I wish it would have. I saw this when I was a kid and have been hooked ever since.
shareJudging from the title, I'm sure it was. Another similar situation was REMO WILLIAMS: THE ADVENTURE BEGINS, which came out a short time later. I think Columbia was hoping SPACEHUNTER would be the first of a few films, but after a #1 weekend at the box office, it quickly got pummeled the following week when a little movie called RETURN OF THE JEDI opened.
share[deleted]
The problem is a compound one:
Back in the 1970s, Spacehunter was originally a screenplay called 'Road Gangs', set on Earth in a dystopian future. The character of Jarrett (Paul Boretski) was the main focus and his mission of vengeance against the Overdog for the death of Grandman Patterson was the main plot. This is where the comparison to Mad Max first began.
When pre-production first started, the screenplay was tendered around various distributors at places like Cannes. An Australian distributor that was approached saw it and expressed some interest. Next thing you know, that same distributor suddenly banged out Mad Max. There are only rumours that the screenplay concept was a direct rip-off, but the circumstances are very suspect and the fact that everyone now deems Spacehunter a Mad Max rip-off only raises further eyebrows.
Anyway, the script was re-written by some extra bods brought in. Production started, but the production team had been given complete freedom to do whatever. The original production designs looked pretty cool, but got evolved by the various (and fairly independent) production departments into various things - the vehicles were once big spiky and massively multi-coloured things, the Scrambler was bright purple and some characters had utterly insane make-up. The early VHS releases still have a picture of Molly Ringwald in a sort of Rainbow Festival facepaint, which is one example of what had happened before.
Additionally, the studio had made the fatal decisions of putting it in 3-D (a condition for increasing producer Don Carmody's budget) and also set the release date in stone, to compete with Return Of The Jedi.
Initially, the 3-D was being done by expert Dan Symmes at the time and was spot on.
After only a few weeks of shooting, the studio and producers were not happy with how things were going. Exit director and about half the staff. Add in more scriptwriters. Enter Lamont Johnson and a team of new folks with very different ideas. Whilst a competent director, Johnson didn't care for 3-D himself, mainly as he was almost blind in one eye and couldn't benefit from it. Ernest McNabb managed to bluff his way into presenting himself as a 3-D expert and was left to command that part of the process.
After so many studio revisions and attempts to capitalise on other films of the time, much of what had made Spacehunter so promising in the beginning had been edited out. Peter Strauss and Molly Ringwald were especially upset to see most of their character development scenes had been cut, in favour of actions shots and small moments that left a lot of the story unexplained. Now, only tiny, subtle details remain that give the briefest hint of what this film was intended to be.
Spacehunter is still very cool, but it must be watched in ignorance (genuine, or self-imposed) of any other such films. I was fortunate to have seen this well before any of the others that usually get grouped into the same box as this (Metalstorm, Buckaroo Banzai, Mad Max).
The Spacehunter Forum:
http://spacehunter.phpbbhosts.co.uk/
Doubtful that a distributor ripped off the ROAD GANGS screenplay and "banged out" MAD MAX. If there's evidence, please share it. MAD MAX was an indie production shot in 1977 and released in April 1979. There was no distributor involved at the time of its production. The original MAD MAX and its first sequel borrow heavily from Kurosawa and Leone, also films like DEATH RACE 2000 and A BOY & HIS DOG, and various biker movies including the 1974 Australian film STONE (which utilizes many of the same cast members).
Doubtful that a distributor ripped off the ROAD GANGS screenplay and "banged out" MAD MAX.
If there's evidence, please share it.
So, there is no evidence, just hearsay, suspicion and sour grapes. If there is any similarity, it is purely coincidental, a sign of the times or simply a zeitgeist in action.
No offense, I admire your love for SPACEHUNTER (I'll take a better look at your page when I have a moment), but perhaps revise your thinking and keep your comments in check; making unsubstantiated claims weakens credibility and makes one look silly.
My comments are my opinions based on my experiences. Why would I need to "keep them in check"?
Of course there's no actual, documented evidence that says, "Hey, we ripped this film off and we're just noting it down in case anyone asks later on".
That's not the sort of thing people do, otherwise they'd not do it, would they!
Same as making films that are clearly (to anyone with half a brain) based on something real, yet simply stating at the end of the credits that the film "bears no similarity, intentional or otherwise, to any events or real persons living or dead, yadda yadda".
It's *beep* and we know it.
