It cannot get worse than this: a movie titled Mad Max: this and that, turns Max into a mumbling moron that cannot do anything right.
He is inconsequencial to the story, and he is quickly sidelined to a boring woman who is the real hero and protagonist of this """Mad Max""" movie.
I want my money back.
Me too! One if the worst films I’ve ever seen, total crap!
shareI feel the same but it's still a fun movie to watch. The vehicles alone are worth it..
shareIKR I saw a superman movie recently , and Christopher Reeve wasnt in it! wtf!?
That's a really bad analogy. Nobody was complaining that Mel Gibson, the actor, wasn't in it. The complaint is that the title character isn't even the main character in the movie.
It's like if they made a Superman movie for the first time in 30 years, and titled it and advertized it as a Superman movie to excite people and bring in audiences and the fanbase, and then some unknown Kryptonian woman ends up being the hero/badass character and Superman is just sort of... there, as a side character.
You make your point well!
I'd say max's role was only diminished to co star 50/50 .
And the movie isnt any the less for it though.
For the record I do like the movie, quite a bit in fact. And Furiosa is an awesome character. But I get the criticisms from hard-core 40 year fans. It was totally a bait-and-switch. And honestly, I'd say his role was 40/60 or maybe even 30/70 in favor of Furiosa.
shareTotally agree with you.
Although, I hate this movie for the bait and switch, but I would probably like it too, had they been honest and titled it "Furiosa, road warrior" or something similar.
I was angry about the bait and switch too, for a long time. Still am, to a certain extent. It really wasn't a Mad Max movie.
Ultimately though, it was a fucking awesome movie set in that universe with Mad Max in it every step of the way. I'll take it.
"this and that, turns Max into a mumbling moron that cannot do anything right"
Sounds like The Road Warrior tbh and that's one of the most popular ones.
"He is inconsequencial to the story"
This isn't true at all. He saved the girls' lives many times during the course of the movie, including Furiosa's right at the very end. This comment has no merit whatsoever.
The script gives him some RANDOM action to save face over its obvious bait and switch.
Those are never the actions of the hero. They all feel like those moments where the sidekick reveals some abilty. Robin for instance is always shown to be useful, but it's Batman that has the important actions (like, taking down the bad guy or devising a plan).
Max is second banana at best in this Furiosa: fury road (even the fucking title admits it).
I agree with the OP. This was a Furiosa movie and Tom Hardy said as much. There is even a Furiosa prequel planned. Mad Max is a hero but he became a sidekick in this movie. I have no desire to see a tough butch with a shaved head.
The movie even had some feminist bs about an evil warlord keeping females in shackles for breeding purposes. We are seeing all these female superheroes in an attempt to tackle INTERSECTIONALITY. I don't have a problem with Max being assisted by a tough female BUT Max should be the hero. The lefties also want to get rid of WHITE MALE SAVIORS so they want more films with a collaborative effort by multiple UNDERREPRESENTED GROUPS.
I did enjoy the movie BUT I didn't like seeing Furiosa as the main protagonist assisted by her sidekick Max.
http://www.cinemablography.org/blog/sisterhood-and-savagery-intersectional-feminism-in-mad-max-fury-road
https://www.indiewire.com/2021/08/tom-hardy-mad-max-fury-road-furiosa-movie-1234658379/
https://reimaginetomorrow.disney.com/assets/DGE-INCLUSION-STANDARDS-ONE-PAGER-6-16-2119.pdf
https://www.oscars.org/news/academy-establishes-representation-and-inclusion-standards-oscarsr-eligibility
Fleeing and killing a tyrant who keeps slaves is feminist?
shareYes. The tyrant represents the patriarchy and the chained wives represent the oppression of women. The first article below touches on the feminist themes in Fury Road. I don't mind feminist heroes but I don't want to see a hero turned into a sidekick to score points with feminazis who would never go see a Mad Max movie.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/27/sexists-are-scared-of-mad-max-because-it-is-a-call-to-dismantle-patriarchies
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/jun/22/the-age-of-patriarchy-how-an-unfashionable-idea-became-a-rallying-cry-for-feminism-today
Men wouldn't flee from or kill a tyrant?
shareThe entire plot makes no sense, considering it hinges on a warlord in control of vital resources (water) in a radioactive wasteland being unable to find willing sexual partners, as well as the people who inhabit said wasteland apparently being more concerned with being strong and independent than with such comparative trivialities as everyday survival.
