It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
The MMFR plot is not indeed complicated, but it doesn't need to be. A lot of good movies have simple plots. Simple doesn't mean worse, it depends. I like the simplicity of the basic premise and plot - and feel it's told in a way that is full and rewarding for the viewer, rich in detail. In some ways like Ravel's Bolero. I've loved it since I was a kid, and for me it just never gets old or boring (as long as the performance is good) - and it's sort of just this little melody that gets repeated a lot, but it's varied and stuff is added along the way and it's glorious. :D
Even though the basic plot is very simple, it's not like there is no depth at all, or a richness to the characters and the world. I didn't miss more backstory to the characters, we learn a lot about them as it is and not everything needs to be spelled out anyway. It works - for me anyway - that the stories we get of the characters and their background have holes in them. We know parts, can conclude other bits, and some is shrouded in mystery - all good in a story like this I think.
Apart from the obvious fact that Max doesn't speak a hell of a lot, I completely disagree with that bolded bit there. Speaking and communicating are not the same thing at all - in movies any more than in real life. It's possible to convey a lot non-verbally, too. Eyes, the rest of the face, gestures, body language, what one does... and, well, by grunts, too - one of the many ways that Max communicates in. :P He basically only speaks when he has to or really wants to, either little important things like "water" or occasionally even sentences when there's need to say more - like when he suggests they go back and explains why. He needs more than just his eyes and grunts and gestures or even a word a two for that, so he does speak. But he isn't a speaker, and spends a lot of time alone, so it's probably tough for him to express himself verbally all of sudden, it's not what he's used to at this point. How important was the quiet doing when he just handed over the rifle to Furiosa, then let her use him as a sniper stand (if that's incorrect please tell me the correct expression... I'm writing in a bleedin foreign language here and have never needed to use a word for that thing before). He didn't say anything, but communicated a lot by doing it in the first place and then not making a big deal of it. How much was it from him to give that little smile and a thumb-up to Splendid? He communicated a lot, all the way. And when he speaks it tends to be important - like... he's speaking out of necessity... Or he is saying more than he's actually saying (like when he finally decides to tell Furiosa his name).
The relationship does develop, a lot. At first they see each other as enemies, then after extreme suspicion become less suspicious, then allies and come to depend on and trust each other. They share a goal and get there together when on first meeting they were ready to kill each other. How is that not development?
Oh my goodness! This sounds interesting:
"I AM THE SCALES OF JUSTICE!!"
What I'm disagreeing with is that there was no relationship building or character development. Talking isn't necessarily needed for that like I already said. I don't, in general, love car crashes and chases, even well directed ones, I don't in general even love what get called "action movies" since they seem mostly boring set of people throwing punches, explosions and cgi - indeed without anything actually interesting going on with the characters - the talking in them is mostly either the "I'm so badass" or "I'm so funny" variety - which tends to be neither badass nor funny in actual fact. For me this one was an exception in that. I didn't expect it to be when I first went to see it, but it was (for me).
For me, something like, say Iron Man movies or The Avengers (the first one, lost all interest in seeing the second) have lots of talking, which is often supposed to be funny but rarely succeeds, and zero character development, and plenty of action which to me is boring. Yet people love them. (I don't know if they see character development, but they obviously see excitement and fun.) Opinion and taste.
When it comes to talking, less can be more, like some people who say little can get more said than some who talk constantly, and when it comes to communicating and expressing thoughts and feelings, it's so much more than just talking. I get that you found it lacking in that department. I didn't feel more talking was needed, but that has nothing to do with "well directed car crashes" :)
I want to be excited for Mission Impossible 5 but after watching Going Clear, I really don't want to support Tom Cruise at all. Don't feel comfortable giving him a penny of my money anymore. I would watch it online but my wife will probably want to watch it really and I prefer watching stuff on the TV to the computer anyway. I know someone who sometimes sells pirate DVDs, mostly filmed of the cinema screen but often good quality. Might be able to get a copy off him.
@Creasy47 Can't believe I'm defending superhero films but, in their defense, I don't think every film needs character development. The Man With No Name trilogy didn't really have character development, it's still an amazing trilogy.
Never really noticed this when watching the film but it's kinda weird how the previous films made a point of showing ammunition was scarce, while in this one bullets fly constantly (with this guy being the main example).
Not a complaint, just pointing out how the franchise has changed. Yet more evidence for Fury Road being a reboot/reimagining rather than a direct sequel, imo.
Bond doesn't really have this problem. I mean you know Bond will be ok but Bond girls, allies, etc, could well end up dead, which adds a sense of danger that isn't really in the Marvel films.
