Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
official trailer - http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2015/mar/31/mad-max-fury-road-what-the-new-trailer-teaches-us
Looks very, VERY warhammer 40k.
Love mad max, might have to persuade Mr s to make one of his v rare cinema visits to see this on the big screen
but looks awesome
"The resulting pileup of twisted metal and decapitated ego may well be the biggest, most muscular depiction of the masculine manifest destiny wiping out in action-movie history."(!!!)
it's obviously, plainly, verifiably a nonsense but it plays into their stark paranoia over the "demasculation" of the world by feminists. fucking crazy eh?
"It looked like a straight-up guy flick. No fucking around. Perhaps even a little, hidden acknowledgement from the director that when the shit hits the fan, it will be men like Jack Donovan Mad Max who will be in charge. But then my spidey senses started noticing a couple things. Charlize Theron kept showing up a lot in the trailers, while Tom Hardy (Mad Max) seemed to have cameo appearances."
but adult women are somehow beyond the pale? Blimey.
"a piece of American culture"
I guess if you're an MRA you're too stupid to understand a map.
this is INSANE! Even more than the flat Earth or Beatles didn't exist. I'd like to know what these men have done in their lives to convince them that they are the master race, that'd make for an interesting episode of Louis Theroux
because Theron is apparently a sex slave and they wanted to make her story more realistic. MRAs naturally threw a fit.
has google stopped working?
Which is pretty crazy, never expected it to be this well reviewed. Actually curious about seeing it now.
It's just a bad, bad film.
watched it for the first time ever on Sunday and just thought it was a bit of a joke.
Badly acted, pointless sequences that added nothing to the film.
Soom cool car chases I guess..
Loved it. 2 is obviously fucking miles ahead, but 1 is an amazing example of cult cinema. Bizarre, homoerotic, scattershot storyline, with absurd montages, a funny dog, car chases... what more could you want from a really good bad film.
Not a bad film to be laughed at...perhaps that's the difference.
"which is the one with Diana Ross?"
who hilariously G_F's manager seems to have mistaken for Diana Ross.
Fury Roads a flat out masterpiece. Hard to imagine a major film studio funding something so insane.
and not bother with it, but now I feel like I have to see it...
but liked it because it was very grounded and near-future sort of thing, it was scary because it was a "we're only a few steps from this" vibe. This one just looks like a cartoon, not saying it wont be entertaining or anything, it probably is, but surely something that daft looking isn't a masterpiece, just a spectacle?
But I wasn't as impressed as I'd hoped. The action is really great, but other elements aren't what they're necessarily being hyped as...
It's worth seeing, undoubtedly, but I felt the reviews coloured my judgement a little. I do want to go see it in 3D now though.
that it'd be boring.
Needn't have. Absolutely bonkers and brilliant.
bit of a let down.
think all the rave reviews probably ruined it for me. expectations were too high.
& tom hardy's accent is just weird
had high expectations.
lots of nice little touches, small snippets and background characters and sets but ultimately just a sped-up chase movie, but a good one.
But I really enjoyed it. There's not a massive amount beyond the chase scenes, but those chase scenes are really fucking great.
The film should win some sort of prize for getting a decent performance out of Rosie Huntington-whateverhernameis
really liked the sandstorm bit. Also I thought it would be a good movie to try out that 4DX cinema thing in Milton Keynes. You got some water spray into your face, when someone gets chainsawed :D
great username/thread combination too bd
After the first 20mins or so I thought I might be watching one of my favourite films ever, not quite perhaps but it's good fun, daft as fuck but good fun
Essentially just another big, dull action film. Overblown but totally flaccid. Had none of the intelligence or oddball humour of the originals either.
And the whole half-baked feminism thing grated hugely. Your point will only ever by flimsy at best by crow-barring in a bunch of scantily clad pouting supermodels to carry that thread.
Thought it was an hour too long and found myself bored in places.
Loved all the silliness and the bad guys had some amazing lines - especially Joe's "mediocre", but I found it incredibly repetitive and the attempts at poignancy and emotion really foundered for me. Oh and the tough old ladies stuff was just embarassing.
However, of the five people I saw it with I think I was in a minority.
It's a bit like saying, "Loved all the silliness... didn't like the silliness."
Biggest crime for me though was that it dragged.
