Movie Review: Mad Max: Fury Road

Mad-Max-Fury-Road-cars-700

Mad Max: Fury Road is Aussie director George Miller’s goofy, rip-roaring, full-bore, let-it-all-hang-out post-modern “reimagining” of Mad Max and Mad Max Two: The Road Warrior. Miller, 70, directed those two post-apocalyptic movies about thirty-five years ago. Mad Max put Mel Gibson on the map. The Road Warrior made Gibson a superstar. This movie reminds us how great Gibson was in the part. Here’s what passes for a plot in Miller’s start-to-finish blow-‘em-up shoot-‘em-up non-stop chase movie . . .

In Fury Road, the post-apocalyptic world is a leftist’s wet dream. The world has run out of oil, everything is contaminated with radiation, all men are brutes and the one satellite visible in the sky probably broadcasts tapes of Rush Limbaugh 24/7. It’s hell on Earth! Ah, but hell looks beautiful. No, really, it does, thanks to the remarkable cinematography of John Seale. If hell looked like this, a lot of damned souls would be carrying Nikons.

MadMax-FuryRoad-ImmortanJoe

In a place called ‘The Citadel,” a cruel, homicidal, horny, deformed warlord named Immortan Joe controls the water supply, which is a big deal where the world is mostly desert. The horror-masked Joe (played by Hugh Keays-Byrne, who was “Toecutter” in the original Mad Max) is able to keep control of the water and the people thanks to hundreds of War Boys, who seem to be suicidal teenage English skinheads in Casper the Friendly Ghost makeup. While all the War Boys are diseased and have a half-life rather than a life, most of them manage to look like they spend six days a week working out on Gravitrons and drinking protein shakes.

Aside from water, The War Boys and Joe’s other minions keep Joe swimming in enough gasoline to power an enormous fleet of more second-hand vehicles than a CarMax superstore. Having control of all the water, vehicles, fuel and soldiers makes Joe powerful enough to own a harem of the five hottest women left on the planet. In a post-apocalyptic world where a lot of the people are ugly mutants, you’d think that an uglier mutant like Joe would be happy with one or two fives. But no. Joe, the greedy bastard, hangs with five tens. Where does he get the energy?

It’s due to these supermodels that the thin plot thickens like a pot of filetto di pomodoro sauce left on simmer for too long. While Imperator Furiosa, Joe’s one-armed lieutenant played by Charlize Theron, is on a routine supply run, she smuggles the hot chicks out of The Citadel. Why? Because otherwise there would be no movie, that’s why.

rs_560x415-141211084917-1024.Mad-Max-Charlize-Theron.jl.121114

Theron, sporting a buzz cut that would make Sinead O’Connor envious, wants to take the girls to “the Green Place,” which is either paradise on Earth or a pot farm just outside of Melbourne. It’s also Furiosa’s original home, controlled by an all-female clan called the Vulvalini. The Vulvalini either take their name from a type of pornographic pasta or a Star Trek satire. If this was an American Western movie, they’d probably be called The Vaginians.

mad-max-fury-road-tom-hardy-wallpapers-mad-max-epic-road-war-at-the-heart-of-fury-road

Max, a wandering paladin, suffers flashbacks of his dead family while he munches on a lizard. Max is stricken with guilt that he couldn’t save them, and keeps on imagining his little daughter trying to snatch his lizard. The title character is played by Englishman Tom Hardy, but he’s really a supporting player in this exciting, uh, drama. In fact, this is Charlize Theron’s movie and should have been titled Fast and Furiosa.

Max and Furiosa, who initially distrust each other to the point where they beat the hell out of each other in a well-choreographed fight, eventually unite in battle. This sets up the flaming destruction of a bazillion two, four and eight wheeled vehicles as the band of sisters fight their way to the Green Place. Furiosa, with some help from Max, has to outrun (in no particular order of importance) a clan of Ewoks on dirt bikes, Joe’s minions, a bunch of creepy stilt-walkers known as the “Crows,” a gang run by the repulsive “People Eater,” and another gang run by the even more repulsive “Bullet Farmer.” Presumably, post-apocalyptic bullets are lovingly grown from seed. In between explosions, the characters exchange a few words of what passes for dialog.

KQnzRUC

Theron is so beautiful that she looks great despite having no hair and only half a left arm. And as a tall, skinny one-armed woman, Theron fights like tall, skinny one-armed women can only fight in movies. In his supporting role, the best thing to be said about Tom Hardy is that he wasn’t Oliver Hardy. Hardy – Tom that is — is not as handsome as Gibson at the same age, but worst of all he lacks that all-important charisma that one expects from a wandering desert nomad who thinks that a mutant lizard is a nice snack.

T1ppUpmVZX

The best actor of the lot was Nicholas Hoult as “Nux,” a War Boy who strives to die in battle, earning his way into “Valhalla” where he will be greeted by all the others dupes who died serving Immortan Joe. While the Valhalla of Norse legend is well-known, what probably nobody in this movie knew is that Valhalla is also the name of a “correctional facility” in New York, which is exactly where Nux deserved to be. Nevertheless, although Nux starts out fiendishly stealing Max’s blood, Hoult ends up cleverly stealing the movie as Nux mends his homicidal ways for the love of a good woman. Who, not surprisingly, is a supermodel. Which is a third definition of Valhalla.

The rest of the movie is all the total, nonstop action that $150 million can buy, which is plenty. Bombs and vehicle impacts do a lot of the dirty work in Fury Road, but there’s plenty of gunplay and a pretty good assortment of firearms that are used to great effect in slaughtering Furiosa’s enemies.

