I think this would've done much better than Furiosa, but Max Max still is a bit of a niche franchise as it is and I don't see Warner Bros being willing to take another gamble. Plus Miller is getting up there in age.
George Miller's knocking on, and Tom Hardy might get acclaim as an actor but he's not a box-office draw. That means the producers giving George Miller money to fund a film with an actor who isn't bankable, in a film that's part of a cult franchise where the last one just completely bombed.
Yeah, I'd agree with that. For all it's faults, I love some of the visuals in Thunderdome - for example, the opening shot of the desert and slowly zooming in on the camel train is something David Lean would've been proud of, and the Sydney ruins (all model work) is effective.
I agree. There's a decent movie in the midst of all the $h!t.
It's almost like the Star Wars starting from Jedi to the prequel trilogy. Yeah, there's some great ideas and good visuals (well, good visuals in Jedi) but the movies are a complete mess.
So, cool you brough up David Lean. Lawrence of Arabia is one of my favorites. I still haven't seen Bridge on the River Kwai. I'm almost embarrassed to admit that.
Same. I love Lawrence Of Arabia. I like River Kwai as well, just not as much.
There's definitely a few visuals in Thunderdome that make me think George Miller was thinking about LOB when he made it. And of course, they both have the Maurice Jarre connection, who did the music on both.
I'm cool with letting George Miller make whatever the fuck he wants, it's his series and as long as he's making it I will keep watching it whether it has Max in it or not.
It might get made cause things seem to work differently down under. But I'd wager if so it would only be with Miller producing and with Max recast yet again and so.. what's the point? If it's anything like the game and comic it's gonna be ultra-bleak and won't be well received anyhow.