Support NeoGAF

[Irnbru]

How, exactly, are these cliches?

They are tropes of the genre not cliches. You can't be dense about it. You need to see this movie like you would super metroid. The exposition is front loaded, and you find the details of the world through all the glimpses of the world on camera. Your imagination fills the gaps which are very clearly there and there In Millers mind... But You fill it yourself not by a character drinking some guzzaline enjoying the view. That's world building the way it should be in cinema. I see one scene in this movie and suddenly it devolves into... What brought humanity to this point? It claws at your basal emotions and instincts. That's complexity, and please don't confuse complexity for pedantry. This movie is built to be tight not woobly woobly spacey timey ( and yes I like interstellar too ).

ps this is not aimed at you bert; just wanted to use what you said as a spring broad, but I think you know that bwahaha.

 

[CharminUltra]

This was packed to the brim with cliches.

Tyrant? Check
People in dire situation? Check.
People in dire need to change dire situation? Check

This word doesn't mean what you think it means.

 

[Sibersk Esto]

Execution > originality people.

 

[jett]

How are you coming to this conclusion? Out of sheer curiousity.

This was packed to the brim with cliches.

Tyrant? Check
People in dire situation? Check.
People in dire need to change dire situation? Check.

Mediocre!

 

[Calabi]

I'm not sure how people are complaining that there's not much story and you dont understand and see much of the world. This had more detail's and story than most other science fiction, fantasy movies. It's written on Max's back, on the cars and vehicles, environment's, everywhere. In the way the characters act and what they dont say. It's incredible the sheer amount of extraneous detail that didn't need to be there but that just add's to whole sum of the parts. Some of the simplest stories are the best.

 

[Sibersk Esto]

Nothing breaks immersion for me like a character explaining how the fictional world works. These characters live in this world, so everything should just be natural for them.

Mad max does not suffer this problem

 

[The Mule]

Driving home after watching this at the cinemas felt really boring. Took a lot of will power not to smash into other cars.

 

[Messofanego]

Films were a mistake. They're nothing but trash.

 

[duckroll]

It's bizarro you guys neglect to understand when you're supporting my stance.

Yes, they are in evry movie ever made. Exactly how does another movie, this movie, following the exact same framework exhibit complex layers not found in those other films?! Again, people are touting originality, complexity and subtle storytelling here. For me it is another run of the mill flick. Which is fine.

I think you're being very disingenuous here. You're the one who is waving his hands in the air going "WHY IS EVERYONE SO IMPRESSED HURR THERE IS NO STORY!" and when people try to explain that there is a story, and it is well told, but not a complicated one, you bring up straw men. Originality and complexity are not things most people are saying about the movie's narrative. The narrative is layered, but it is not complex. There is certainly a lot of subtlety to the storytelling, but again, that doesn't make it complex or deep.

A story can be simple, well told, have layers, and not be complex and deep, and still be considered a good story. More importantly it can be considered that there IS a story, which is the main point. Storytelling isn't a binary thing where there is either a deep complicated storyline involving tons of events, or there is no story at all.

 

[Raptor]

So this is good uh?

Seems like this is my kind of movie, no exposition whatsoever and no convuluted history, just insane action all over the place!!

Fuck I cant wait!

Brother's in arms track hopefully is used with some god damn inspired visuals and I will fucking melt right there!!

FUCK!!!!

 

[Atraveller]

Films were a mistake. They're nothing but trash.

 

[BronsonLee]

Films were a mistake. They're nothing but trash.

Can't stop, won't stop

 

[Myriadis]

I wasn't interested and thought that it was some standard action movie, some cash-in.
Never thought that it would get these ratings, gotta watch it!

 

[Gastone]

So this is good uh?

Seems like this is my kind of movie, no exposition whatsoever and no convuluted history, just insane action all over the place!!

Fuck I cant wait!

Brother's in arms track hopefully is used with some god damn inspired visuals and I will fucking melt right there!!

FUCK!!!!

You won't be disappointed with regards to the Brothers in Arms track. It's perfectly used, and i was sitting there with the biggest smile on my face, and getting those little shakes that i've had since i was a kid...when i get really excited about something.

 

[sonicmj1]

It's bizarro you guys neglect to understand when you're supporting my stance.

Yes, they are in evry movie ever made. Exactly how does another movie, this movie, following the exact same framework exhibit complex layers not found in those other films?! Again, people are touting originality, complexity and subtle storytelling here. For me it is another run of the mill flick. Which is fine.

For me, the most interesting stuff in the film outside of the incredible action comes from how the film builds the insane mythological construction of the War Boys culture in stride at high speed, and how all the characters, with varying degrees of subtlety, have to cope with the shattering of these legends that have been constructed around them, or that they have constructed for themselves. It's not just some higher sense of morality that allows them to see through The Tyrant's lies and save themselves. It's a tough, painful process, one that takes its own sort of mythologizing, and it changes everyone even over the course of the chase.