If there was definitive proof of this rip-off, people would have already been in court over it. As it stands, a screenplay that hasn't even yet entered full pre-production has very little legal protection. This is how writers (amateur and even professional) often get their screenplays ripped off when they send them round to studios and why studios keep getting hit by writers claiming to have written.
All you need do is change enough of the screenplay to be considered sufficiently different in the new form and you're sorted.
As is, enough people involved in the production have told this same rip-off story, even those who don't give a *beep* about either film, so I'm inclined to afford them more credibility. Add to that several cast and crew speaking of rehearsing early script, when suddenly they get a complete rewrite and they're now doing a sci-fi because some other film has come out that's pretty much what they were just rehearsing.
That's one heck of a coincidence, don't you think...
I have no particular sour grapes personally. I love the Max films. But as a (somehow) champion of Spacehunter, I do feel it important that people realise which was technically first and what actually happened 'behind the scenes', as it were.
Too often I've slated a film myself, only to find something about it's background that has made me see things in a very different light. I used to hate Kevin Costner films (still do, sometimes), but now I at least understand and appreciate where he's coming from.
The Spacehunter Forum:
http://spacehunter.phpbbhosts.co.uk/
My apologies; I didn't mean to imply you had sour grapes, I was referring to the grumbling cast and/or crew with whom you've supposedly spoken.
I'm very familiar with the work of screenwriters, how that work is contracted, the various permutations in negotiation, the protections and/or lack thereof given certain instances. I know exactly how difficult it is to prove copyright infringement in court because I have first hand experience working for the defense in such a case (we won, by the way).
Your opinions are based on hearsay, so don't state them as fact. No evidence is presented, certainly nothing to reach a conclusion beyond reasonable doubt. I remain unconvinced. As I said, Mad Max came well before SPACEHUNTER, by many many years in terms of its script development.
We shall agree to disagree. But that's cool.
I was referring to the grumbling cast and/or crew with whom you've supposedly spoken.
I know exactly how difficult it is to prove copyright infringement in court because I have first hand experience working for the defense in such a case (we won, by the way).
Your opinions are based on hearsay, so don't state them as fact.
I wasn't aware I did.
No evidence is presented, certainly nothing to reach a conclusion beyond reasonable doubt.
As I said, Mad Max came well before SPACEHUNTER, by many many years in terms of its script development.
Can't comment on the case I worked, non-disclosure and all that. A correction though, I worked for the plaintiff. I will say it was a David vs Goliath scenario.
If the creators of Road Gangs have any evidence, records of meetings, the people to whom they'd shown material, there may well be enough to pursue legal avenues. Now would be the time to consider it, given the upcoming reboot of the Mad Max franchise.
The legal procedures take time, navigating through the numerous hearings. A big part of winning is staying power. Those in the wrong, assuming they're powerful, will use every dirty trick in the book to grind down the other party, depleting finances, resources, or simply their will to continue. If the little guy can stand up to the bullying tactics and has a legit case, the tenacity will pay off.
Ideas by themselves are not copyright, it is the sequencing of those ideas that's protected. If the Road Gangs gang can prove the ideas of Mad Max, its setting, characters, themes and plotting are more-or-less the same and assembled in more-ore-less the same order with the same tone, there's likely a winnable case.
Hope that's of help or interest.
Best regards
It's of interest, yes, especially to me, but only in an academic sense and ultimately it's not really my beef to take to court.
I also believe the Road Gangs screenplay might actually belong to Columbia Pictures (later Columbia Tristar and now Sony Pictures), so it'd be down to them not the writers to pursue action.
If it is the writers' initiative, I believe at least one of them is now deceased too. There may well be a case, but the Road Gangs screenplay is literally just that - A script. Unfilmed and nothing more than an archived piece of interest only to fans.
The Spacehunter Forum:
http://spacehunter.phpbbhosts.co.uk/
There are a couple of problems with this story:
1. Mad Max Producer Byron Kennedy and Director George Miller were, at the time, complete unknowns, and out of the Hollywood loop. No-one in the U.S. would show them a script. No-one in the U.S. knew they existed.
2. Mad Max was produced and funded independently. AIP acquired the U.S. distribution rights after the movie was completed, and had enjoyed a successful run in Australia.
Lets face it, the plot ... ex cop goes after the men who murdered his wife, is pretty generic.
What!!! No Gravy???
Check out the FAQ. http://tinyurl.com/cf6pvux
Well, as I said, that's the word from various different people involved in the production, including a few who were axed from the original team.
Hell of a coincidence...
