http://gamingtrend.com
August 30, 2015, 12:03:42 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: [movie] Mad Max Returns in Fury Road  (Read 5533 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 18886



View Profile WWW
« Reply #120 on: June 03, 2015, 02:12:45 PM »

FWIW I think Bana's portrayal of Robert Bruce Banner was far more compelling than Norton's, and he seemed genuinely haunted and conflicted.

Tom as Mad Max? Ugh. Too much focus on "madness" (and uncompellingly so) and less on Max.

This was Death Race 2000. That's it.
« Last Edit: June 03, 2015, 02:14:19 PM by Purge » Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
forgeforsaken
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1699



View Profile
« Reply #121 on: June 03, 2015, 03:25:53 PM »

Quote from: Purge on June 03, 2015, 02:12:45 PM

FWIW I think Bana's portrayal of Robert Bruce Banner was far more compelling than Norton's, and he seemed genuinely haunted and conflicted.

Tom as Mad Max? Ugh. Too much focus on "madness" (and uncompellingly so) and less on Max.

This was Death Race 2000. That's it.

So I can add movies along with games to things I fundamentally don't agree with Purge on.
Logged
farley2k
Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3766



View Profile
« Reply #122 on: June 03, 2015, 08:08:52 PM »

My little pony survived the apocalypse!













Logged

Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 18886



View Profile WWW
« Reply #123 on: June 04, 2015, 04:13:07 PM »

Quote from: forgeforsaken on June 03, 2015, 03:25:53 PM

Quote from: Purge on June 03, 2015, 02:12:45 PM

FWIW I think Bana's portrayal of Robert Bruce Banner was far more compelling than Norton's, and he seemed genuinely haunted and conflicted.

Tom as Mad Max? Ugh. Too much focus on "madness" (and uncompellingly so) and less on Max.

This was Death Race 2000. That's it.

So I can add movies along with games to things I fundamentally don't agree with Purge on.

... and reciprocated.
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
whiteboyskim
Senior Staff Writer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7888


Hard partier


View Profile
« Reply #124 on: June 10, 2015, 03:15:14 AM »

Quote from: Purge on June 03, 2015, 02:12:45 PM

FWIW I think Bana's portrayal of Robert Bruce Banner was far more compelling than Norton's, and he seemed genuinely haunted and conflicted.

Tom as Mad Max? Ugh. Too much focus on "madness" (and uncompellingly so) and less on Max.

This was Death Race 2000. That's it.

Well, the first word in the title was "Mad" after all. smile Part of what I liked about this was how Max starts as a feral animal, and gradually regains his humanity over the course of the film. The opening narration is absolutely true when he says he's reduced to a single instinct. That's not a far cry from where he ended up after Thunderdome when he was lost to the sands and the wastelands. One could see him devolving further over time until we meet him again in Fury Road, by which point there's very little humanity left.

Oh, and I barely breathed during the final sequence when he was climbing over the guitarist and the action was happening in 57 different places at the same time. A lesser hack like Michael Bay would have fumbled this so catastrophically I can't even begin to imagine it.
Logged

Behold the glory of my new blog!
Filmmaking is vision plus faith plus balls, all 3 of which Hollywood knows little about.
Eco-Logic
Guest
« Reply #125 on: June 11, 2015, 12:00:59 AM »

Quote from: Eco-Logic on April 01, 2015, 08:14:15 PM

Haven't read a thread, and wanted to say I think the trailer looks like fly infested horse shit.

Now I'll read the thread.

I was so wrong.  I saw it this weekend and found it was one of the best action movies I've seen.  Bravo, and I'm glad I was proven wrong.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Logged
Eco-Logic
Guest
« Reply #126 on: June 11, 2015, 12:03:43 AM »

This movie absolutely schooled Bay, in his movies you can hardly tell what's happening during the chaotic action, during this movie that was filled to the brim with chaotic action, you can see/feel everything that is happening.  Bravo, this film was a true achievement.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Logged
Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 18886



View Profile WWW
« Reply #127 on: June 11, 2015, 07:52:40 PM »

Quote from: whiteboyskim on June 10, 2015, 03:15:14 AM

Quote from: Purge on June 03, 2015, 02:12:45 PM

FWIW I think Bana's portrayal of Robert Bruce Banner was far more compelling than Norton's, and he seemed genuinely haunted and conflicted.