What makes this movie more interesting to me than something like The Raid: Redemption (the only other action film I can think of with as much relentless intensity) is its much wider scope in terms of characterization. It's not just the Action Adventures of Action Men. The development of the Wives, in particular, feels like a kind of arc I've never really seen in this kind of movie, and it's accomplished because the director trusts his actors to bring a few lines of script and give them fuller dimension everywhere else in the film. The action and the character development are remarkably well-integrated.

The story and its character arcs aren't complicated, but they have a lot of nuance that's carried by the direction and the performances of the characters.

 

[Pai Pai Master]

Please don't ask for more "story" in a movie like this. Just pay attention and analyze what you're being shown, think more critically. If every movie has to have lengthy discussions with characters suddenly becoming captain obvious, then you wouldn't be able to get a movie like this. So tightly packed in a neat two hours and FULL of content, absolutely nothing extraneous in this movie and perfectly paced.

 

[Irnbru]

Thanks for thought. Regarding the bold, this is what I have been afraid of bringing up without the words to delicately express it.

Your definition of world building as been the first response in this thread that gives me something to consider. That is, it is not what you do know but what you do not know that leaves a gap for someone's imagination to run with possible scenarios. Interesting.

Well if we take two movies.. And don't take this me comparing 2001 to mad max, I'm not! But take is as a comparison in medium. You take 2001 vs Interstellar... You have one movie which pushed the medium to the maximum on the visual front... The world building was there... But you filled in a lot of the gaps, you see the actions and you make up your mind on why it happened. It's what makes it such a classic on the visual front. You take interstellar and it trying to fuck your face with exposition and explanation. I don't blame it entirely on Nolan... Ok maybe I do... But it's hugely a product of modern blockbuster cinema.. The masses are asses so let's hand hold them. Fury Road challenges that concept, instead Of miller having a war boy hold your hand and explaining why in minute detail why they go about the desert over a 30 minute drive... miller says.. Let me just attach you to front of a 2000 hp v8 and rip your through the desert and you figure out why through these scenes here and there. It's very poignant when you start to be like.. Well that's why they fucking do this or that with just a few words. Yeah... It's not hugely complicated .. But it doesn't need to be, and that's the beauty of it! That I feel is what we love. It's a medium to fuel the train of destruction that so many fail to do.

 

[Raptor]

You won't be disappointed with regards to the Brothers in Arms track. It's perfectly used, and i was sitting there with the biggest smile on my face, and getting those little shakes that i've had since i was a kid...when i get really excited about something.

Oh man, Oh man!!

 

[Fallout-NL]

Avatar? Hahaha no.

Yeah, Terminator (2) and Alien (Aliens) belong in that list. Avatar does not.

 

[kinggroin]

Mediocre

Post of the fucking year

 

[chicagocubsfan]

Please don't ask for more "story" in a movie like this. Just pay attention and analyze what you're being shown, think more critically. If every movie has to have lengthy discussions with characters suddenly becoming captain obvious, then you wouldn't be able to get a movie like this. So tightly packed in a neat two hours and FULL of content, absolutely nothing extraneous in this movie and perfectly paced.

Yeah lol. That dude probably wants Max to spend the first 20 minutes explaining everything point by point to the audience.

 

[TacticalFox88]

Mediocre!

This is why I love you Jett.

When I scrolled to this I legitiamtt laughed out loud

 

[Spinx]

Just saw the movie...

 

[BronsonLee]

In this thread which I have admittedly skimmed through for most part

Oh..ok

 

[Irnbru]

Disingeuous?

Duck, you are oversimplifying my confusion. World building is a tool of story telling and can be much be a part of the plot of any story. In its use, it can be a very effective tool to give weight to adjectives such as "subtle, complex and layered" like many have expressed here.

The problem i don't see it with this film despite other peoples assertions that it exists and cite few examples to give weight to the claims. In this thread which I have admittedly skimmed through for most part, I have only read two examples citing subtle storytelling is at display here: steering wheels and markings on Max's back.

I agree not every movie needs to be deep. I do not think this is a movie with a simple yet effective story placed in a middle of a complex world that gives it a layer of backstory to give it dimension. When people argue for the world building in this movie, it would be interesting to hear examples of how so i can look at this from another angle rather than garner defensive reactions from a few posters.

Dude... The subtle story telling is EVERYWHERE in this movie. I could point out like 5 places where you can blow up the story. I won't here at I would have to delve into spoilers... But just start asking the whys and it begins to unravel the world. It just happens at 200 mph in the wasteland. What brings every character to where they are. It's not hugely complicated, but the world is most definitely there.

Sonicmj1, irnbru, thanks for the posts. Really helpful.