The Spacehunter Forum:
http://spacehunter.phpbbhosts.co.uk/
So, how did Kennedy and Miller find out about the Hollywood script when they weren't connected to Hollywood in any way and were total unknowns at the time?
If anything, given the timing, Mad Max found it's way to the U.S. in 1980 thanks to AIP, and someone saw this then unknown cult movie and stole from it.
The story just lacks basic plausibility.
What!!! No Gravy???
Check out the FAQ. http://tinyurl.com/cf6pvux
Were Kennedy and Miller the distributors as well?
The story told is always that the Australian distributor (whoever they were) the SH guys approached nicked the idea. Whether they supposedly passed the info along or something - Who knows.
Lets face it, the plot ... ex cop goes after the men who murdered his wife, is pretty generic.
If anything, given the timing, Mad Max found it's way to the U.S. in 1980 thanks to AIP, and someone saw this then unknown cult movie and stole from it.
Were Kennedy and Miller the distributors as well?
If you look at it that way, sure... but how many are also set in a dystopian future Earth with (for want of a better term) 'road gangs' being the antagonists?
No. The Australian distributor was "Roadshow", at the time a well known second level company who typically imported U.S. "B" movies.
I suspect the motivation for a dystopian future was more financial than artistic ... you can use abandoned buildings as sets, worn out cars as props, and most of the filming is outdoors.
Interesting... So *they* could feasibly have been at Cannes, then?
I'd love to find out more from the MM side, like who the private finance came from.
Most Australian films have, in amongst the credits, stuff like funding by "The Australian Film Finance Corporation." That's me, the Australian taxpayer.
I've just p!ssed 90 minutes of my life down the drain watching Spacehunter for the first time in 25 years. All I can see is "True Grit" meets "Flash Gordon" with elements of Star Wars thrown in for good measure. Not one part of the film reminded me of MM.
And, I know, you're going to say that the story was changed,
but there doesn't seem to be any way that a script shopped around Hollywood in the 70s could have wound up in the hands of then unknowns Kennedy and Miller in Australia.
Huh? True Grit? Never heard that comparison before...
Can you expand on that one?
Well, Cannes is in France, if ye wanna be picky... []
I just wondered if this as yet unidentified Australian distributor from Cannes may have passed it on to someone in Oz who felt like making a movie or something... I just hear the 'rumour' so often from people who didn't even like the film, that I'm always wondering if there's some truth in it.
Molly Ringwald ... Kim Darby.
My point was ... the project originated in the U.S. where no-one was interested in the Australian film industry.
This is the third attempt. Kennedy and Miller made MM independently, then hired a distributor. They were unknowns at the time with no influence in the film industry. How would a script that originated in the U.S. find its way to them?
This is the first time I've ever heard this story.
I know. You keep saying. So where did they get the ideas for their screenplay so similar to this other one from several years beforehand, then?
And yet the SH guys were interested enough that they were seeking an Oz distributor... would the Oz guys not be interested in the US side?
Can you point me to this incredibly unique and original script, or at least give me the plot outline that allegedly became Mad Max so I can compare the two?
Most U.S. movies are distributed here, but because of the small population, it's hardly at the top of the list for U.S. movie studios.
Why would anyone in the U.S. film industry try to sell a script to an Australian Producer, when, at the time, the Australian film industry barely existed?
People are rewriting history. MM was successful in Australia, but in the U.S. AIP redubbed it and ran it mostly on the southern state Drive-In circuit. Not exactly a blockbuster.
This conspiracy theory is really just the byproduct of people who resent the later success of George Miller and Mel Gibson.
The basic plot is about the two brothers (Jarrett and Duster) ... etc etc.
The rumour was that the script was nicked from the Yanks by an Aussie distributor. If that distributor then passed it to a producer, with exclusive rights or something, there you go.
It was pretty successful here in the UK, IIRC.
Nothing there that leaps out as the inspiration for MM. Tom Laughlin's "Born Losers" (1967) has more in common with MM than Road Gangs.
Many films have fairly close release times and bear striking similarities to others, because when one studio gets inside info on a film being made, others will try and get their version in first. Typically the other version is lower budget and more hurriedly made... and, guess what - 'independently financed/produced'. And it shows. However, occasionally these lower budget films do make it. Ripping off scripts happens all the time, which is why people like James Cameron are so often being sued (I think he's involved in four Avatar lawsuits alone at the minute?).
