New BoB Inaccuracies and do they matter?

[DGSimo]

I was going through some pictures of the new FR vehicles, the BoB in particular and noticed it's inaccurate in a few places. There's only one tank in the back and it's missing the tail spoilers as well. Could add to theories about this Max being a different Max/ Alternate timelines, etc.

Lore states that Max tried to rebuild the Interceptor. Something that is one of the focal points for the comic and video game which both serve as prequels to Fury Road.

[Knightrider]

No what i cant believe is after 6months of George Miller interviews where he clearly states that Fury Road is NOT A SEQUEL people still dont want to know about it (I mean George Miller... PFFFTTT!!! Im a fan and HE IS WRONG!!!) and prefer to live in this strange fantasy land and endlessly discuss something despite the facts being known.

Fury Road is NOT a sequel. The Interceptor is not meant to be exactly the same as the previous version. (As if it could be magically revived after being rolled and blown up!)

endlessly claiming That GM said this or that, but never able to provide a source, I have read the interviews and he has NEVER said definitely that FR is not a Sequel, If I am wrong please prove it so that I can be convinced so that I will stop being wrong....

if there are 6 mos worth it should be pretty easy to come up with just one

[Ishnox]

Hello there, I'm new but have been lurking since the release of the Comic-Con Fury Road trailer, and I suppose I really should be posting in some sort of new user board but I'd really like to reply to this topic instead.

I've seen a lot of talk here about the dreaded "IS IT A SEQUEL!?" question. There's a lot of evidence back and forth; assuming this is a sequel, the BoB seems to be rebuilt, but in basically the same condition as it was in MM2. Did Max have it hauled up, then rebuilt to the same battered condition? Or did it get rebuilt and just happen to end up rusting, losing a fuel tank, and missing the bottom fibreglass bumber, and get coated in dust, to end up looking very similar to how it looked in MM2? This seems silly. Yet Max has his original coat; he even has the leg brace, though no longer seems to walk with a limp. And in the comics, Charlie and Roop from MM1 show up, in their MFP Interceptors no less.

So maybe it's a reboot. Then why the references to the previous movies? It seems painfully obvious that this movie branches off directly from the other movies, with some bizarre continuity, or alternate timeline weirdness, or something. The upcoming Mad Max game by Avalanche is even rumored to include not only the War Boys, Plains of Silence, and Gas Town, but also contain Thunderdome!

As far as an "alt timeline continuation", George Miller just doesn't really strike me as the type to pull a J.J. Abrams on us. Even though you can nominally exclude sci-fi references, and not bring up the "original split continuity", assuming that this is a splinter universe from MM2, people are still going to wonder what sort of plot magic caused a split timeline. It's unavoidable. And Miller has stated that these films are simple allegories, Westerns on wheels, excluding the first film I suppose. He's also directly stated that he himself can't place the continuity of the films.

Which I suppose leads to the theory that all of the Mad Max tales, excluding the first which undoubtedly takes place before the others, are part of a sort of timeless folklore. This has been discussed as well. The theory goes that Max is a legendary hero, a man who the denizens of the Wasteland tell tales about, who seems to be unplaceable in time. The only constants about him are himself and his vehicle. It would seem multiple tales tell of how it was destroyed, sooner or later. Which story is "true", so to speak? All of them are, and none of them. What happened is known, but what exactly happened, and when, is a mystery. That this lonesome wanderer came from nowhere and helped those who needed it most is all that is really known.

This stuff has been discussed. I brought it up for a couple reasons. One was to address the argument at hand, which isn't really saying anything new. Another is to gather what is known in one place. Ultimately, though, I'm tired of the various theories blending and mixing and having the facts lost, then restated, then lost again. I like order. I like talk, but it's purposeless if nobody remembers what they've said before. So I'm gonna name the theories so we can get into little tribes and get mad at each other and start road wars and huff chrome spray paint over it.

They are:

Sequel Theory: Takes place after Thunderdome, or between MM2 and Thunderdome, or between MM1 and MM2. No matter which, it fits into established canon.

Reboot Theory: Is an entirely new story. New movie, new trilogy, new continuity. The old movies don't count anymore.

Alt Timeline Theory: Counts some of the movies. Probably an alternate version of Road Warrior, due to the BoB getting kaboom'd in both.

Mythos Theory: The movies show multiple tales of a folkloric hero. First movie comes first, the others are anyone's guess. Events and narrators are unreliable.

There you have it. The theories are named. Go ahead and take sides. Or not. Personally I think Mythos Theory is closest to what's going on. But that's just me.

[Knightrider]

Sequel Theory: Takes place after Thunderdome, or between MM2 and Thunderdome, or between MM1 and MM2. No matter which, it fits into established canon.

Reboot Theory: Is an entirely new story. New movie, new trilogy, new continuity. The old movies don't count anymore.

Alt Timeline Theory: Counts some of the movies. Probably an alternate version of Road Warrior, due to the BoB getting kaboom'd in both.