Screen-Shot-2014-07-27-at-21.54.05

Charlize Theron – a fanatical gun-hater in what she probably calls “real life” –  shooting a modified, scoped SKS accurately at long range is a joy to behold. Cast members call the SKS “the big boy,” which tells us how far the post-apocalyptic world has fallen. Not content with long-range rifle shooting, Theron also wields a sawed-off side-by-side shotgun, for which she has no ATF tax stamp. Furiosa’s war wagon is also stocked with a sweet Luger P08, a Webley .455, a Webley flare gun, a bushel basket of other, assorted firearms and enough ammo to constitute what in modern journalistic parlance is known as a “hoard.”

Both Furiosa and Max employ GLOCK 17s to do their business, proving that even TEOTWAWKI can’t stop a GLOCK. Then again, Max also wields a Taurus PT92 which seems to have survived the apocalypse quite well.

Mad-Max-Fury-Road

The Vulvalini, who are a bunch of old hags (except for a naked body double who deserves her own movie), have the most interesting, uh, weapons. One middle-ager does her sharpshooting with a lever action Rossi M92, while an old biddy takes her head shots (on men only, because, well, men) with a cool Pennsylvania flintlock rifle. The old charmer’s motto is, “one man, one bullet.”

Among the bad guys, the Bullet Farmer totes a pair of Heckler & Koch MP5K-PDWs, shooting two at a time, one in each hand, and mostly missing. But it looks cool. The star of the firearms show is Immortan Joe’s pristine Colt Python in stainless. As always.

Fury Road is loud, but not that loud. It’s rated R for violence and disturbing images, such as a host of huge-breasted obese women being milked, but there’s not a lot of gore. As actioners go, this one is close to top of the line. However, as I watched Fury Road, it struck me — a group of desperate and attractive people struggling to get home and fighting off gangs of crazies in wild costumes, nutty makeup and fright masks. Now, where had I seen that before?

mad max fury road

Fury Road is Mad Max meets The Warriors, with much better effects and stunts. Like Fury Road, The Warriors also featured an all-female clan, called The Lizzies. Get it? The Lizzies didn’t like men and they were bad. The Vulvalini in Fury Road is an all-female clan that doesn’t like men and they are good. The featured female in The Warriors was a weak sister. The featured female in Fury Road is a kick-ass. Furiosa is trying to get home to a paradise on Earth called “the Green Place.” The Warriors gang was trying to get home to a paradise on earth called The Bronx.

Secondly, this movie does not like men. Is Fury Road a feminist take on The Warriors” and Mad Max? Probably. In the original concept, Max was probably supposed to rescue the concubines, but the idea of one guy stealing a bunch of hot chicks from another guy didn’t work. Okay, but then he hired Eve Ensler of The Vagina Monologues infamy to vet the script, turning it into feminist propaganda where every man is depicted as bad or nuts, including Max who after all is Mad, and all the women are cool, fearless and nice. So you make the call.

maxresdefault

[SPOILER ALERT] At the end of the show, Max and Furiosa take over The Citadel and liberate the masses, who celebrate with a refreshing bucket of water. As Furiosa rides the human-powered elevator up toward her future, she looks around for Max. He’s not coming. As a road warrior, it’s Max’s fate to wander the Earth, searching for redemption and a nice dish of lizard. And a hot chick with two hands and flowing hair and maybe even a Colt Python in Royal Blue. We’ll see what happens to Max when the sequel is released in a year or two.

SPECIFICATIONS:

Model: Mad Max: Fury Road
Caliber: 150mm
Length:  120 minutes
Action: Non-stop
Finish: Predictable
Price: $150 million (est.)

RATINGS (out of five bullets):

Style * * * * *
The action starts out crazy, gets crazier and rarely stops to catch its breath. The battle scenes are breathtaking, and watching all the gasoline-powered vehicles being blown up will warm the cockles of Al Gore’s heart. The cinematography and art direction are incredibly lush. Never in the history of movies has utter desolation looked so good.

Reliability * * *
Some will find the political messaging objectionable. Some will find the lack of a plot even more objectionable. Most will find Furiosa’s haircut completely objectionable.

OVERALL RATING * * * *
Action fans will enjoy it.

comments

  1. avatar DrVino says:

    An all-female clan called the “Vulvalini”????? Really? That is a notch above “unobtainium”…

    1. avatar Ing says:

      Vulvalini? Unobtainium? Too…many…jokes… Must…not…

      1. avatar Swarf says:

        They are both jokes, Francis.

        1. avatar Dustin says:

          Is that anything like Valvoline? Reminds me of something I saw in Thailand…

    2. avatar CYRANO says:

      Do they razors in the future? Maybe it should have been Mad Charlize and her Furry road.

    3. avatar pieslapper says:

      Witness!

  2. avatar Grindstone says:

    99.9% of the audience won’t give half a sh!t about any “message”. They just wanna see sh!t blow up.

    1. avatar AllAmerican says:

      That and I really do not see how this movie is broadcasting some kind of hidden feminist agenda. I saw the movie, its good. Not once did it seem like there was any hidden political agenda during the film. If there was, they sure did a sh***y job of it. I think a lot of this flipping out about a hidden feminist agenda is just a bunch of alex jones paranoia.

      1. avatar doesky2 says:

        You’re exactly the numbskull audience member the “vagina monologue” activist was looking for.