Here's a few high profile 'rumours' for you - Dantes Peak and Volcano, Deep Impact and Armageddon, The Illusionist and The Prestige, Antz and Bugs Life, The Truman Show and Ed TV, Mission To Mars and Red Planet, Top Gun and Iron Eagle, Tombstone and Wyatt Earp, The Abyss and Leviathan & Deep Star Six...
This is the film industry. Whatever else, it's a business. It's there to make money by getting its product bought by people. XBox or Playstation. Whichever one gets there first is the one people tend to remember, unless the runner-up is massively more notable.
By that same example, lots of people went to see Spacehunter, but it was utterly forgotten when Return Of The Jedi came out the following week - One of several devastatingly stupid decisions the studio forced on it.
[quote]You keep drifting off. MM was not a success in the U.S.
Yes... and as I said, I'm not even in the US, so what's your point?
Here's a few high profile 'rumours' for you ... etc. etc.
The point is ... the people in the U.S. were claiming MM ripped off their idea, despite the fact that MM was unsuccessful and virtually unknown in the U.S.
why would they think either story had anything in common?
To me, this conspiracy theory reeks of jealousy and sour grapes, and was probably started years later after George Miller became a successful Director and Mel Gibson went to Hollywood.
I didn't say plagiarism never occurred, and when two plots are very similar there may be grounds, but for the life of me, I can't see the MM Road Gangs connection.
Further to my earlier post, Buckaroo Banzai was supposed to have had sequels, at least according to the end credits.
If another Spacehunter project does come along, I'd hope to learn more about the characters' histories, particularly of Washington and Wolff and their days during the war in Sector Control.
The Spacehunter Forum:
http://spacehunter.phpbbhosts.co.uk/
Yes, but it bombed, and not because Lucas's Star Wars' film came out either. It was just a bad movie altogether. Okay production values, but just campy as hell. People didn't buy into it. So when Jedi hit the theatres, people opted to see the better of the two films, otherwise Spacehunter might've given Jedi a run for its money.
shareI think it's pretty clear that they not only wanted to continue this story with sequels like a lot of movies, but also with at least one or two prequels, as well.
I mean, since when is a story of a man who beings a movie with an obviously kissable but now melted android and ends the movie getting to cuddle platonically with a real but underage, nightmarishly annoying but cute version of the same kind of thing, a complete story?
You just know this particular relationship was going to be developed in that particular direction as the actress playing Niki ceased being underage, right?
Why else would the title be about any kind of "Forbidden Zone(s)"?
That's what might have made this a much, much, better story.
Right?
Yes, but it bombed, and not because Lucas's Star Wars' film came out either. It was just a bad movie altogether. Okay production values, but just campy as hell. People didn't buy into it.
by brightfamouscucumber (Fri Aug 17 2012 08:14:41)
Ignore this User | Report Abuse
I think it's pretty clear that they not only wanted to continue this story with sequels like a lot of movies, but also with at least one or two prequels, as well.
I mean, since when is a story of a man who beings a movie with an obviously kissable but now melted android and ends the movie getting to cuddle platonically with a real but underage, nightmarishly annoying but cute version of the same kind of thing, a complete story?
You just know this particular relationship was going to be developed in that particular direction as the actress playing Niki ceased being underage, right?
Why else would the title be about any kind of "Forbidden Zone(s)"?
That's what might have made this a much, much, better story.
Right?
That guy's been watching too much anime, methinks... :-)
The Spacehunter Forum:
http://spacehunter.phpbbhosts.co.uk/
That I didn't get until a few years ago when I thought of the film. I just didn't get the whole Molly Ringwald connection, and why her character was in the film at all. I mean the guy was out to rescue three hotties, and he's got to tote along this underage girl who becomes his sidekick?
The movie was campy as hell to begin with (a supersized bulldozer driving in badlands, and aliens that were as convincing as Disney's robots in tommorw land), then to include a young girl? I never knew what to make of it until now.
Now that I understand the film industry a bit better, and what Molly Ringwald's character represented,... I don't know. I didn't think the movie was good to begin with.
Now I think it's kind of sick.
Now that I understand the film industry a bit better, and what Molly Ringwald's character represented,... I don't know. I didn't think the movie was good to begin with.
Now I think it's kind of sick.
Well, like they say, "I didn't know that". Seriously, wow, I honestly did not know that, and I guess a lot of other people didn't either. And yeah, there is a lot of pedophile fever going on for some reason. And I guess it's that more than anything else that I don't get.