Mythos Theory: The movies show multiple tales of a folkloric hero. First movie comes first, the others are anyone's guess. Events and narrators are unreliable.

There you have it. The theories are named. Go ahead and take sides. Or not. Personally I think Mythos Theory is closest to what's going on. But that's just me.

Good post welcome, I prefer the Sequel or Mythos presently but am open to change as new info is presented.

Yes pick one, pick two, pick them all, change your mind whenever ever you want for no good reason, But please people just stop saying George Miller said stuff that he did not say.

[Artemis Flow]

10410203_10204193628071188_1118632457437073508_n.jpg (9.09 KiB) Viewed 3547 times

[Ishnox]

Honestly, it's kind of weird being on another forum arguing about whether or not a new addition to a franchise is a sequel or a reboot. I got into Evangelion around August 2013, and on EvaGeeks.com, an enormous backlog of threads tell the tale of a great war over whether or not the Rebuild series, which was ostensibly a reboot of the anime, was a sequel or not. We're talking hordes of insanity on both sides. At some point, they just stopped arguing about it. There was no middle ground. I wonder if we're witnessing the beginnings of another Sequel Theory war for another universe.

[Knightrider]

10410203_10204193628071188_1118632457437073508_n.jpg

seems as more and more evidence comes out in support of one side of the argument, all the other side can do is make up fake GM quotes and call other people stupid for not agreeing to their POV, come on people!

for those who can read and do a google search you will find George Miller actually presents more evidence that it is a loose sequel than a reboot. but do not take my word for it see it for yourself. Here are some of the main ones- the first link is a 28 minute long podcast interview (Uncle Entity take note that GM describes MM1 as taking place in a post apocalyptic world right around the 21 minute mark )

http://hwcdn.libsyn.com/p/e/2/1/e21ceeb ... d7f5c9363d

http://nerdist.com/interview-director-g ... fury-road/

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/pro ... on/6466538

AND MOST IMPORTANT OF ALL

http://herocomplex.latimes.com/movies/i ... hology/#/0

this is the one causing all the confusion, people are not reading the part where he says IT IS the same character even though it is "slightly wonky" it is an article and not a direct interview and some of Millers answers seem to be paraphrased by the author.

AND GO READ THE COMICS!!! co written by George Miller and Nick Lathouris, two of the three screenwriters of Fury Road. Cant get much more official than that.

now for sure there are plenty of so called journalists that say it is a reboot on all corners of the internet and TV, but many of these idiots are also calling Star Wars 7 a reboot which is obviously not correct as it is EPISODE 7 staring the original cast. So........

[Artemis Flow]

Some " fake " GM quotes

George Miller

1. What would you call this film? A sequel? A reboot?

George Miller: I like to call it a revisit.

How is Mad Max: Fury Road connected to the previous three Mad Max movies? Do you consider it a sequel, a reboot?

GM : It's connected in spirit. It's kind of revisiting a familiar place for me.

CS: I'm guessing you want to keep it a bit of a mystery, but I heard that this isn't a sequel or a remake...

Miller: No, it's not. It's not a sequel or a remake, no, but it's a post-apocalyptic world. I mean, the big attraction of those films is that the human

behavior is reduced to its very essence, to a very elemental stage. It's almost like a medieval world set in the future. It's very spare, given that it's

figures in the landscape, a little bit like "Happy Feet," in that big, vast landscape with these figures interacting.

Charlize Theron

“I think we’ve been told is it’s not a sequel or a prequel. It’s the world of Mad Max but it’s a re-imagination. I play a warrior and Mad Max is played by

Tom Hardy; at least I hope it’s still Tom Hardy. That’s really all I think I can say”

Theron: Mad Max won't be a sequel

Charlize Theron has revealed that Mad Max 4: Fury Road will not be a prequel or sequel to the previous films.

The Oscar-winning South African actress is set to star alongside Tom Hardy as Mad Max in the fourth instalment, which comes 27 years since the last movie,
Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome.
"Like with Snow White And The Huntsman, there is so much potential to re-imagine that world. It's such an interesting world and how much it still resonates
today after 20 years or whatever it's been. We're going back to that world but this is not a prequel or sequel or anything like that," she said.

Megan Gale

ffs.jpg (52.26 KiB) Viewed 3526 times

[Knightrider]

he says revisit NOT reboot different word altogether, and then he says reworking, which is much closer but still not reboot, reboot means throw out everything that came before and start over, reworking and revisit implies more of rearranging or reinterpreting earlier chapters as opposed to throwing it out, and CT is not GM but even she says re imagination not reboot. I know it is a hard concept to understand that different words mean different stuff. Even synonyms are not exact but exist in order to describe nuance and levels and shades.
and did you even read the stuff i linked, apparently not

like a politician he dances around that word reboot BUT never says it EVER. Your own posts prove that.

[Artemis Flow]

Reboot , re imagining , re interpret , re tread whatever are not words used to describe a sequel it has never been called Mad Max 4 for obvious reasons
but go ahead shoehorn how the Interceptor magically rebirths itself lol