        1. avatar AllAmericanu says:

          You mad bro? 🙂 How was this movie feminist in any way?

        2. avatar Grindstone says:

          And you’re exactly the numbskull who wets their panties over a strong female lead.

      2. avatar Grindstone says:

        There’s a strong woman who doesn’t need a man, therefore it’s feminist propaganda! Women OBVIOUSLY need a man to rescue them!

        (that was sarcasm if it wasn’t obvious enough).

    2. avatar pg2 says:

      Exactly. Hollywood social engineers have counted on this for decades to wrap messages into unsuspecting audiences because no one is smart enough to give a shit what they consume.

    3. avatar Kyle says:

      Thank you, i’m part of the 99.9%.

      Its Max, I dont need silly things like plot. Max is like riding a roller coaster at disneyland. Do you really care about the “Plot” of the amusement park ride?

    4. avatar pieslapper says:

      They blowed it up good, they blowed it up REAL good!

  3. avatar michael nieto says:

    i saw the movie and have to disagree with the review aside from good action it was TERRIBLE this is one of the worst movies i payed(keyword) to see in a long time do urself a favor and go see avengers again or wait for somthing better

    1. avatar Art out West says:

      The movie sounds incredibly stupid. Therefore, it will likely be a hit.

      By the way, the SKS with a big fancy scope seems pretty stupid. The SKS is a great TEOTWAWKI rifle, but it just doesn’t merit that type of scope with it’s average accuracy, and short-mid range ballistics. It should have been a Dragunov if they wanted to feature that scope. Plus the spam cans of 7.62x54r will probably be one of the last things available after the end of the world.

      1. avatar jeremy says:

        Yeah man,

        That portion of this movie about paint huffing lost boys driving multimotored nitroused monster trucks through a post apocalyptic desert where people subsist on tanker trucks full of non refrigerated breast milk was TOTALLY NOT VERY REALISTIC!

        Worst. Documentary. Ever.

        /sarc

      2. avatar DaveGinOly says:

        It’s a movie about a post-apocalyptic world. They scrounge for everything they have. If you have an SKS and a scope, you use them together. I presume if the character had a better rifle to put the scope on, she would have done so. The weapons shown in the movie are the weapons available to the characters (according to the story being told by the movie makers), and not what we wished they had available.

    2. avatar AllAmerican says:

      Except the avengers is pretty much a cartoon with all the crappy CGI, and I’m sure that it has an anti gun agenda too.

      1. avatar Nagurski says:

        The Avengers is just about as pro gun as Hollywood gets. While Batman will tell everybody who is listening that he doesn’t use guns, just about every Avenger except Thor or the Hulk has picked up a gun and used it. Let’s be honest though, those two do way more damage without the guns. There was a scene in the latest Captain America movie that stood out to me as particularly pro gun. Nick Fury is telling Cap a story about how his grandfather was a doorman and used to walk home with a lunchbox full of tips every night, Captain America asked if his grandpa ever got mugged and Fury responded saying that he carried a .22 magnum just in case.

    3. avatar wlitten512 says:

      Really man, Avengers? That movie was overstuffed with too many plotlines trying to setup more marvel movies, the action scenes were incoherent largely because they relied on CGI so heavily.
      I felt like this Avengers movie was a bit of a waste. They were smart enough to know in Mad Max that the less dialogue and plot the better. Unlike Transformers where the characters never stop saying the dumbest things.

      1. avatar Spoooghett says:

        I completely agree, the avengers was basically a movie for children. I can’t get past how terrible the writing was and how uninteresting they made the bad guy.

    4. avatar Spoooghett says:

      This is exactly the opinion I would expect out of someone who considers the avengers a great movie. It had bad really writing (seriously the jokes were awful), was even less realistic than fury road, and the bad guy was one of the least interesting characters possible. I consider the avengers 2 a movie for children, at least Mad Max hit a more mature audience, even if it was insane (which was the point of the movie).

  4. avatar mike oregon says:

    I don’t pay to watch movies or listen to music by anti-gun people.

    1. avatar JasonM says:

      So you live in absolute silence in a white room?

      1. avatar Swarf says:

        All Cat Scratch Fever, all the time.

      2. avatar Kyle says:

        No doubt.

      3. avatar pieslapper says:

        So you live in absolute silence in a white room?

        With black curtains…

    2. avatar Cubbie says:

      The better option would be to support movies/music/art by such actors that are contrary to their leftist ideology, even if they don’t realize it.

      Besides, you extend that policy to anyone or any company that is anti-gun and you’ll be living in your own Mad Max world.

    3. avatar Spoooghett says:

      I see you do like to spout garbage on the internet about something you haven’t seen though. Seriously, go watch the movie than come back with your opinion. It seems like everyone here is just saying things because they want their opinions heard even if they are completely invalid, much like the anti gunners who despise guns even though they have never shot one and know nothing about them. Experience something before you form an opinion.

  5. avatar Swarf says:

    This movie is fantastic. Anyone who gets hurt feelings and thinks it’s some sort of mean ol’ feminist manifesto is being a hypersensitive ninny.

    1. avatar AllAmerican says:

      +1. Couldn’t agree more. Didn’t realize men were supposed to be so easily offended.

    2. avatar Aerindel says:

      Just saw it for third time. Loved every second of it.

      1. avatar foggy says:

        Three times at the theater? Wow! I guess they’ve got your number.

