Quote :

"Wasn't Waterworld just Mad Max with boats"

More road warrior than mad max, but yes. That's why it was so great.

Also, the extended/directors cuts are much better than the theatrical version.

4/2/2015 11:02:15 AM

Not sure if I like this trailer or not. I have no clue what is going on. Looks like a very long death race.


III

4/2/2015 11:17:02 AM

This is getting great reviews.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2015/05/11/review-mad-max-fury-road-is-an-action-movie-masterpiece/

Quote :

"I cannot overstate the quality of the mayhem we see onscreen, both in terms of the vehicular carnage and how much each crash and near miss matters in terms of the story being told. There are real artistry and poetry to the onscreen chaos. This is a spectacular action picture that slowly morphs into an out-and-out great film."

Going to have a Mad Max marathon before going to see it.

5/11/2015 7:29:58 PM

This is being haled as one of the best action movies in the last 10 years by some very credible people.

5/12/2015 3:09:37 AM

I am excite.

5/12/2015 8:58:41 AM

I too am ridiculously excited about this one. Currently sitting at 97% on rotten tomatoes (only 38 reviews so far, but still, that's 37 out of 38 positive). My birthday is Saturday and I will be going to see this to celebrate.

5/12/2015 9:15:07 AM

^ 98% after 60 reviews now

so hyped for this

5/13/2015 12:11:05 PM

Lol, this is one of my favorite youtube reaction videos ever.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fk9yPZX_NM

5/13/2015 12:49:33 PM

stoked

http://www.avclub.com/article/mad-men-mad-mad-max-having-mad-women-219391

5/13/2015 8:47:58 PM

Book Of Eli meets Twisted Metal.

But so much better than you can even imagine.

5/15/2015 1:19:31 AM

Damn, now I gotta see it today

5/15/2015 10:25:04 AM

Going tomorrow.

Girlfriend wants to come with just to drool over Tom Hardy for 2 hours.

5/15/2015 10:29:34 AM

May is gonna be a busy movie month for me and my wife. She(and I, really) wanna see Pitch Perfect 2...I wana see this and we both kinda wanna see that Aloha movie.

5/15/2015 10:36:12 AM

I cant believe how universal the praise is. Crazy good praise too.

5/15/2015 3:21:05 PM

Was FUCKING AWESOME

5/15/2015 10:47:51 PM

Nonstop action. Couldn't catch my breath. It was so intense that the projector in my auditorium seriously turned off and had to be rebooted. Great movie though, incredible stunts and barely any CGI at all. Not as good as the Road Warrior in my opinion but better than the first and Thunderdome.

The dude with the flamethrower guitar was my favorite part.

Also, someone get Nux some fucking chapstick.

[Edited on May 16, 2015 at 12:13 AM. Reason : ]

5/15/2015 11:46:39 PM

Yeah that was amazing, totally delivered. Saw it in DBOX-3D.

5/16/2015 7:41:34 AM

So, I haven't seen Age of Ultron yet either, and if I got a chance to see one, should it be this movie or Ultron? I really want to see both, but that much time in a theater just isn't in the cards for me.

5/16/2015 8:51:09 AM

I haven't seen Ultron either. As much as I wanted Avengers 2 after Avengers, I think all the comic book movies that came out in-between burned me out on the genre. I bought tickets to this on an impulse after reading a few posts of impressions on a forum.

[Edited on May 16, 2015 at 9:00 AM. Reason : .]

5/16/2015 8:59:51 AM

^^Ultron was alright...but i'd prolly see this in a theatre over the avengers.

5/16/2015 11:36:10 AM

they're both good movies ... but I think the epicness of the fight scenes lies in mad max more than avengers, so I'd say it'd be more beneficial to see mad max in theaters if you had to choose one ...

5/16/2015 12:20:28 PM

Quote :

"the projector in my auditorium seriously turned off"

How'd you watch it there? Is it on the internets?

5/16/2015 7:34:59 PM

Did you really not even bother finishing to read the sentence?

Quote :

"had to be rebooted"

5/16/2015 8:10:16 PM

^in your snarkiness to point out his snarkiness...you've proved to be too snarky

5/17/2015 8:09:34 AM

I hope other film makers take note of this movie's critical success (and hopefully box office success) and understand that people are tired of movies filled with CGI. Because deep down, no matter how great the CGI is, we know it's fake, and that has an impact.

