My biggest problem with the movie

[NuffTorque]

I don't know how you are even worrying about Max's' age in this movie, how the f*** do you explain the dancing penguins in the bullet framers house?

[Taipan]

The biggest problem i have is the fact Miller has already explained Fury Road but people dont seem to care what he says...
If you dont want to listen to the creator, then you may as well keep "theorising" as much as you like.

Miller used the terms "re-imagining" when describing Fury Road.
When asked how long AFTER THUNDER DOME does fury road take place he siad "it can be 30days or 30yrs".

Fury Road has nothing to do with the orginal series other then the character "Mad Max" wandering the wastelands.
In reality its not even MM4 because its not a sequel to Thunderdome (MM3).

100% agreed

[blackmocco]

I hope you're right because if Fury Road references something hokey from its past like that last stupid Star Trek movie(Harrison is really Khan) or that stupid Prometheus movie(showing the original Alien from Alien at the end) or that stupid Indy Jones 4 movie(Shia being the lost son, every single minute) then I'm going to be really pissed.

It doesn't. You won't be.

[blackmocco]

If this is a "reboot", it's interesting that it seems to replace the second film, rather than retelling the origin. Maybe this is Miller's more thought-out sequel to MM2, taking place in a reality where Max doesn't crash, but outruns Wez when he leaves the compound. Miller's correcting the "mistake" of MM3BT (don't jump on me Uncle, I'm just offering a theory. I like BT).
I think this principle was what Gene Roddenberry was using when Star Trek II The Wrath Of Khan was made. All new uniforms, Kirk seeing the refurbished Enterprise--the first Star Trek film was so badly received that ST II was like a do-over.
Yeh, I'm a Trek geek too...only Original Series, though..

But Star Trek II isn't a reboot. The first movie's events technically still happened. It just doesn't get referred to again. (Because it's boring as shit.) Plus, <nerd hat on> Star Trek: TMP's set supposedly five years after the TV show ends. Star Trek II's set supposedly ten years after that, fifteen years (more or less, real time) after the TV show ended. Plenty of time for new uniforms, etc.

I keep saying it, but Fury Road doesn't fit in with the original trilogy. It's a new version, with a new actor, with a new timeline. Better to go in with that in mind. If you all keep trying to connect it somehow, it's not going to add up. Clearly the biggest hurdle is that Miller did this one. If it had been a different director, maybe it would have been easier to swallow that this is its own thing.

[Taipan]

I keep saying it, but Fury Road doesn't fit in with the original trilogy. It's a new version, with a new actor, with a new timeline. Better to go in with that in mind. If you all keep trying to connect it somehow, it's not going to add up. Clearly the biggest hurdle is that Miller did this one. If it had been a different director, maybe it would have been easier to swallow that this is its own thing.

I think I see the reason why people keep thinking that way. Miller's been pretty consistent with vagueness of MM movies from the very beginning. Playing around with concepts of character/actor swaps, no dates, 3rd person account storytelling, etc. There's a lot of leeway for speculation. Even die hard fans couldn't resist figuring out stuff like Gyrocaptain/Jedediah. Miller knew what he was doing and to be honest - it was brilliant because it kept people invested. But it's even more amazing when you find out all those gaps were already filled in by Miller, characters had backstories, that whole 'universe' has its own little history but you'd have to dig really deep to discover all this. And I'm not talking 'go and speculate over fanfic' but go to directly to the source - Miller. He's got the answers.

There's also this one thing about Miller and MM movies...
Miller has this constant urge to revisit his old ideas if given the chance. I remember reading an interview with him about how he was disappointed with the quality of MM, its low-budget feel. And how he made it all happen in RW the second time around. It's funny if you look at RW from that perspective, you'll instantly start noticing carbon copy themes and elements from MM but updated with more money a new look. It became apparent to me that Miller's approach to MM is equal parts new story and updating his old ideas. In that respect, MM movies seem to balance between original movies and reboots themselves (more on the 'original story' side though, because each one has its distinct theme and plot, but the amount of re-used ideas.... wow..). Take all this into account and you start seeing MM universe as Miller's playground with not a whole lot of regard to continuity. Dare I say Max himself is the only element keeping this whole thing together, and Miller does a great job at sticking to that (attention to detail, dilated pupil, his injuries, clothes etc). Other than that, remove Max and you get 3 movies that are completely disjointed.