    3. avatar Spoooghett says:

      Seriously, a lot of people in this thread are acting just as bad as the moronic Tumbler feminists who do not base their opinions on logical evidence. Go watch the movie with an unbiased and open mind and I assure you that this so called “feminist manifesto” will be nothing more than an excellent action movie.

  6. avatar Roscoe says:

    Other than scarce eye candy potential; meh.

  7. avatar LarryinTX says:

    Oh, settle down. Saw it yesterday, it’s sure no Jupiter Ascending, but it was fun.

    1. avatar foodog says:

      Yeah, I agree with Ralph, the womyns rule thing was tiresome, but then so was Twilight, and Hunger Games, and Divergent…I mean, enough with the sensitive post-apocalyptic damaged puppy guys already. It aint working…Heck, the chick flick Perfect Pitch beat Fury, opening day.

      But then, its an action movie, and who goes for plot, character development and all that-

      The action was awesome, huge, ever changing, brilliant, and the cinematography – incredible.
      Huge, John Ford-ish background, from the movies of my childhood…you gotta see it on the big screen.

      Call me old fashioned, but I am waiting for Hollyweird to wake up and re-do some of the classic guy movies-

      http://www.filmsite.org/guy-movies1.html

      and not with these underfed ladies…more Frank Frazzetta style, if you know what I mean…

      http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0059170/

      1. avatar Jake harper says:

        “Enough with the sensitive post-apocalyptic damaged puppy guys already”

        Really? Have you seen the original movies going back to ’79? Thats what Max is, damaged that is kind of his bag. His Wife and Child were murdered in front of him and he took revenge, then went off into the wasteland to run away from his problems. Anyone expecting Max to be more assertive has no real handle on his characterization, he is out for himself, and often finds himself swept up in things bigger than himself, usually going along with it, partly out of his sense of morality, but mostly to help himself. In the ‘Road Warrior’ Max only had something like 16 lines, several of which were ” I’m just here for the gasoline.” Anyway, the point is he avoids attachment because he is afraid of attachment and loss, he is damaged, thats the point.

  8. avatar Spectre_USA says:

    Now [i]THAT[/i] is how a review should be written.

    Cut through all the crap, and only hit the highlights, or lowlights, as it were.

    1> Switch off brain
    2> Enjoy the show!

    Got it…

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      “Now [i]THAT[/i] is how a review should be written.

      Cut through all the crap, and only hit the highlights, or lowlights, as it were.”

      Then you’ll really like ‘Joe Bob Briggs’ movie reviews. An example of his style:

      “The reviews typically end with a brief rating of the “high points” of the movie in question, including the types of action (represented by nouns naming objects used in fight scenes suffixed with -fu), the number of bodies, number of female breasts bared, the notional number of pints of blood spilled, and for appropriately untoward movies a “vomit meter”. A typical such concluding paragraph would be, “No dead bodies. One hundred seventeen breasts. Multiple aardvarking. Lap dancing. Cage dancing. Convenience-store dancing. Blindfold aardvarking. Blind-MAN aardvarking. Lesbo Fu. Pool cue-fu. Drive-In Academy Award nominations for Tane McClure. Joe Bob says check it out.” (“Aardvarking” is one of many euphemisms Briggs employs in reference to sexual intercourse.)”

      http://www.joebobbriggs.com/index.php?/movie-reviews/

  9. avatar PatrickOfOregon says:

    I loved this movie. It was everything I wanted from the movie, to be honest.

    But now I am considering not reading TTAG anymore, as this review sounded like the menanists or whatever they are called who bitch and moan when things aren’t 110% in favor of male superiority.

    Honestly, who gives a shit what the women were called? I honestly didn’t even remember them even having a group name! Its not like they go touting feminism at every step, the movie was 99.999% shit blowing up! Get over it.

    “Waaa! Boohoo! They wanted to save the sex slaves from an evil mutant who rapest them to have his children! *sob sob sob* and now they want to take them somewhere they WONT get rapped! *sob sob sob* why do women deserve any form of respect?..”

    That’s basically what I see when people bitch about this stuff. Truely pathetic.

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      I’m glad that such info was included. I can’t stand really stupid movies… and “Vulvalini” is just too much. Poe’s law in effect.

    2. avatar DrVino says:

      They don’t have to “tout feminism every step of the way” for it to be a feminist movie (or any other kind of propaganda). The construct of the movie creates undercurrents of broader moral messaging that are the take away. Case in point: Avatar.

      1. avatar AllAmerican says:

        I guarantee if you watch this movie, the last thing on your mind when you leave the theater will be, “huh, I guess the feminist nazis are right. I’m gonna go vote for Hillary.” If anything it has a pro gun message.

        1. avatar Cubbie says:

          +1

          What’s feminist about women using guns trying to get away from a sick and abusive warlord?

      2. avatar Another Robert says:

        For Doc–Another case in point, an 80’s movie called “White of the Eye”. Ostensibly a crime thriller of the woman-finds-she’s -married-a-serial-killer variety. But it doesn’t take a genius to see that every single male character–the real killer, the guy you think is the killer, the cops, the extras, everyone– is either a psycho rapist murderer, a psycho macho man hood, a complete buffoon, or just a crude jerk. The only intelligent and moral and non-jerk characters are the female lead and her pre-teen daughter. Oh, and as icing on the cake, the real killer turns out to be apparently something of a homosexual too. Just like those men–they only really love each other…

    3. avatar Aerindel says:

      I agree..this is pretty low…reads like someone just trying to pander to the dumb rednecks they think gun owners are. Newsflash, we aren’t as stupid, hateful, or as racist as the liberals like to believe.