Irnbru, i like the point about full blown exposition vs storytelling through visuals that provoke the audience's imagination. I think i now understand why this movie puts me at odds with the general consensus here which is it didn't peak my curiousity nor my imagination in the least bit which may say more about my reaction to the film than the film in if and itself.

Oh yeah, I can agree with that. If the movie doesn't spark the imagination, I can see it falling flat. The world is there, it's just either going to run you over or simply drive by, which can happen with any movie. Haha.

 

[phazedplasma]

Saw it last night. So glad there is atleast one action director out there who still understands that film is a visual medium.

 

[-ImaginaryInsider]

Please don't ask for more "story" in a movie like this. Just pay attention and analyze what you're being shown, think more critically. If every movie has to have lengthy discussions with characters suddenly becoming captain obvious, then you wouldn't be able to get a movie like this. So tightly packed in a neat two hours and FULL of content, absolutely nothing extraneous in this movie and perfectly paced.

Exactly.

But there is always somebody in the audience that wants to know something like The Man With No Name's name/backstory, but they don't realize telegraphing every detail would take away from the character.

Being able to convey story, character moments and emotion without tons of dialogue is powerful in its own right.

 

[duckroll]

The problem i don't see it with this film despite other peoples assertions that it exists and cite few examples to give weight to the claims. In this thread which I have admittedly skimmed through for most part, I have only read two examples citing subtle storytelling is at display here: steering wheels and markings on Max's back.

I agree not every movie needs to be deep. I do not think this is a movie with a simple yet effective story placed in a middle of a complex world that gives it a layer of backstory to give it dimension. When people argue for the world building in this movie, it would be interesting to hear examples of how so i can look at this from another angle rather than garner defensive reactions from a few posters.

You will find more discussion about specific examples in the spoiler thread, because when people who have watched the film want to talk about stuff in detail, spoiler tags get pretty annoying.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1046257

In particular I will highlight some examples to help you understand where people are coming from.

(WARNING: These posts are from the spoiler thread and contain unmarked spoilers discussing details from the film)

How the film handles emotion and empathy: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=163955341&postcount=10

The culture of worth and value in the film: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=163959190&postcount=27

Subtlety and details in world and character building: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=163973734&postcount=62

More on subtlety and details in world building: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=163975936&postcount=66

Even more on subtlety and details in world building: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=164024815&postcount=107

There's a bunch of this stuff in the thread if you care to read through it. I'm no fan of circle-jerks, so I'm not approaching this from a "you're wrong" angle. But if you're really surprised why people are impressed with how the film was put together and how everything felt like it fit so tightly and perfectly, I hope you have a better understanding from these explanations.

 

[BronsonLee]

Yep, but you knew that seeing you have a survey that counts a bajillion posts from me

I'll let duckroll handle the actual seriousness, but it's pretty clear you're not actually trying to have any sort of a nuanced discussion here. You go tone deaf to any post that basically doesn't fit your narrative of what the movie is. Why would I want to engage in anything resembling a serious discussion about your critique of the movie when it's clear you're not actually going to read it?

You know what most people do with movies they don't like? They stop talking about them.

Thanks, duck. I'll check it out and go see this again tonight.

...Or apparently they go see them twice, because that makes sense

 

[muntersaur]

Execution > originality people.

Yep, genre films exist to satisfy audience expectation.

With a genre film, the audience should know what to expect in terms of narrative (with some slight subversion to keep it interesting), and these films live and die based on execution of these familiar tropes rather than on terms of deep philosophical insight or narrative complexity. If the latter is what you are after, go watch a different film.

 

[antispin]

Is the 'save your self' track from the trailer in the soundtrack?

I have the iTunes version and it doesn't seem to have it. Good OST though. Gogetitalready

 

[Lebron]

Going to see this in a DBOX theater later. Should be something

 

[sonicmj1]

Sonicmj1, irnbru, thanks for the posts. Really helpful.

Irnbru, i like the point about full blown exposition vs storytelling through visuals that provoke the audience's imagination. I think i now understand why this movie puts me at odds with the general consensus here which is it didn't peak my curiousity nor my imagination in the least bit which may say more about my reaction to the film than the film in if and itself.

Glad it helped. And even if the world didn't spark your imagination, at least you could appreciate the visual kineticism on display.

The Citadel as it's established early on is pretty thoroughly ridiculous, with its impossibly tall spires and enormous masses of bodies that must eat... something... so I couldn't blame you too much if you just kind of check out right there and say, "This is absurd, clearly nothing here is supposed to make any sense." But despite how incredibly heightened all the aesthetics are, every character with any kind of screen time is treated pretty seriously, and the background details of the world explain a lot about each of them.

 

[Fallout-NL]

Disingeuous?