I think of a lot of films I liked when I was younger, some anime as an example, and I begin to wonder why some people liked them. Take for example Miyazaki's "Naussicaa". It's one of my favorite sci-fi anime because of the the story and whole scope of the film, but the thing does focus around a teenage girl, and so I begin to wonder why other people like it. Me, I think it's got action, heart, a good story, and it's fun to watch animation. But one wonders if maybe there wasn't another agenda at work.
And that's the vibe I got off of "Spacehunter". When I first saw it I actually did take it as an adult parent figure finding someone's lost kid. I didn't think much of it. Me, I think the movie would have worked without Ringwald's character, but it's like you say, in our atmostphere of heightened awareness of sickies out there, one begins to wonder and have paranoid notions about why other people like a certain movie.
Oh well. thanks for the post.
No worries, Blue.
TBH, I probably know more about the Behind-The-Scenes of this film than most people (cast & crew excluded) and what I know just makes me adore this film even more... although I'm probably more in love with what everyone tried to make it, rather than the partial *beep*-up the studio turned it into.
But for the sake of conversation, if Spacehunter's intent WAS as creepy as you first thought, it's peanuts compared to an awful lot of Manga and general Anime.
Must be a cultural difference, but I really don't get that whole 'cute schoolgirl' thing they seem to have a lot of... THAT to me is creepy!
I'm not sure if we should be so snappy on the Paedo thing or not, TBH... Yes, there are a lot of sickos out there, kids in danger, blah blah blah. The area I live in has one of, if not THE, highest populations of released 'rehabilitated' offenders in the country.
But the downside of tackling this is that a bitchy teenager has only to cry 'rape' once and the entire life of the accused is OVER. Period. You could have a world of proof that you're innocent, but the merest hint of an allegation and you're done. This is why there are so few male teachers nowadays.
More worrying is the poor doctor that got beaten to death by a vigilante group, who couldn't understand the difference between a paedophile and a paediatrician!!
The Spacehunter Forum:
http://spacehunter.phpbbhosts.co.uk/
In the 90s there's a place I used to rent a few VHS tapes from. Anime from Japan. And where most of the stuff was aimed at main stream kid audiences (giant robots fighting aliens kind of stuff) it was my first exposure to the whole school girl thing, and not to sound too Pollyannish here, but I really didn't get it at all. I mean it didn't even click with me that there was a sexual component to what I saw on the store shelves. I think the thing that went through my head was "wow, teenage girls knowing martial arts must be really big in Japan". I shrugged at it, then grabbed a copy of Macross or something really popular at the time.
Just musing out loud here, I wonder how big a problem child sexual abuse is, and I wonder how much is our perceptions of it. The only thing I can say is that growing up you stopped adults to help you out if you were lost, or had a broken bike or something. Now, as an adult, kids are taught to be engarde, which I think is okay, but as an adult it's just one more thing to worry about.
Getting back to the movie. It's been ages since I've seen it. I think the last time I saw it it was on HBO. It was a time waster as far as I was concerned. About on the same level as "Solarbabies" (another sci-fi film I detest). I guess wen you're an adult you tac on fearful meanings to a lot of things that are otherwise mundane.
Oh well.
On the flip side, as an adult you daren't even talk to a kid, lest they accuse you of something. I sort-of follow this, but given the number of scrotes we have locally I leave them in no uncertain terms as to why I'm talking to them... usually it revolves around messing with my motorcycle and how protective my dogs will become if they do mess with it (empty threat, actually. Both dogs would likely just roll over and wag their tails!).
For me, the film was one of those that calls to the child in us. I still would love to have my own spaceship, funky off-roader and a gorgeous gynoid companion and just spend my time bumming around the galaxy, doing my own thing and hopefully making ends meet.
The childish side is there, but there's the more grown-up perspective as well if you want it. Clearly it was supposed to be something with greater impact, given the sheer volume of talent in the production crew!
The Spacehunter Forum:
http://spacehunter.phpbbhosts.co.uk/
You're right about the movie. It seemed like there was a lot of A-list talent in the thing, but to me it came across as a B-movie (I think it was initially released as a 3D experience, or am I wrong?). I'll have to see it again give a good opinion on the whole thing.
Thanks for the exchange.
Aside from the obvious big names in the cast, the production crew included Ivan Reitman, Don Carmody, Len Blum, Gene Warren Jnr, Jack De Govia, Elmer Bernstein, Frank Tidy, Julie Weiss, Bob Burns, Mike Minor, Steve Rubin and the Burman family of makeup artists.