    4. avatar doesky2 says:

      Patrick “pajama boy” Patrick .

  10. avatar DoomGuy says:

    Meh… Don’t want to see it. Seems like all movies now are about making one dimensional cliches and political statements and deconstructing the “action hero” role.

    Sorry I’ll keep my $15.

    1. avatar Aerindel says:

      Too bad everything you are assuming about this movie is wrong.

    2. avatar doesky2 says:

      Not enabling Hollyweird.
      At best I’ll borrow a friends DVD or better yet a free download.

  11. avatar Christian says:

    Yes, Tom Hardy was a supporting character but that was meant to be and always was. You may think whatever you want about Tom Hardy but he’s a terrific actor and he oozes charisma. In my opinion a worthy replacement of Mel.

    1. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

      He was pretty good in Lawless.

    2. avatar Jeff says:

      Don’t know much about the guy, but damn he’s pretty much a dead ringer for Gibson from the original movies.

  12. avatar Shire-man says:

    Between the super-heros, outbreaks and post-apocalyptics it feels like there have only been three movies made in the last decade.

  13. avatar Former Water Walker says:

    Great review Ralph. Milking? Maybe I’ll see it next year on HBO. At least Charlize comes by her anti thing (sorta’) honestly with mom shooting dad…is the Taurus/Rossi placement???

  14. avatar Dean Carpenter says:

    I will stick with originals. I have no desire of watching a a father fantssize his daughter id snatching his lizard. I am glad they made the movie so I could read a hilarious review.

    1. avatar Swarf says:

      Wha… what?

  15. avatar Nine says:

    No mention of that awesome guitar player?

    Shame, shame.

    1. avatar Mister Fleas says:

      +1

    2. avatar Bernard says:

      +1

      Cirque du Soleil stunt team and chrome spray paint huffing
      But the guitarist (Doof Warrior) was my favorite.

      1. avatar Bernard says:

        Let me add: his name is Sean Hape, better known as iOTA.

  16. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

    Here I thought it was Gallipoli that mad Mel Gibson a super star.

  17. avatar JaxD says:

    BTW:
    The Warriors ran from the Bronx, not to it.
    The Lizzies didn’t hate them as men, just trying to take them down, like all the other gangs.

    1. avatar Another Robert says:

      And IIRC, the Lizzies were the only ones who used guns.

  18. avatar Rick Grimes says:

    Absolute worse movie I have seen in a long time. I was actually pissed off when I walked out of the theater about the wasted money and afternoon that I could have used to go shooting instead.

  19. avatar rammerjammer says:

    Lighten up Francis!

    The new Mad Max is one of the most absurd, unrealistic, implausible, ludicrous movies with barely any plot or meaningful dialogue…and it was AWESOME!

    1. avatar Swarf says:

      Exactly.

  20. avatar Bungameng says:

    I’ve seen it in 4D and now I just need to go again to see it in 2D to enjoy it without all that seats swerving and vibrating.

    I am only sorry that the Tatra 6×6 chassis didn’t see any real action in the movie.

    1. avatar Aerindel says:

      What? The War Rig was the star of the show!

      1. avatar Bungameng says:

        Yeah, I understand that they chose it to get through the sand without hassle, but still, they could have run it also somewhere else than only on the flat desert. Its advantages come forward offroad.

        http://www.tatratrucks.com/cache/images/galleryPreviewBig/tatra-phoenix_turbo-trucks-experience_02.jpg

  21. avatar crashbbear says:

    Yep. Total feminist propaganda. A woman saving other women from mutant rape, oh hell no. Joe himself refers to them as “breeders”, so it’s totally NOT a case of objectivity. Nope. Death by Snu-Snu much? New age feminism is bad, but this is not that. Pick your battles next time dude.

    1. avatar Xanderbach says:

      Indeed. Also, the whole “we are not things” wasn’t just for the women- The War Boys were just as much expendable items as the women were, in fact more so. The feminism seemed more about equality than superiority- It was also not unbelievable, for all its silliness. Notice that in this “overtly feminist” film that not a single woman beat a man in a one-on-one fight? Furiosa only beat Max when he was beaten, dehydrated, drained of his blood and taken on 5-on-1. Overt man hating!

      I guess I can understand his dislike of the “Vulvalini” tribe’s name… It obviously doesn’t hold a candle to such noble and well written names like the gangs from “The road warrior”… The Gay-boy berserkers and the Smegma Crazies. /sarc

      This review just seems to be an attempt to make something out of nothing, paid extra for every word over 3 syllables (whether fitting or not), and focused directly at what liberals think gun owners would respond to. This website, which promotes gun owners of all ethnicities, genders and sexual orientations; is better than this. Throwing political BS (which is non-existent) into a fantasy movie where armed men and women save others from religious fanaticism, rape and slavery seems… Silly.

      I myself enjoyed it. Then again, I’m a fan of the old ones as well, so maybe I’m biased.

      1. avatar Another Robert says:

        I dunno–I enjoyed the old ones too, but I haven’t seen anything in the trailers to make me want to see this one.

      2. avatar Ary says:

        Seconded. I read Ralph’s review of the remora and loved it, then I come over here to read this load. I myself loved the movie, it had allot of old school cinematography mixed into it, like fast motion scenes, and allot of feels harkened back to the original trio. The plot itself was more coherent, and valleys deeper than the first two by far in my opinion, and you’d notice that if you weren’t obsessing over non existent hidden messages in the film. Basically (and I mean Basically) the movie starts off Michael Bay, and the remainder of what felt like 3 hours is Christopher Nolen.