But hey, that's what you get when you let ideology do all your writing for you.
It's an action movie so the plot doesn't have to make that much sense. Just joking! If I am ever in a post-apocalyptic wasteland, I would mainly be concerned with food, shelter, water and SEX. All this independence and respect is first-world BS.
shareyeah! dem slaves should be grateful for the food thrown into their cages right?
Why were those women slaves to begin with?
Taking into account the setting the movie itself shows us, either they would have been born into slavery, and thus never have known any other kind of life, or else they would have, and would be aware that their choice was essentially between a gilded cage or the freedom to slowly wither away in absolute, miserable squalor.
In either case, they certainly wouldn't have felt the need to leave behind some idiotic message that "their sons wouldn't be warlords", as though they would have any frame of reference that might allow them to even consider that a bad thing.
"Characters" (for lack of a better term) in this movie aren't "written" (ditto) taking into account that the world they inhabit would necessarily shape their views. They aren't survivors of a hellish wasteland where few things are cheaper than human life. They are two-dimensional caricatures based on the mind-numbingly tedious political pet issues du jour in Hollywood.
humans take very badly to being imprisoned no matter how gilded the cage is .
Which particular " tedious political pet issues du jour in Hollywood" do you think are being reflected here?
They do, yes. They tend to take even worse to starvation, dehydration and very likely radiation poisoning, though – and that's all assuming they were even aware of being prisoners in the first place.
As I said, they are not written (to the extent any sort of writing can be said to exist at all here) as people who might exist in the world they inhabit; their priorities and preoccupations are not those any actual human being might conceivably have in their situation. They are nothing but cardboard cutouts through which the "writer"(s) can soapbox their current-day, terminally-online "progressive" talking points.
I agree with all your points.
And clearly they had their agenda write the script, with little care for coherence.
This is one of the most overrated films ever, in my opinion.
Everyone I've talked to IRL about this film (a small sample size granted) thought it was a load of shit. They basically drive to this place, nothing is there and drive back all whilst fending of some goons. It got tiresome really quick. Pointless film.
I wouldn't know, I refuse to watch it. No Mel?? No thanks!! Mad Max anything without Mel Gibson in it is a fake Mad Max and doesn't exist in my world.
shareThat is 100% correct.
But, being still Miller and hearing such positive reviews, I figured it would be worth watching.
Well, it is a barely passable chase movie, and the name Mad Max should have never been dragged in it
But that was the main draw here, hence the bait and switch.
mel is too old for the lead role. a cameo would have been nice. i thought the movie was average.
shareNo, he wasn't. Mel IS Max.
shareMel is 66. They could have found a role for him in this movie may be as one of the older villains. it would have been a nice touch.
shareMel was 59 then and he could've play Max Rockatansky. Because Mel IS Max. Just like he's going to play Martin Riggs yet again. Stop being ageist.
shareI LISTENED TO SEQUEL NEWS FOR YEARS...GIBSON WAS THE ONE WHO ALWAYS HELD OUT...HE IS GREAT AS MAX...BUT MAX ISN'T EVEN A PERSON...HE IS A GHOST...A SHARED FEVER DREAM OF A MEMORY OF A MAN...FURY ROAD WAS EXCELLENT...AND HARDY WAS GOOD AS MAX.
sharewell you can all stamp your feet and have a little tantrum and then boycott the film
but at the end of the day you're missing out on a great film.
George Miller is what makes these movies great , not Mel gibson , not whether the main character is called Max or Furienna
and he pulled it out of the bag with this one , bigger and better than ever.