Duck, you are oversimplifying my confusion. World building is a tool of story telling and can be much be a part of the plot of any story. In its use, it can be a very effective tool to give weight to adjectives such as "subtle, complex and layered" like many have expressed here.

The problem i don't see it with this film despite other peoples assertions that it exists and cite few examples to give weight to the claims. In this thread which I have admittedly skimmed through for most part, I have only read two examples citing subtle storytelling is at display here: steering wheels and markings on Max's back.

Well, another example would be that thing they do with that chrome spraypaint stuff which I found pretty damn cool seeing as how very telling that is of their reverence for beautiful cars, internal combustion engines and, perhaps best of all, how it explains that their version of heaven contains an imagined alloy that does not rust and stays shiny forever (Immortan Joe mentions this as he sends off Nux). Which is something I understand the need for all too well as the owner of a pretty motorcycle that I absolutely can't stand to see rust or corrode in some form or other.

The film was full of these little touches.

I see that a couple of reviews got this wrong by the way, they said that they're huffing the paint, which is not true, they are adorning themselves with it.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

...Or apparently they go see them twice, because that makes sense

Hey, me and a friend went to go see Prometheus on the 2nd weekend just because we were so confused as to how it could have gone that way, we thought maybe something would jump out at us on the 2nd viewing that would put it right.

Of course, it didn't DO that, but still - it's not out of the ordinary to give something a 2nd shot if you think maybe there was just something you missed .

 

[Dabanton]

Going to see this in a DBOX theater later. Should be something

You're in for a treat. the DBOX is amazing for this film.

 

[BronsonLee]

Hey, me and a friend went to go see Prometheus

OH MY GOD BOBBY NO

.

*shrugs*

 

[DocSeuss]

Read a book then. What are you watching movies for, if you can't get enough storytelling from all the visuals?

It was described by Miller as "a silent film with sound." He recommended reading The Parade's Gone By (amazing book) for anyone who wanted to make movies. It's ALL visual storytelling.

 

[Lebron]

You're in for a treat. the DBOX is amazing for this film.

Good to hear! The price tag had me hoping it would be at least worth it.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

OH MY GOD BOBBY NO

Man, you think I'm amped to see Mad Max... you shoulda seen me riding the high of those trailers. ALIEN is in my top 5 all-time. Even tempering expectations, I was still like "huh. I mean... it LOOKED right. So why did... I mean... did I just miss something there? There are some cool ideas but it didn't... Okay, LOOK. Let's just see it again next weekend. We'll sit on it a week, and then we'll come back, and maybe something will jump out at us and it won't be so much of a fuckin botch job? Maybe?"

(one week later)

"Fuck."

 

[Simo]

You're in for a treat. the DBOX is amazing for this film.

Awesome! First DBOX experience tonight, although I'm having to drive 50 minutes for it. lol

 

[kinggroin]

This movie is Star Wars if Star Wars was 2 hours of the Rebel cruiser being pursued relentlessly by the Star Destroyer. I guess some people call that "distillation" but it's not all that satisfying from a narrative point of view

That's the most disingenuous shit said about this movie so far.

 

[Tricky I Shadow]

So this is good uh?

Yeah - it's good. The action is amazing.

But 98% good? Honestly, no. Not quite.

 

[Timeaisis]

Bobby, you still haven't seen this yet!?

 

[Bobby Roberts]

Bobby, you still haven't seen this yet!?

A little more than 24 hours from now.

Considering the 6 or 7 listens I've given to the soundtrack, I'm fairly certain I'm going to short circuit when I hear Brothers in Arms in context for the first time, because that track already works on me like gangbusters.

 

[NotTheGuyYouKill]

Tonight's the night.

Edit ^ Brothers in Arms is such a killer track. I keep listening to it.

 

[Calabi]

Just saw the movie...

You didn't give enough exposition I'm not understanding what you are saying.

 

[TheXbox]

A little more than 24 hours from now.

Considering the 6 or 7 listens I've given to the soundtrack, I'm fairly certain I'm going to short circuit when I hear Brothers in Arms in context for the first time, because that track already works on me like gangbusters.

It's only half as good as the scene it accompanies. Probably the best sequence in the whole film.

 

[duckroll]

Yeah - it's good. The action is amazing.

But 98% good? Honestly, no. Not quite.

What does that even mean? A 98% RT score means that 98% of reviewers liked the movie. So what you're saying is "Yeah it's good, but I don't think that many other people should think it's also good" which is really stupid. Lol.

The actual average for the movie now is about 8.8/10 across all reviews. So maybe you're just confused as to how RT works.

 

[More_Badass]

Yeah - it's good. The action is amazing.

But 98% good? Honestly, no. Not quite.

98% simply means 98% of the reviews were positive. The average rating is actually 8.8/10

Edit: Beaten by duckroll