        Pretty much all the female characters when left to it weren’t nearly as badass as I’d hoped, the ‘supermodel’ escaped breeder characters were pretty weak kneed in much of the movie; which is understandable given their background of just being the least marred stock of the lot and not much else. The crones were awesome but *Spoilers* all died in pretty short order, without having done all that much damage, as most badass male wingmen characters aften do in movies. If there’s any message it’s that women in this film at least, have stepped up from invulnerable but useless side characters to regular tier supporting mooks.

        As a side point, the Vulvalinni probably would have shot Max and Furiosa had she NOT been one of their members in the past, they seemed pretty set on survival of themselves and their own alone regardless of who they’re up against.

  22. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    Another great review.

    Vulvalini…

  23. avatar John L. says:

    The local theater’s sign has the movie listed on its outdoor LED sign as:

    “Mad Max: Furry Road”

    I sure hope nobody tells them…

    1. avatar DrVino says:

      DING! DING! DING! DING! DING! DING! DING! DING! DING! DING!
      Winner! Winner! Chicken Dinner!

    2. avatar Geoff PR says:

      “The local theater’s sign has the movie listed on its outdoor LED sign as:

      “Mad Max: Furry Road””

      A perfect name for the porn parody version…

      1. avatar Landbarger says:

        Except that it’d have to be “Mad Macks: Furry Road” to get far enough away from the copywrited franchise name.

        Still yet…that’d be (arguably) even more appropriate for lesbian truckers, which is the obvious direction to spin a porn parody.

  24. avatar MeRp says:

    The movie was ok… but it diverged severely from the feel/spirit of the original 3, at least to my sensibilities. And, no, it wasn’t the strong female characters; both Road Warrior and Beyond Thunderdome had significant, strong female characters, and it wasn’t the bizarre localized subcultures; once again Road Warrior and Beyond Thunderdome had these, even Mad Max, to a lesser extent did as well. I think part of it was a feeling of total disconnectedness to the pre-apocolyptic world; the original, I think, was set just pre-apocolyptic and the second two tied themselves very strongly to the original. Another part was just that it seemed like they were trying to re-do Road Warrior but bigger; the bad guys gang was bigger and more powerful (and had 2 extra gangs with it); the good guys were smaller and had less of a chance (so bigger risk). I also disliked that the signature Mad Max car was only his for all of a couple seconds, then got entirely blown to bits by the end; wtf is Mad Max w/o his police interceptor?!

    1. avatar Cubbie says:

      That was the worst part of the film – watching his Interceptor go to pieces. Hopefully Max was heading out from the Citadel to fix it up before the next sequel.

  25. avatar Tommycat says:

    People watch action movies for the plot?

  26. avatar Fug says:

    It isn’t the same without Mad Mel. It is probably the most inauthentic reboot since Conan, to hell with it and the hype surrounding it. It is really bad in comparison to the originals, which were amazing for their time. The feminist overtones in the script are bizarre, completely out of place and they ruin the film. Anyone who says otherwise just does not get it.

  27. avatar Swarf says:

    Some people are just desperate to be offended. They’re the same ones who think there is some sort of War On Christmas that isn’t just a part of Bill O’Reilly’s fever dream/fantasy.

    And then they accuse liberals of being too PC.

  28. avatar Sergei says:

    This review is TRYING WAY TOO HARD to find something that isn’t there.

  29. avatar Cubbie says:

    What’s not to like about women on bikes with guns! Trifecta!

    I had read about the potential feminism prior to seeing the film but found it to be a lot of bark with no bite. Women who defend themselves from a raping warlord is a good thing in my book. Sure one can make comparisons to the originals (Mel was better) or to Miller’s leftist leanings, but in itself the movie is a great action flick that shows the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy, or girl, with a gun and a really big truck.

  30. avatar Cubbie says:

    Also, Ralph, it’s hardly a leftist’s wet dream when everyone has a gun.

    (And there is still oil – Furiosa was heading out to Gas Town when she took the detour.)

  31. avatar nynemillameetuh says:

    For the price of today’s movie tickets I could just go back to school and listen to feminists bash men. This is Hollywood’s revenge against Mel Gibson. No more, no less.

    1. avatar Spoooghett says:

      Don’t believe everything you hear, the movie is good despite what all the half-whit reviewers are saying. I did not consider it a feminist manifesto and if you read my other comments you will see why. People are getting so worked up with the idea that the movie may have pro feminism undertones that they are refusing to see it and spouting to other morons what they chose to hear regarding the movie. Go see it, and then form an opinion.

  32. avatar pg2 says:

    Haven’t seen the movie, some reviews said it was feminist wet-dream?

    1. avatar Mister Fleas says:

      There is a grain of truth to that, but it was not overbearing in the film.

      “Mad Max is a Feminist Film”
      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/aap/article-3080603/Mad-Max-feminist-film-Theron.html

      There was however a very odd bit of dialogue in the middle of the movie where one of Immorten Joe’s pregnant wives discusses with an old woman her fears that her unborn baby will look like the father, an “ugly” man. The old woman consoles her by telling her the “baby could be a girl”(????????). Like gender would improve a baby’s looks. It was probably the screenwriters’ views of the relative worth of males and females or something.

