I am apparently the only person here who didn't like Fury Road. Two reasons: 1. The guy, Max. Pointless, waste of runtime, remove him. 2. Every time the bad guys fire off flamethrowers into the sky for rule of cool it breaks the immersion of the whole postapocalyptic shortages setting for me.
Mad Max is the narrator and story teller that we see everything through, not the main character. This is a common tactic in literature and film and complaining about it shows your entire ass as ignorant. This is the format of all of the mad max films.
Second, burning off excess during scarcity is the #1 way humans have demonstrated religion and sacredness throughout history. Does it "break your immersions" when ancient starving shepherds killed their best lamb and burned it at an altar? Joe's entire faction is a cult dedicated to cars, burning excess guzzoline is a sacred rite and a tactic to display their wealth and power to others. It makes it more realistic, not less. The war party and convoy chase is obviously a sacred rite and ritual to these people, not just a pragmatic attempt to catch their enemies. They are all in a heightened state of ecstasy, a jihad where they get high and kill themselves to get to Valhalla. They aren't being perfectly rational, they're wrapped up in an emotional and religious fervor.
I really can't get into the reddit-like mind of someone who likes or dislikes films, what are essentially dreamlike works of art, on such superficial "gotcha" "plotholes" and shallow BS. How do you interpret art in such a low-level shallow manner? Do you rag on surrealist paintings because the lighting source is wrong or clocks could never melt or whatever? Seems very pleb and lazy, like when rightoids get mad at paintings for not being photorealistic.
Like, there are legitimate criticisms of the film. I would say one is that the flashbacks of Max were distracting and had no pay-off and muddled the tone of the film. Another is the strong color grading is oversaturated and can make the film feel fake like 300 even though it's all practical effects, which is one reason I actually prefer the black-and-white version. The black-and-white version with all of Max's weird flashbacks cut out would be a near perfect film in my opinion though.
George has talked about how Max isn't really a specific person. The Mad Max stories are stories told around an evening fire about a great cultural hero. Max is a lone warrior who arrives during critical events, plays his role, and moves on. He's a stock character like Weyland Smith or Coyote or Koschei the Deathless. He has a distinct role as the a warrior who arrives, becomes embroiled in events that don't involve him, regains his lost humanity, aids the heroes, and moves on.
I am apparently the only person here who didn't like Fury Road. Two reasons: 1. The guy, Max. Pointless, waste of runtime, remove him. 2. Every time the bad guys fire off flamethrowers into the sky for rule of cool it breaks the immersion of the whole postapocalyptic shortages setting for me.
Dumb criticisms.
Mad Max is the narrator and story teller that we see everything through, not the main character. This is a common tactic in literature and film and complaining about it shows your entire ass as ignorant. This is the format of all of the mad max films.
Second, burning off excess during scarcity is the #1 way humans have demonstrated religion and sacredness throughout history. Does it "break your immersions" when ancient starving shepherds killed their best lamb and burned it at an altar? Joe's entire faction is a cult dedicated to cars, burning excess guzzoline is a sacred rite and a tactic to display their wealth and power to others. It makes it more realistic, not less. The war party and convoy chase is obviously a sacred rite and ritual to these people, not just a pragmatic attempt to catch their enemies. They are all in a heightened state of ecstasy, a jihad where they get high and kill themselves to get to Valhalla. They aren't being perfectly rational, they're wrapped up in an emotional and religious fervor.
I really can't get into the reddit-like mind of someone who likes or dislikes films, what are essentially dreamlike works of art, on such superficial "gotcha" "plotholes" and shallow BS. How do you interpret art in such a low-level shallow manner? Do you rag on surrealist paintings because the lighting source is wrong or clocks could never melt or whatever? Seems very pleb and lazy, like when rightoids get mad at paintings for not being photorealistic.
Like, there are legitimate criticisms of the film. I would say one is that the flashbacks of Max were distracting and had no pay-off and muddled the tone of the film. Another is the strong color grading is oversaturated and can make the film feel fake like 300 even though it's all practical effects, which is one reason I actually prefer the black-and-white version. The black-and-white version with all of Max's weird flashbacks cut out would be a near perfect film in my opinion though.
George has talked about how Max isn't really a specific person. The Mad Max stories are stories told around an evening fire about a great cultural hero. Max is a lone warrior who arrives during critical events, plays his role, and moves on. He's a stock character like Weyland Smith or Coyote or Koschei the Deathless. He has a distinct role as the a warrior who arrives, becomes embroiled in events that don't involve him, regains his lost humanity, aids the heroes, and moves on.
There's a shortage because some jackass keeps blowing it all on the stunt budget
But let me offer a counterpoint of flame thrower go fwoooooshhhh!!!