I'm sick of superhero films. Your last sentence summed up the problem: 90% of them all follow that formula. It's not that there are too many superhero films, it's that they're all the same. There's been some brilliantly fresh, original superhero stuff like Misfits, Kick Ass, Chronicle, etc. But all the big films from Marvel and DC all follow the same formula: the light hearted CGI extravagansa or the gritty, dark, dramatic formula. Every superhero film either tries to be Iron Man, or tries to be the Nolan Batman trilogy, but none of them are ever as good. It just comes across as repetitive. Iron Man was good because it was a breath of fresh air, a fun, creative blockbuster, but Marvel have taken the Iron Man formula and run it into the ground by releasing multiple films a year that followed that blueprint. The Nolan trilogy was great because it was brilliantly directed, shot, acted, written, etc. There are lots of films that try to be like the Nolan films (Man Of Steel) thinking they'll achieve the same success just by rebooting a character and throwing in some half assed character drama but that doesn't work because the film itself is nowhere near the same quality as the Nolan films, and the whole gritty reboot thing is just boring now. I have no interest in ever watching Avengers 2 or Batman vs Superman.
My slight tangent for what it's worth.
'Mad Max: Fury Road,' on the other hand, has stuck with me pretty damn well since I saw it opening night. The amount of insanity in that movie is worth many, many repeated viewings.
But this MM was it's own beast. Along with the incredible tension and pacing, the stunt work was brilliant, and I was emotionally involved with the very big question mark of who was going to survive. I just feel this film is a vastly superior action film to just about every action film I can remember for years. MI5, Spectre and anything else following it this year has a high bar to meet. It appears to be doing well, and there will be a sequel, but still, It's disheartening to see clearly inferior action films post such huge BO.
But what I think is essential is that the characters are interesting and many movies miss that mark for me, such as The Avengers. Nobody felt real or all that interesting and I didn't care about them. When I say "real" - yes, I know they were superheroes, not regular folk, but I mean real persons with real complex inner life and feelings and all that. I got that with Nolan's trilogy. I got that with MMFR.
I agree with you guys that too much cgi easily contibutes to the feeling of not really caring what's happening since it doesn't feel real. The sequel thingy doesn't really matter to me in that, I don't feel actual mortal danger to main characters is necessary for me to feel invested and interested in what happens in a movie. I knew Max was going to survive, I always know Bond will survive, so it's not that. I still care what happens to them and how they get through it (I mean not just which of the other characters will make it and so on).
I also agree that too much sameness and repetition, too much formula kills the interest. It's like with food; even if you really like some dish, would you like it as much if you ate it every day and wouldn't you want something else pretty soon? The huge success of stuff like the Marvel movies is a complete mystery to me. Some aren't bad, but, well... Messing with a formula is a good idea. That can, of course, end up making a mess of it, too, but done well it's the way to keep things interesting in the long run - presumably not only for the audience but the people making the movies, too. I sometimes wonder about the actors if they get inferior scripts or a useless director and may be disappointed already during filming, but can't do anything about it... and if they have multiple film contracts then they'll just have to do it again, like or not. I know the stars get paid nicely, but still... For anyone who considers themselves a proper actor surely making something worthwile is more than just making money. And that should apply to filmmakers in general.
One can´t really complain that Marvel does what it does with the films, because if I´m not mistaken they do pretty much with the films what they did and do with the comic books, and that made them so successful. In the comics, perhaps some hero is killed off at some point, but then he´ll re-appear either in a re-boot or in an alternate universe.
No, what bothers me most in superhero films is that the protagonists have supernatural powers, yet deal mostly with human emotional problems, which in a way makes them bloated babies. James Bond on the other hand doesn´t have superpowers, he doesn´t even have the most exemplary character, yet he gets the job done, saves the world, and at least used to get the girl.
Of course it doesn´t help the comic book movies either that producers think they have to cram as many characters from the books into the films as possible, or even more, instead of concentrating on a decent story.
Actually, it doesn´t have to be weird. Max is wandering through an awfully big desert, and from time to time stumbles upon remnants of society that have developed since the apocalypse isolated from the rest of the world. As you can see in MMFR, they use mirrors and sunlight for communication, they don´t have radios. But in each of the three towns industrial techniques haven´t been obliterated completely, hence one town has functioning oil plant equipment (which wasn´t extinct in RW either), and one has weapons industry.
By the way, I played this video game called R.A.G.E once. Can I just say, there are some amazing similarities with MMFR.
http://media.dunkedcdn.com/assets/prod/63098/p18qj655qo1f2aboqgqq121slc23.jpg
http://www.platformnation.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/RAGE-Box-Art.jpg
http://media1.gameinformer.com/imagefeed/screenshots/Rage/TheScorchers01.jpg
http://www.theaveragegamer.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/RAGE_CarJump.jpg
This scene :x \m/ ^:)^
Yeah I read a lot about that before the film was out (back when we had no trailer or release date or anything and I was scrounging the internet for every scrap of info I could find :P, weird how it finished filming two and a half years ago but only just came out, while in contrast SP is still filming and will be out in November), that they were arguing and she was finding him difficult because of how he worked, etc, but to be fair I think making the whole film was quite a difficult tiring proccess (because of the weather and all the stunts and everything), and they seem to be ok now
http://www.flickeringmyth.com/2015/05/charlize-theron-says-she-fking-went-at-it-with-tom-hardy-on-the-set-of-mad-max-fury-road.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2605511/Tom-Hardy-opens-feud-Charlize-Theron.html