      1. avatar Spoooghett says:

        That is the mindset of the characters, not the agenda of the film. The women don’t like men because almost all of the men in the area follow psychotic warlords and slaughter each other all the time.The reason why Furiosa doesn’t believe in Valhalla and all that is because she wasn’t raised on those beliefs, she was stolen as an older child. The women would have been just as bad as the men if they were in the same circumstance.

      2. avatar pg2 says:

        I’ll never be certain, generally avoid remakes, especially remakes of decent older movies. My experience is that most remakes suck because they take a well made product, and turn it into a vehicle to push current social formulas, barely resembling the original product.

        1. avatar Ary says:

          That’s been the case overarching for the past 15-20 years for film, but this has, in my book as a film fan, a 1950’s-early1970’s post apoc aficionado, and lover of the first three, been the rare exception of a good and genuine reboot of the series. It’s true that Max’s interceptor was pretty much a foot note to the movie (And I really wanted to hear that car again), and it was fairly detached from the per-apacolyptic world, but the setting felt like it took place 5 or more years after Thunderdome. The wasteland is more built up, and the bandits are bigger and tougher and more organized.

          But if you see the film, and pay attention you’ll see allot of tropes and tricks from 1970’s and 80’s film that haven’t been around for a while. Along with some modern writing and film techniques that are in vogue to let the scenery tell the story in many ways, and keep the plot coherent.

          Hope that helps, it’s definitely worth the see, I’d give up 4 or 5 excursions to the range to see it again.

  33. avatar Roger says:

    One important thing this review left out is Coma, The Doof Warrior – a blind dude, suspened by bungie cords, with an electric guitar that doubles as a flamethrower, hanging from the front of a truck made almost entirely of speakers.

    The speakers, guitar, and flamethrower were all fully functional, and the actor was a real guitarist.
    http://www.mtv.com/news/2161513/mad-max-fury-road-guitar-player-doof-warrior-colin-gibson/

    I don’t care what you’re film’s message is, that alone is worth the price of admission.

  34. avatar Lurker_of_lurkiness says:

    Yeah I felt there was a little much Charlie hypocriton.

    Good insane film, but I wouldn’t have paid to see it if my other choice wasn’t pitch perfect 2 bleh

  35. avatar tdiinva says:

    The Mad Max franchise got Gibson noticed but “The Year of Living Dangerously” is the movie that really put Gibson on the map as an actor.

  36. avatar DickDanger says:

    Saw it. Loved it. Didn’t have any hope in this thing being good. Thought it would be just another “this used to cool, make a sequel/ redo” Hollywood cash-in. But, I was wrong. They captured the stylized insanity of the original. Valvilini or what ever? I chocked that up to the borderline-fantasy setting and styling of the film. Society of only women. Why? ’cause Apocalypse, that’s why. Same reason Star wars gets away with “The Force? ’cause Space, that’s why.”

  37. avatar C says:

    Terrible, terrible movie in which teenagers huffing spray paint is a major plot device and a supporting villain wears nipple clamps to town.

    1. avatar Swarf says:

      Totally. Nipple clamps are strictly a home accessory.

      How gauche.

      1. avatar C says:

        Don’t play with your nips in public. It doesn’t go over well. Learned that one the hard way.

    2. avatar Spoooghett says:

      Just because something isn’t your style doesn’t mean its terrible. Consider what makes a movie great; plot, acting, cinematography, and music. This movie did all these things well. It’s like me saying all hip hop is garbage because I only like classic rock, of course that’s not true.

      1. avatar C says:

        If what you saw was well done, we watched different movies.

  38. avatar Yellow Devil says:

    I think I enjoyed the review more than I will the film.

    For everyone’s belly-aching of the reviewer’s comments regarding “feminism”, he still gave it 4 out of 5 bullets.

  39. avatar JWM says:

    I’ll wait til it’s 5.95 at Rasputins. Then if I think it’s crap it won’t hurt so much to toss it.

  40. avatar Ben says:

    I don’t think this one’s for me. There’s a little bit more to modern males besides gratuitous violence. Sure we love Rambo but there’s a point to the killing, explosions and death on the screen. Plus I’m honestly not interested in women cast in unrealistic roles. So, I’ll pass on this movie. People need to ask themselves why there’s never been a Wonder Woman movie? She’s only been on TV and that’s where she’ll stay.

    1. avatar Aerindel says:

      You need to read some more reviews, you have this movie all wrong.

    2. avatar Spoooghett says:

      There is no “wonder women” is this movie. Charlize’s character’s abilities are realistic of someone in her position ( she drives a war rig, meaning she is a very high ranking commanding officer). The fight scene is very realistic considering Max is both muzzled and restricted by chains, while being beat upon by 5 different women. The old women are held to a high regard because they are much wiser than the other clans and have good leadership. They hate men but that is not the agenda of the movie, that is simply their characters. You should’t form your opinion before actually experiencing something, much how most anti gunners hate guns even though they’ve never shot one and don’t know anything about them.

  41. avatar Kendahl says:

    Of the Mel Gibson Max Max movies, The Road Warrior was the only one I liked. My local public library will probably buy a copy of the new one. I’ll check it out and watch it at home.

  42. avatar ad-lib says:

    does the reviewer not know there were THREE Mad Max movies prior to this one?

  43. avatar ropingdown says:

    RD, you write ’em, I’ll gladly read them. There’s definitely, I find myself supposing, an echo in that skill of many many cases summarized for effect.