Just check out these people's resumes, both before and after Spacehunter to see what legends had a massive hand in this. Gene Warren Jnr and his guys from Fantasy II company alone have done some of the biggest films in our generation.
All it takes is one studio moron to make a stupid decision based on the idea that holding the purse strings makes them qualified in film making and a whole film is decimated.
A very basic story of production:
Designed in the mid 70s as a low budget flick of a couple million. Studio offered a couple more if they could have sole distribution rights. Script was then shown around Cannes, whereupon an Aussie company ripped it off and released Mad Max (hence the similarity). Script re-written as a space adventure, re-cast and filming eventually started. THEN the sudio offered a massive $16 million to make it a 3-D flick. Producers reluctantly agreed. Early footage results were awful, production teams were not being managed and so 3 weeks in, Lamont Johnson was brought in to replace Jean LaFleur. Many crew were culled too.
With new crew production resumed, following a quick but massive re-hash of the production design. However, Return of the Jedi's release date was already set and the studio decided a couple weeks beforehand would be a great idea... along with cutting out the more serious parts of the film and trying to edit it into a comedy-action-adventure-thing.
Finally, while there was some serious talent in the production crew, 3-D consultant Ernie McNabb was a big-talking camera guy who created his own 3-D camera system specially for this film, but had replaced the experienced Dan Symmes who really *was* an expert in 3-D. Consequently a LOT went wrong with the 3-D. Further disasters happened when the cinemas showing the film relied on the lazy Saturday Boys to properly align and focus the projection system, which they never did. People left theatres with headaches, Jedi came out a week later, the film bombed and was forgotten.
The Spacehunter Forum:
http://spacehunter.phpbbhosts.co.uk/
In retrospect, just thinking about it, I wonder if maybe there wasn't some other agenda of casting a young Molly Ringwald in the thing. Like maybe trying to tease out potential pedophiles who pretended to be sci-fi fans or something.
I don't know.
It was a weird film, especially with that king sized snow plow thingy.
Like maybe trying to tease out potential pedophiles who pretended to be sci-fi fans or something.
I actually don't, but why the hell put in a prepubescent girl in the thing? Lots of films are actually based on criminal case histories, but are dressed up as comedies or sci-fi. I wonder if that was the case here.
shareThe original plot as filmed revolved around Wolff's loss of his wife and child in the war (which was barely mentioned in the beginning of the film) and slowly taking on Nikki as a surrogate daughter.
As is, the studio cut the character development scenes (as well as many other aspects) and turned it into an 3D action/adventure in the hopes of scoring a summer blockbuster, wrecking the original film so much that several of the cast and crew walked out of the premiere.
Nothing criminally sinister, aside from a clueless studio spoiling yet another film, really.
... I'll buy it for now.
I just seem to see a lot of potential crime plots in a lot of films over the last several years. A man wonders on occasion.
Really, this sounds like conspiracy theory rubbish. Spacehunter is similar to Mad Max 2 (released as the Road Warrior in the US because the original Mad Max, which preceded Spacehunter by a few years, wasn't a big deal in the US). I think Miller and Kennedy should be suing you for defamation. And Spacehunter wasn't a big commercial success because of its 'failed 3D' or 'poor projectionists', but because it isn't very good.
shareReally, this sounds like conspiracy theory rubbish.
I think Miller and Kennedy should be suing you for defamation.
And Spacehunter wasn't a big commercial success because of its 'failed 3D' or 'poor projectionists', but because it isn't very good.
I can accept that Spacehunter may have been a better movie were it not for the studio's interference. That's not uncommon. Similarly, what may have worked in 3D does not necessarily work in 2D.
However, I think it requires more than gossip to suggest Kennedy and/or Miller saw an early draft script and based Mad Max on it. (Did they ever attend Cannes before making Mad Max? It was their first feature.) You might as well claim the early Spacehunter draft was plagiarising Brando's The Wild One. Without evidence, it's just scuttlebutt.
I can accept that Spacehunter may have been a better movie were it not for the studio's interference. That's not uncommon.
Similarly, what may have worked in 3D does not necessarily work in 2D.
However, I think it requires more than gossip to suggest Kennedy and/or Miller saw an early draft script and based Mad Max on it.
Without evidence, it's just scuttlebutt.
Funny you should mention Brando's "The Wild One" in conjunction with this. Even a first time viewing of it followed by the original "Mad Max" shows scenes that are virtually identical.
"Be nice until it's time to NOT be nice."