout the whole movie. Nicholas Hoult is very good, except that his character does a 180-degree personality turn for no apparent reason. Charlize Theron is downright iconic as Imperator Furiosa, she was great. Overall, it was just another post-apocalypse movie with decent action and bad writing.

The script is anything but bland, and the writing is a million miles from bad. I think a lot of people confuse jokes and speeches with writing.

The harem girls don't fight, and so in combat terms they are useless. But that's not the same thing as being bad or ineffectual characters.

But I do agree that the action scenes get a little repetitive, and this is made worse because the last sequence is the least impressive fight out of all of them.

I recommend Six-String Samurai, it's more fun and memorable.

Please don't do that. People will believe you, and they don't deserve that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheSilo wrote:
I guess it's a pretty common movie trope, still felt a little ridiculous to see in a character who was willing to die for his religious conviction change so dramatically so quickly.

It's the bend or break thing you see in extremist ideologies - failing their society and being automatically outcast, they go looking for approval and acceptance in another. You see this with Japanese POWs in WWII, extreme beliefs made it hard to capture Japanese soldiers, but those that were taken were extremely talkative - much more so than the prisoners of other countries (crappy Japanese operational security helped as well).

The time frame is massively exaggerated, I mean we're basically talking one intimate conversation with a girl, but other than that it wasn't too unbelievable.

they did car action stuff very well, its just thats basically all it was...

which is ok for 80 minutes, but it was 2 hours long ffs.

At that length there needs to be a little bit of tempo change, it cant all be action, no matter how good the action is, especially when its a specific type of action.

The repetitiveness of it just left me wanting it to end at the end

Watched Thunderdome last night, now that was a cool film. The cars and story in that were awesome. I think it shows its age a bit with the silly humour in some parts but aside from that it was pretty awesome.

I think the fact that Barter Town wasn't an awful sickly and cruel place but instead a bit more of a "normal" post apoc settlement with the crazy turned up a bit made the whole movie that much better. In Mad max we get the typical "everytink bad, nutink good" scenario that doesn't really make sense (to me).

Cars in thunderdome were awesome too. How I always imagined Apocalyptic cars.

Thunderdome could easily have done away with some of the silly humour (the indiana jones style bad guy who doesn't die is the worst offender in that film) but I think the Thunderdome explores more post apocalyptic ideas than Fury Road does, which is Frankly just a car chase movie and not much more.

Fury road was definitely better than the Original Mad max though.

 easysauce wrote:
they did car action stuff very well, its just thats basically all it was...

which is ok for 80 minutes, but it was 2 hours long ffs.

At that length there needs to be a little bit of tempo change, it cant all be action, no matter how good the action is, especially when its a specific type of action.

The repetitiveness of it just left me wanting it to end at the end

There were tempo shifts, and I think they were long enough, and the time was well spent expanding the story and setting. Honestly, if people think there wasn't enough story in this film then I just don't know what to say. It wasn't laid on with never-ending gobbledigook explanations, but it shouldn't be, and it didn't used to be.

I kind of wonder what would happen if something like Die Hard was released today. Or the original Conan the Barbarian?

That said, I do agree with the complaint about repetitiveness. It wasn't enough to ruin the movie for me, but it was certainly there. But I don't think the issue was with the amount of action, but the similarity between all the action scenes. Max and Furiosa's fight was the only action scene that wasn't the war rig being chased by a bunch of vehicles, and by the final action scene, we'd seen all that already.

 easysauce wrote:

you are not reading what I wrote,

it didnt lack *explanation* it lacked *exposition* and depth..

I dont need it to explain what is happening, because its pretty self evident that the only thing happening is a bunch of car chase and action scenes..

thats the point, mad max has more to it then just car chase action scenes, which I do enjoy, but that wasnt 100% of the movies originally, they had other elements to them.

in fury road we get no exposition of the world, and the movie is 100% action oriented instead of exploring the world/theme/ect

umm... explanation is a synonym for exposition. Ever write an expository essay in school? You're attempting to explain some gak in it.

Again, I think the writers of this movie were able to explain perfectly in 30 seconds of dialogue, or single phrases of dialogue, what some movies have trouble doing with a 5 minute monologue.

Just because the players in the movie weren't holding up signs reading out what's going on in the background, doesn't mean it wasn't there.

And unless you missed the very opening credit sequence, they most definitely do explain how the world has gone to gak in a handbasket...

 sebster wrote:

 easysauce wrote:
they did car action stuff very well, its just thats basically all it was...

which is ok for 80 minutes, but it was 2 hours long ffs.

At that length there needs to be a little bit of tempo change, it cant all be action, no matter how good the action is, especially when its a specific type of action.

The repetitiveness of it just left me wanting it to end at the end

There were tempo shifts, and I think they were long enough, and the time was well spent expanding the story and setting. Honestly, if people think there wasn't enough story in this film then I just don't know what to say. It wasn't laid on with never-ending gobbledigook explanations, but it shouldn't be, and it didn't used to be.