Just watched about a 2 minute short on CNN with some of the behind-the-scenes filming, and its incredible to see them making some of the scenes and wonder how the actors/actresses didn't get maimed or killed.

But then again 25 years ago, that's how they did it all the time.

5/17/2015 10:27:13 AM

^ It's incredibly hard to do the MCU and DC movies without CGI. Having said that, Vision in the latest Avengers installment was done with practical effects. So, yeah, there's that.

5/17/2015 11:08:14 AM

Nolan's batman movies had both critical and box office success, while being a comic movie, and using mostly practical effects. It also helps to have good actors and a coherent plot so you don't have to distract the audience with tons of CGI. Fury Road really had it all. It's one of those movies that exposes the true contrarians or film snobs. If you don't have mostly positive things to say about this movie then you shouldn't be a film critic lol. It's like a food critic who thinks bacon tastes bad.

5/17/2015 12:40:53 PM

Batman would be one of the best choices for all practical effects because at it's very core lies the fact that Batman is just a normal guy with no super powers. Of course, to pull off other films like antman coming up, some cgi will be needed.

Having said that, it would be cool to see a Wes Anderson AntMan. I bet he would build tons of real-life miniature effects.

5/17/2015 1:02:02 PM

Quote :

"Did you really not even bother finishing to read the sentence?"

Sure did, but the rebooting part isn't really pertinent. Guess he doesn't really have his *own* auditorium like some do on here.

5/17/2015 1:15:01 PM

^wtf are you talking about? When I said "my auditorium" you really thought I meant that I owned my own auditorium? I meant the auditorium that I was sitting in at the cinema. I thought that was quite clear.

5/17/2015 2:31:16 PM

I thought "auditorium" could describe the decked out dedicated home theater rooms many on here have. Guess not.

[Edited on May 17, 2015 at 2:43 PM. Reason : It's nothing to get mad about.]

5/17/2015 2:39:19 PM

"The projector in my auditorium" was an odd way to say what you meant...

5/17/2015 3:26:33 PM

to be fair ... as I'm in med school I only associate "auditorium" with classroom ... so I thought you bootlegged it and were watching it in class or some shit

5/17/2015 6:35:26 PM

Auditorium is technically the area in a theater where an audience sits. When I hear auditorium I immediately think theater. Although I guess you could say the projector isn't actually in the auditorium portion of the theater.

5/18/2015 12:25:34 AM

I loved it. Didn't pretend to be anything else other than a Mad Max movie. The lack of CGI is apparent, and definitely adds a lot to the movie.

My girlfriend went in not knowing much about the series, and immediately upon getting home started reading up on the previous movies to get the backstory. We're going to sit down and watch at least 2 and 3 sometime soon. She was gasping and gripping my arm hard during a lot of the stunt scenes, which to me speaks to the realism over apparent CGI.

5/18/2015 8:18:22 AM

I am really disappointed in Rotten Tomatoes (movie critics in general) lately. I am sure this is a good movie, but giving it a 98% is as ridiculous as them giving Selma a 99%.

Please compare:

Godfather I/II - 99%
Memento - 92%
The Conversation - 98%
Star Wars: Ep V - 96%
Saving Private Ryan - 93%
The Insider - 96%


You can't honestly expect me to believe the only movie out of those that is better than Max Max IV is The Godfather. How many people think Selma and The Godfather are equal movies? Is there money skewing critics now or are critics simply not as harsh these days? I believe internet/blog critics may have a lot to do with this trend and the fact people aren't going back to rate old movies.


Take a look at the Top 100 Movies: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/top/bestofrt/

Most of those movies that aren't in the last ~20 years are epic films that anyone will know. Now look at the ones from the last ~20 years....



[Edited on May 18, 2015 at 12:04 PM. Reason : _]

5/18/2015 11:37:02 AM

I guess you don't realize what a Rotten Tomatoes score really is? It's just a ratio of people that reviewed it as a good movie vs. those that reviewed it as below-average.

5/18/2015 11:45:22 AM

Quote :

"but giving it a 98% is as ridiculous as them giving Selma a 99%. "

Yeah it's two aggregate scores of reviewers (news papers, popular critics, etc) and readers (you and I).

98% critics liked it because 228 critics reviewed it. 4 didn't like it so that's 98% (224/228).

