Furiosa outshined Max


Theron is a better actress than Hardy is an actor, and she looked much cooler and memorable, with the crew cut, face paint, and one-arm

she also had the main character role (leading the mistresses away, delivering the final blow to Joe, taking over the citadel). The movie could’ve gotten away without Max entirely infact, but they needed Furiosa

reply

That's why this movie sucked. Also, it's not a real Mad Max movie without Mel Gibson as Max.

reply

Actually I kind of settled on Hardy for the time being. He may not have been who we wanted but provided the portrayal that we “needed” so to speak.

Would’ve liked more interaction between him and Furiosa. What I wanted to see is why she settled on him as being cool and gave everyone else, even that nice Jack guy from “Furiosa” such a hard time. Why would she perceive Max to be different? Was it because he didn’t tap her in the back of the head when he had the chance?

reply

I can't imagine Mel Gibson's max getting "genitalia intact" tattooed on him like a little bitch.

reply

same as its not a real bond movie without Sean Connery right?

reply

My favorite thing about this movie is it's the Furiosa Show. Right until she gets damn near murdered and Tom Hardy's Max saves the day, kills all the bad guys, engineers the heroic romance, and then literally props up a dying Furiosa to obtain the throne, then just fucks off for chicken wings and beer.

reply

I actually preferred this to the original Max movies, but then again I wasn't really a fan of them in the first place.

reply

Maybe you should rewatch the first two if you liked this.

reply

I actually did rewatch them recently. The second one is not bad. The best thing about them is seeing a young Mel Gibson, you can tell he's destined for superstardom when you watch how magnetic his screen presence is, same with his other early films Gallipoli and Attack Force Z.

reply

I haven't seen Gallipolli for about 30 years but I remember it being excellent.

The second one is amazing (but dated with the early 80s look to some of the characters) and the first one (also dated in places) is full of Australian muscle cars and excellent dialogue and brutality.

reply

Gallipoli is a masterpiece and one of Gibson's best films, maybe his best imo. I'd say it's one of the best war films of all time.

Is the third Max Max as bad as it looks?

reply

Skip Thunderdome.

reply

Watch Thunderdome. It's the thinking person's installment of this franchise.

reply

"Theron is a better actress than Hardy is an actor"

I haven't seen enough of either of their work to comment but acting talent isn't necessarily how someone outshines someone else on screen. Screen presence and charisma plays a huge part. Mel Gibson doesn't have great range but he had those in spades.

Furiosa wouldn't have outshined Max if Gibson had returned.

reply

Charlize Theron was also much better in the role than Anya Taylor-Joy for reasons similar to what you mentioned. ATJ is small and slight and doesn't have the physicality or stature that Theron brought to the role. I still liked Furiosa a lot despite that.

Also, Tom Hardy absolutely fucking stank as Max.

reply

I think deep down George Miller knows that. That's why he kept his face covered for half the film and made him look like a gimp😂

There's no way Max's face is covered for half the film if Mel had done it.

reply

Mel doing it wasnt really an option though was it? (due to age)

reply

Mel was in Brendan McCarthy's (co-writer) storyboards for the film for years from 1997. Mel was excited about it and said to Miller they needed to get it made before he turned 50.

Miller has never said Gibson was difficult to work with on the films (unlike Hardy), and in 1985 said that if he'd refused to do Thunderdome they'd have gone back to just doing the initial idea of it been another hero who stumbled across the tribe of children because he would never re-cast Max.

So it was all set. Then because of weather conditions they couldn't film where George Miller usually did in Australia so that delayed, and Mel decided to do his Passion project, and you know the rest after that film's release.

Was age an issue? Maybe a bit, he was late 50's by the time they started filming but it's not as if Tom Hardy was doing most of his own stunts or putting himself in danger. It was either a double or wire work, even when he's running in the citadel to escape the war boys the film's speeded up, and Harrison Ford was still doing Indy at 80 and a lot of the physical stuff, and Max is a less physical role than Indy.

So ultimately, I think Gibson didn't do it simply because his reputation was in tatters post-mid 2000's.

reply