I kind of wonder what would happen if something like Die Hard was released today. Or the original Conan the Barbarian?

That said, I do agree with the complaint about repetitiveness. It wasn't enough to ruin the movie for me, but it was certainly there. But I don't think the issue was with the amount of action, but the similarity between all the action scenes. Max and Furiosa's fight was the only action scene that wasn't the war rig being chased by a bunch of vehicles, and by the final action scene, we'd seen all that already.

I dunno, I thought the chase scene in to the large sand storm was pretty unique and a nice tempo change. As well as when they get to the part where they pretty much got away, but then got stuck in a bog and the tank vehicle was after them. Max then went and did some pretty shady stuff while they were working on it.

There were plenty of slow spots in the movie. It just had a lot of action, people tend to forget about them.

 Dreadwinter wrote:
I dunno, I thought the chase scene in to the large sand storm was pretty unique and a nice tempo change. As well as when they get to the part where they pretty much got away, but then got stuck in a bog and the tank vehicle was after them. Max then went and did some pretty shady stuff while they were working on it.

The car sequence in the storm was different, but it was still a car sequence. I'm not complaining about there being lots of car sequences (it's a Mad Max movie afterall), I'm just pointing out it could possibly have benefited from one of the big sequences being a different kind of action scene. It might have meant that the last sequence back through the canyon would have been a lot more exciting.

There were plenty of slow spots in the movie. It just had a lot of action, people tend to forget about them.

I'm not sure if you're talking to me or easysause, here's my comment;
"There were tempo shifts, and I think they were long enough, and the time was well spent expanding the story and setting."

I'd echo the view that enough is explained through visuals, looks between characters and what dialogue there is. Anything else... well you can fill in the blanks with that little thing called imagination.

At the end of the day, this is just one way of making a film and for me, it was just really refreshing to see everything done for real instead of CGI (sand storm excepted, but that's an example of how a little CGI goes a long way).

For those disappointed, I honestly don't know what you were expecting from the film. It's Mad Max done how Mad Max should be done. And as others have highlighted, there are definitely changes in the pace. I remember the slow bits all too well, because I was getting impatient at the lack of action.

George Miller got the balance absolutely spot on IMHO, but the thing with balance is that not everyone will see things the same way. Some will want a bit more of action, while others will want the characters to sit down in a room and spend ten minutes talking about why they need to chase each other around the desert in cars.

I definitely do not think Thunderdome was better..however, I do feel that this movie was, in general, a repeat of the Road Warrior gas tanker set piece. That was very innovative back in the 80's no one had done anything like that before (that I recall). That was kind of one of the coolest things about road warrior, the tanker chase/battle, and it was the climax of the film.

In Fury Road it was just about the whole thematic element of the movie.. attack the tanker truck....rinse and repeat.

And I'm not saying I didn't enjoy the movie, because I definitely did!

I really liked the Citadel...Wanted to see more of it! Really liked the War Wagon..and the guitar guy. Just about all of the side elements were cool, just wanted to see more of it!! This would have been better if it had more side story...IMO.

I would have liked to have seen an assault on bullet town, or gas town, or on the citadel...But what we got was one big repeat of the gas tanker set piece from Road Warrior.

Hopefully the next movies will have more story...to balance things out.

GG

Nahh, From what I hear, each is stand alone. Not going to continue a story.

 generalgrog wrote:
I definitely do not think Thunderdome was better..however, I do feel that this movie was, in general, a repeat of the Road Warrior gas tanker set piece. That was very innovative back in the 80's no one had done anything like that before (that I recall). That was kind of one of the coolest things about road warrior, the tanker chase/battle, and it was the climax of the film.

In Fury Road it was just about the whole thematic element of the movie.. attack the tanker truck....rinse and repeat.

And I'm not saying I didn't enjoy the movie, because I definitely did!

I really liked the Citadel...Wanted to see more of it! Really liked the War Wagon..and the guitar guy. Just about all of the side elements were cool, just wanted to see more of it!! This would have been better if it had more side story...IMO.

I would have liked to have seen an assault on bullet town, or gas town, or on the citadel...But what we got was one big repeat of the gas tanker set piece from Road Warrior.

Hopefully the next movies will have more story...to balance things out.

GG

Yeah that mirrors my feelings as well,

I wanted more exposition of the OTHER things going on BESIDES the crazy chase the truck scenes that took up 90% of the movie, some scenes that explore the citadel, or flesh out immortom joes character (you dont need people talking about what they are about to do for 10 minutes... but like, a harem scene or something to simply establish that joe has a harem, or *something* to flesh him out a bit is nice.)


there was just a lot more to the story that should have got some visual story telling done to it, not just the car chase stuff, lots of things besides the car chase stuff is interesting in the mad max world, and it could have been explored more is all.

I do hope there is another film or two, I think it has a lot of potential, even as a action flick fury road is a really GOOD action flick at least...

the total lack of CGI, and the really well done stunts combined with brilliant camera work deserve praise.