92% of readers liked it etc because of the 48,225 of people who saw it 92% of them liked it.

5/18/2015 11:54:09 AM

haha, I know how Rotten Tomatoes works, I am simply talking about the scores. I didn't know I needed to explain how it worked in my post in order to satisfy you two. I mentioned the critics because I am comparing old/older movies and I would assume the number of user reviews would be very unproportionate in comparison.

How about you comment on the movies mentioned?


Godfather User Reviews: 724,697
Mad Max IV User Reviews: 48,225



[Edited on May 18, 2015 at 12:12 PM. Reason : _]

5/18/2015 12:03:31 PM

Quote :

"I am really disappointed in Rotten Tomatoes (movie critics in general) lately."

No, you clearly don't understand how it works. Critics aren't rating Mad Max 9.8 out of 10 on average. Most of the positive reviews are B's & 3/5. Nothing about a high Rotten Tomatoes score indicates its quality over another "fresh" scored movie other than there were a higher amount of people that rated and scored it as positive. There are more "critics" now and more people on the internet that have seen recent movies compared to older movies.

5/18/2015 12:27:32 PM

Quote :

"haha, I know how Rotten Tomatoes works, I am simply talking about the scores. "

RT is not an accumulation of the absolute scores, but rather on whether or not the reviews were positive or negative. So, giving that, one can not use the RT percentages as a scale to rank movies based on how they were critically perceived. RT basically just serves as a way to standardize all of the different critical metrics (and there are tons from stars, to numbers, to smiley faces) into positive or negative results for the general public to use as a universal metric. It is actually often used to directly compare movies in terms of which one was critically reviewed better, but this is a flawed technique that is still currently in use.



[Edited on May 18, 2015 at 12:59 PM. Reason : r]

5/18/2015 12:57:43 PM

I use it as one indicator of whether I'm going to pay $15 for a movie in the theater (among other reviews, etc). I'm not necessarily going to say a movie that's rated 98% on RT is better than a movie that was rated 92%. It just means a slightly higher percentage of reviewers liked it.

[Edited on May 18, 2015 at 1:02 PM. Reason : movie]

5/18/2015 1:01:56 PM

BlackDog just go see it and form your own opinion, it's amazing...

5/18/2015 1:17:36 PM

Quote :

"No, you clearly don't understand how it works. Critics aren't rating Mad Max 9.8 out of 10 on average. Most of the positive reviews are B's & 3/5. Nothing about a high Rotten Tomatoes score indicates its quality over another "fresh" scored movie other than there were a higher amount of people that rated and scored it as positive. There are more "critics" now and more people on the internet that have seen recent movies compared to older movies."

Fresh: 225
Rotten: 4

It is not a mystery how this works... It is a thumb up or a thumb down. Nobody ever said they are giving a 98% out of 100%. You are the one drawing these conclusions on your own for whatever reason. It doesn't make my point any less valid about comparing the movie scores.. If it did, there would be no reason for RT to exist.

Once again, can anyone discuss what I actually pointed out instead of trying to act like you are explaining how Rotten Tomatoes scores work?

Quote :

"It just means a slightly higher percentage of reviewers liked it."

Exactly, thus meaning it should be a better movie.


The only thing that I typed confusing in any way was saying "giving Selma a 99%". I should have said the total accumulation of positive reviews vs. negative reviews was higher for Selma vs. The Godfather.



[Edited on May 18, 2015 at 2:02 PM. Reason : _]

5/18/2015 1:47:36 PM

This one of the more ridiculous tangents I've seen in a while.

Get back to the movie, this isn't chit chat

5/18/2015 1:49:43 PM

I agree, I was trying to point out something very simple, but aimorris wants to explain RT score methodology to us.

Forget it, I thought others would find it interesting, but now I don't care.

5/18/2015 1:56:11 PM

The suspended flaming guitar guy was pretty awesome. Apparently the flaming guitar was 100% real.

5/18/2015 1:56:15 PM

^another reason this movie is fucking amazing.

5/18/2015 3:02:33 PM

5/18/2015 3:16:24 PM

90% of total effects were all practical and not cg.

150 stunt men used.

48 hrs of footage edited into movie, over 2X the amount of a normal film.

[spoilers]





But its a weird movie.

I had forgotten what mad max world is like. It took me a second to catch up to the crazyness!

5/18/2015 3:42:44 PM