Tom as Mad Max? Ugh. Too much focus on "madness" (and uncompellingly so) and less on Max.

This was Death Race 2000. That's it.

Well, the first word in the title was "Mad" after all. smile Part of what I liked about this was how Max starts as a feral animal, and gradually regains his humanity over the course of the film. The opening narration is absolutely true when he says he's reduced to a single instinct. That's not a far cry from where he ended up after Thunderdome when he was lost to the sands and the wastelands. One could see him devolving further over time until we meet him again in Fury Road, by which point there's very little humanity left.

Oh, and I barely breathed during the final sequence when he was climbing over the guitarist and the action was happening in 57 different places at the same time. A lesser hack like Michael Bay would have fumbled this so catastrophically I can't even begin to imagine it.

I agree the spectacle was entertaining, but the plot was thin and it was almost like the main character was over-thought and under-delivered (IMO). At best he was a supporting actor. At worst, he was a bloodbag prop with some action scenes thrown in.
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
forgeforsaken
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1699



View Profile
« Reply #128 on: June 11, 2015, 08:23:07 PM »

Quote from: Purge on June 11, 2015, 07:52:40 PM

Quote from: whiteboyskim on June 10, 2015, 03:15:14 AM

Quote from: Purge on June 03, 2015, 02:12:45 PM

FWIW I think Bana's portrayal of Robert Bruce Banner was far more compelling than Norton's, and he seemed genuinely haunted and conflicted.

Tom as Mad Max? Ugh. Too much focus on "madness" (and uncompellingly so) and less on Max.

This was Death Race 2000. That's it.

Well, the first word in the title was "Mad" after all. smile Part of what I liked about this was how Max starts as a feral animal, and gradually regains his humanity over the course of the film. The opening narration is absolutely true when he says he's reduced to a single instinct. That's not a far cry from where he ended up after Thunderdome when he was lost to the sands and the wastelands. One could see him devolving further over time until we meet him again in Fury Road, by which point there's very little humanity left.

Oh, and I barely breathed during the final sequence when he was climbing over the guitarist and the action was happening in 57 different places at the same time. A lesser hack like Michael Bay would have fumbled this so catastrophically I can't even begin to imagine it.

I agree the spectacle was entertaining, but the plot was thin and it was almost like the main character was over-thought and under-delivered (IMO). At best he was a supporting actor. At worst, he was a bloodbag prop with some action scenes thrown in.

In regards to Max, this is true of all the Mad Max movies to a degree with the exception of the first, it's never really about him, but rather the situations he wanders into.  He is the post apocalyptic version of the wandering stranger from the old samurai flicks or westerns.  In regards to plot you are selling it short, the overarching plot isn't overly complicated (that's also not a bad thing), but there is a huge amount of world building in the background and the main characters all have character arcs that the film manages to convey over what is essentially one big action scene.  Lastly despite having one of the shortest scripts in memory I find this film to also be the most quotable in years.
Logged
GargoyleBoy
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 35


View Profile
« Reply #129 on: June 17, 2015, 06:48:15 PM »

Quote from: forgeforsaken on June 11, 2015, 08:23:07 PM

He is the post apocalyptic version of the wandering stranger from the old samurai flicks or westerns. 

This.

I saw the movie yesterday and LOVED. IT.  Hardy's performance is so reminiscent of (what I remember of) Gibson's in that role that I had no trouble accepting him as the same character.  The wide-eyed stare, the halting, clipped way of talking - Hardy nails it. 

The movie was wall-to-wall action - but the opening narrative sets that tone.  There's not much room for complicated plot when most of the people are just fighting for survival.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.25 seconds with 44 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.072s, 2q)