MovieChat Forums > OuterSpace > Replies
OuterSpace's Replies
<blockquote>Yeah, people who think it's failing because it's a female lead movie, are silly. Look at Atlas on Netflix, starring Jennifer Lopez and it's a big hit.</blockquote>
To be fair, that example is a streaming movie and not really comparable. Otherwise stuff like Rebel Moon can be considered a hit too.
<blockquote>The first one was so heavy handed with feminism. It wasn't even about Max himself. This has none of that? "Female Empowerment"?</blockquote>
Nah. The closest to anything like that would be Furiosa having two female parents (Though the movie won't outright say they're in a lesbian relationship) and there's a female villain who, naturally, gets a very "soft" death.
That's really about it though. Furiosa is capable but not instantly flawless and at one point she's even mentored by a positively portrayed man and even has a brief relationship with him.
Any issues with this movie have little to nothing to do with the socio-political arguments of today.
Seemed like it flopped largely due to a lack of interest.
Fury Road did ok but wasn't a major success. Furiosa, the character, got a lot of publicity and (seeming) popularity after Fury Road but they waited beyond too long to capitalize on that and now it's been long enough to where a new Mad Max movie would be more preferable.
Couple that with being a prequel (Centered on a backstory nobody was clamoring for), awful marketing, no real hype and so-so reviews which tried to damage control right out the gate with "...well it's not Fury Road, it's different" and you have something people are more comfortable giving a chance on streaming.
Well that guy who got smashed into the floor by the wardrobe looked pretty dead.
For me the real issue with this one vs Raiders and Crusade is the weak story, surface level supporting cast and underdeveloped villains due the movie focusing on being something of a rollercoaster ride (Almost literal toward the end).
It relies heavily on the action sequences and set pieces to carry the film and while those are indeed great, it lacks the substance, character and plot intricacies that we saw in the other two. As a result it's very hollow or "fluff". Well executed and entertaining fluff but merely just that.
Still, if you can accept that, it's a well made and fun watch.
Trailer is extremely heavy on callbacks to the first movie. Hopefully it's not just a bunch of "remember this from the original?" remixes.
<blockquote>Furiosa is eyeing an $80M-$85M global start. Broken out, that’s $40M-$45M abroad and another $40M+ four-day domestic.</blockquote>
Hmmm...so domestically it's tracking a bit below Fury Road which was considered to be somewhat disappointing way back when.
Nah Max seemed to just be an aimless drifter. This continues in Thunderdome where he's traveling with all his possessions in that camel driven vehicle.
All the above can and maybe do apply.
Though she says "Ain't we a pair..." which to me gave the impression she recognizes Max did everything to protect the children yet is left with nothing, while she also did everything for Bartertown ("I'll do anything to protect it") yet is also left with nothing now that it's destroyed. Killing him now wouldn't change anything so out of an odd form of respect she lets him live.
Same deal as with Rogue One "A Star Wars Story" and that kind of thing. It's a side story not following the "mainline" leads but letting people know it takes place in that same universe. That and using a famous title to coax more people into seeing it.
Yeah it's a terrible scene for all the reasons mentioned.
Plus it ruins the Greedo encounter as originally that scene made it seem like Jabba already had bounty hunters coming for Solo and so he <i>really</i> needed that money as he didn't know when he might encounter another. Now due to this scene, Greedo was just some goon Jabba sent to fetch him while they waited outside. And as mentioned, makes Greedo's attempt to kill Han really stupid.
Because originally it made it clear he's not willing to take any chances and will straight out kill you if he believes you're a threat. Whereas in the SE it shows he wont kill someone until they make the first move.
Nah nobody thought that and the fact that he's constantly breathing makes it clear it's not a droid.
The Skywalker family line is naturally strong with the force for reasons never explained, so being his sister, she is as well. And like with Luke prior to meeting Obi-Wan, her ability has been dormant/unrealized but with training she would be able to realize her potential as well.
I don't know if there's any official reason but I'm going to assume it's because they wanted the lighting to point downward and not up toward the title.
<blockquote>"RT is fake when they praise what I don't like and accurate when they trash bad movies like Madame Web", lol"</blockquote>
While some truth to that, I'd say it's more a case of so much garbage getting good RT's that when a movie gets a bad RT it becomes noteworthy as that tends to mean it's <i>really</i> bad. =P
As for this, I'm not putting much stock in the RT. I love the Mad Max series and I trust Miller, so I'm going to see it for myself and judge. I don't even need it to live up to any of this pre-hype, just a good solid movie would satisfy me.
Nonsense. If James Bond can have 25 movies that are largely the same thing every time, so can Max. =P
Been answered multiple times but what the hell..
He's one of the last of the police officers in a quasi-post apocalypse. The original movie has dialogue proclaiming he's starting to lose it a bit (Though this doesn't come across at all) and wants to quit and start a new life with his wife and son. He eventually attempts this but said wife and child are murdered by a biker gang, which sends him over the edge into being "Mad". He takes his revenge, though doing so does not alleviate his inner turmoil.
The following 3 movies he's a crazed burnout with very dubious morality and just survives for the sake of it; living with no other purpose. After some events he eventually redeems himself and reclaims his humanity(They keep resetting that last part in each new movie). =P
Michael Myers was a stalker who spends almost the entire movie watching his prey before he finally kills everyone. Other than Loomis, none of the characters are truly even aware of him until the end. It's just people going about their day as he stalks them.
The Terminator goes straight for elimination every chance it gets, our leads are aware of it and pursued throughout nearly the entire movie, engaging it multiple times. Large amounts of the movie are bombastic action scenes.
They're really not very similar viewing experiences at all...
Well it's not out of line though. Hitting it head on with the semi truck was enough to give it a limp and a point blank pipe bomb blew off it's legs. So not completely unstoppable with non-military resources, which means an anti-tank rifle should be effective.