    How fitting that you conclude Mad Max: Fury Road “is Charlize Theron’s movie and should have been titled Fast and Furiosa.” It is not so far-fetched to see the War Boys as simply stereotypical Dutch/Afrikans young men, diseased not physically but spiritually, the boys of Charlize’s youth, country boys strong in body but trapped in the beliefs of apartheid. Joe, the violent boss in control of the farm, of the water for a farm in an arid land, fits Charlize’s father well enough, and the farm in Benoni on which Charlize grew up…to the age of 13…or 15 if you count two years at boarding school. Just short of her 16th birthday Charlize’s mother shot to death Charlize’s drunk and violent father. There were ambiguities in that event. I do not doubt these linger. Charlize’s first speaking role in a film came just a few years later in a piece primarily about hit men (Two Days in the Valley).

    It was even so in Charlize’s real life, that mmediately after the homicide of her father came almost instant liberation for Charlize, travel to the Green Place, taken to be “either a paradise on Earth or a pot farm just outside of Melbourne” or to New York and California, where Charlize struck career gold by throwing a tantrum in the face of a bank teller’s obstinance…a tantrum observed by a successful Hollywood agent. The rest is history.

    She condemns the private ownership of most guns, though it was a private gun that actually saved her mother and her from death or maiming at the hands of her father, if that is indeed what happened. (I assume the record is accurate.) In TTAG terms, had Charlize’s mother not had a gun in her hands that night, and accepting that she was indeed under mortal threat, Charlize and her mother would sadly have become fit subjects for an “It should have been a DGU.” Does Charlize live with doubt that the trigger needed to be pulled that night? What else could drive her into the conflicted pairing: her film actions versus her off-camera polemics?

    One minute dad was the tyrant, no expectation of change in that. The next instant he was six feet under and Charlize was in Italy, New York, Miami, and California very rapidly attracting the attentions of influential show-biz people. The pivot from farm life and a rural boarding school to….Hollywood, was remarkably quick, occurring over a mere four-and-a-half years. Two beautiful women with a gun facing an aggressive violent drunken tyrant of a man. Almost a film in itself.

    1. avatar Montesa_VR says:

      My understanding is that her father came home drunk and agitated, together with his brother, and started firing a shotgun into the home and threatened to kill both Charlize and her mother. “The actress’s father then fired his gun into her room, and that’s when her mother grabbed her own handgun and shot and killed her husband and wounded his brother.

      Though her father was dead, Charlize said she knew her mother had no other choice. “I know what happened,” she told Sawyer. “And I know that if my daughter was in the same situation, I would do the same thing.”

  44. avatar jojo says:

    TIL: some guy named Ralph saw a different fury road than I did.

    http://www.slashfilm.com/mad-max-masculinity/

    Yeah, there’s a message. But, there’s also a plot. And both are good.

  45. avatar Spoooghett says:

    I disagree with the whole feminist agenda claim. In the movie it seems to favor the old women over any of the men but not simply because they are women, the Vulvalina are significantly older than anyone else on the wasteland and are much wiser, therefore they don’t give in to the new foolish human-made religious beliefs and have much better leadership than anyone else. Multiple women are brutally killed and they don’t make it a unnecessarily big deal, they treat as if it happens all the time and should’t be dwelled upon. If anything this movie treated both women and men equally, unlike most action movies. Your comments regarding the fight scene between Furiosa and Max are invalid, considering that Furiosa is an incredibly tough for a woman (she drives a war rig, she probably had to kill a lot of people to achieve that position) and max has a both a sharp and clunky muzzle on and is chained (while being beat on by models, it was like 5 to one), it would have been much less realistic if Max just kicked the snot out of everyone all the time no matter the handicaps. The weapon handling in the movie was pretty great, the scene where max fires 3 shots around furiosa’s head was both surprising and intense. The only hiccup I can remember is when Furiosa refers to the SKS’s magazine as a clip, I’ll let that one slide considering you do use clips to load the magazine. All in all excellent action movie, people need to stop getting their panties in a bunch just there is an all women’s group who has better leadership and is more wise than the other groups in the area.

  46. avatar haird says:

    Anaconda, not Python.

  47. avatar Randee says:

    What a disappointingly lukewarm review from an absolute masterpiece of a movie. I’m hardly alone in my opinion as shown by the 98% Rottentomatoes score.

    Any mangina who feels threatened by the strong females in this movie should quit bitching. I can’t fathom how any man could find himself disadvantaged versus women, with the world already so vastly tilted in our favor. If despite all the advantages given by his gender, a man STILL finds himself oppressed by women, he has got to be nothing more than an utterly pussy-fearing insecure weakling or a closet self-hating homosexual.

  48. avatar Vulvalini Pubis Jr. says:

    After reading that the chick from the muff monologues had anything to do with this film (seriously, WTF is she doing consulting?!), I instantly knew I was going to stay as far away as I could from this dong-envy piece of crap film. Seriously, the gina monologues chick, seriously?!

    I hope Rosie O’Donnel doesn’t consult on the next “Expendables” film. Then again, Stallone isn’t a retard like Miller has apparently become. And Max is relegated to a friggin’ sidekick in his own franchise! Hollysuck just keeps getting worse and worse and more retarded as the years pass by. Thank God there are people like Robert Rodriquez, Stallone, Tarantino and others of their good ilk, that still make authentic action films and don’t consult with the creator of the Poontang Monologues… that is just the most pathetic thing that I have ever heard a so-called action film director do. I do find the apologists comments for it funny, though, haha. No wonder the “critics” like this movie, they absolutely love celluloid feces like no one’s business.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email