Fast forward to 2015 - all this vagueness is biting Miller in the ass with people thinking FR is a sequel to MMBT. Or maybe a sequel to MM. Or whatever. No matter how many times Miller says it's a reboot. I think he brought it on himself. But it's not big of a deal anyway, just my 2 cents

[CouplaDaisygo]

Yeah, It's just like someone getting their knickers in a knot trying to figure out why Danny DeVito in Batmans Return had to find plans to the batmobile in sewers and had no idea where the batcave is when earlier Burgess Meredith had already ridden inside the batmobile to batcave and got to have a "Bif Kapow Smash" fight in there. Ya gotta let go and just go for the ride.

[Wife Five]

Getting too literal about this Mad Max timeline will drive you (and us) nuts. As has been mentioned above, Miller has been very clear that it's a new version of the 'Mad Max universe' and obviously has a lot of similarities to what has come before in the Mel Gibson trilogy. Most of the new audience will not have seen the older movies... Maybe it'll spark some interest in them. But we're in new territory now.
What I've seen of the movie and heard about it online from those who have seen screenings makes me very hopeful that this will be a classic.

Hey, 'Blackmocca'.... You've seen the thing. Uh, is it actually any good?

Hell, I'm going anyway.

[blackmocco]

Saw a rough cut last summer. I'd say the version I saw - I've no doubt some things'll be different by the time May rolls around - had some issues but overall, it's pretty spectacular. It's light on character, big on brain-smashing visuals and it's got a fantastic energy you don't normally see from a summer blockbuster. It's pretty removed from the others, just as BT was from RW. First half is worth the price of admission alone. Has a little trouble matching that for the second half. Couldn't make up my mind whether Hardy was miscast or not. It's Theron's show anyway, and she's all sorts of badass.

[Taipan]

Nathan Jones (Rictus Erectus) goes on to explain what Fury Road is:

HI GUYS! SO I DECIDED TO COMPILE MUCH OF WHAT I'VE WRITTEN BEFORE ON SOME PAST POSTINGS & PUT THEM ALTOGETHER IN THIS BIT OF A LONG READ...SORRY..BUT I HOPE YOU ENJOY Emotikon wink AND THANKS AGAIN FOR ALL YOUR SUPPORT!

===> When it comes to business and creating a masterpiece of biblical proportions, George Miller is TOO good to just half ass anything! George Miller is a perfectionist in ultimately giving the crowd exactly what they WANT!!

I have inside information that the public does not. There has been many test screenings of "Mad Max: Fury Road" using diverse crowds and critics for the purpose of analysing and critiquing..

And Warner Brothers is very excited about this movie for good reasons! As myself included, and many others involved..

To some, the trailer looks like it might have too much CGI. And yes, understandably it may appear that way, because the CGI is second to none IMO! BUT less than 20 percent is ACTUAL CGI..! Miller in his infinite wisdom, decided to strap stuntmen..aka (adrenaline junkies) lol, into ridiculously heavily modified vehicles with more than 1600 horsepower of adrenaline pumping madness!!! They had 50+ top talented stuntmen in the world risking life and limb to bring this incredible movie to fruition..

Some people are assuming that the film is just another "remake" or "reboot".. But what George Miller has done is revisited a character and a world that he created..and this has been in creation for nearly 15 years! A character and a world that, even with the first film, has put virtually every other action movie to shame since its release.. There is more brilliantly executed film craft in the first five minutes of each Mad Max film, one after another...

George Miller graduated as a Doctor of Medicine, and is also formally educated, and trained in film production, and his comprehension of, and efficacy with editing, pacing, timing, framing, composition, characterization, contextualization, narrative structure, and any number of other elementary aspects of film language is astounding! (To say the least)...lol

Whenever you hear someone say, "They don't make them like this anymore," they're talking about films like the MAD MAX trilogy. FURY ROAD is going to be AWESOME!!! PURE MEANNESS set to a DYNAMIC SYMPHONY of music...with VISUALLY SPECTACULAR special effects, layer upon layer, with powerful subtext and metaphors that will blow your fracking mind!! It's JUST WHAT THE DOCTOR ORDERED..

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid ... =1&theater

[blackmocco]

I guess I'm just not going to understand why people think the CG is such an issue with Fury Road. If an English period drama uses CG to enhance the surroundings and make it more authentic, people seem genuinely shocked a big-budget sci-fi post-apocalyptic carfest would do the same. Lame.