Amazing action sequences and visuals, but that was all it was really. As said above, it's a chase movie and not much more. There was practically zero character development, but maybe that was the point.
I did get a little bored, which is very strange. There was a lot going on, but it kind of wore me out.
It manages to be both totally over the top and completely lean; relentless while allowing itself to breathe; and was probably the best example in recent years of a film that encapsulates 'show don't tell'.
I didn't think it was a 'feminist' film at all really, at least not in the way that MRAs seem to be calling it. You'd have to be looking at it from a pretty deliberately skewed point of view to see it as that, I think.
which part of the empowered, run away sex slaves/rape victims getting help from a matriarchal society to destroy a super-masculine patriarchy who are literally said to have 'destroyed the world', is not feminist to you?
think marckee owes someone an apology
From all the fuss that the MRAs were kicking up I was hoping for some proper 'The Worm That Turned' origin-story stuff.
1) How the fuck does Charlize Theron manage to get the heavy-set grease off her forehead with no washing up liquid and seemingly very little water?! If i'm tinkering with my bike and get some chain grease on me it's stuck there for days - it just doesn't budge. The way she had it on her head in some scenes and not others was frustrating.
2) Did anyone else think the main bad guy was based on Ric Flair?
but as Bob Marley used to say: No Woo No Flair.
I'd like to think that in universe he's the same character (a pyscho biker gang leader who becomes a despotic warlord) but I guess they would have referred to it if that was the case.
I have no idea where all this backstory came from, but here you go:
I *think* it was deliberate, but wasn't quite sure.
When there was a lot of wider chaos going on but the camera would zoom on in one or two individual people, their movements would become really jerky - a bit like you might see in strobe lighting. I thought it looked quite cool. Does this make sense?!
first saw it in 28days later but put it down to the digital filming, it does look pretty cool.
and wondered if it was some accidental side effect of transferring the film from 3D to 2D.
Ridley says in the commentary he was filming 6 frames a second so you get a sort of stuttery effect that he felt made the action seem better. I liked it in that.
There is that odd stutter with digital sometimes, though, possibly just that the frames are so crisp and clear compared to analogue stuff.
I thought Miller had told people the 2D was how it was intended.
He may have 'intended' it to be seen in 2D, but there were definitely some scenes that were added or shot in a way specifically for 3D audiences.
3d was post-production, apparently quite a good job. (I can't see in 3D so fucked if I know though)
Most films are post-production 3D now, which is fucking stupid. I'm not sure if any are filmed in 3D due to the post-production thing being so popular and, of course, so shit.
Why the fucking fuck hasn't 3D gone? If they do it to Star Wars VII it's going to be a fucking nightmare for seeing without wasting a day's holiday or getting zero sleep :(
apparently it's a right shit to film in 3D so if they can start doing it well in post, that makes a bunch of sense I guess.
implies the list is still longer for 'real', although many of those either appear to be IMAX style documentary stuff (where I'd guess a 3D film is the point) or animations where it's a bit dubious to call it 'real' in the first place.
I don't know if real is harder. It used to be a bastard with film as there was three times as much film used (or something) but in these digital ages I would imagine it's really pretty simple. I guess double-CGI might be a bugger but I can't see how retro-3D isn't already doing that anyway.
Anyway, it reduces the light, is completely bullshit so, hey ho...
Didn't really notice it elsewhere.
It made it look like an early-1900s film or something. I've not seen any if the Hobbit films with their super fast frame rate, and thought (and feared) that it would look like that all the way through.
I liked that it was used when it was, but am glad it wasn't used throughout.
x y + time?
apart from its hurtful depiction of the fens and its historic tradition of stilt farmers.
is built around a pro-fens narrative aimed at rectifying precisely that historical injustice.
I will still be seeking reparations
this film ruled and if you don't think it ruled you're wrong, unless you're ideologically opposed to action movies in which case you've still got a lot of justification to perform. bear in mind that I am fairly opposed to action movies myself because I have great taste and a keenly critical eye that discerns class from crass like the plucking of a dandelion, and because I have thusly and correctly deemed most action movies to be shallow and pandering, the lowest of the lowbrow
shouldn't be too hard
unreal. genuinely one of the best things I've ever seen. can completely forgive Tom Hardy's wtf accent and Bane tics cos the rest of it was so superb.
At "WHAT A SPRAY, WHAT A LOVELY SPRAY"