Ed's Thoughts - Mad Max: Fury Road

Jack made some compelling arguments against the latest Mad Max film in his full review. As I enjoyed it a fair bit more, I thought I'd give some of my opinions.

A harsh desert landscape, a worn-out interceptor and a familiar man with a different face. The fourth instalment in the Mad Max series, Fury Road, has taken thirty years to get here, and it doesn't mess about. This barren and hostile world is unfettered, ferocious; fuelled by blood and a metric butt-tonne of petrol. The plot is simple, just like the first two, and every single frame is utterly beautiful. I've struggled through many modern action flicks, and I despise the Michael Bay 'splosion-fest model of filmmaking so everything here should be wrong. But it's oh so right.

Fury Road has everything that I look for in contemporary action: isolated settings, eccentric characters and a unique style of filmmaking that only comes around once in a blue moon. Miller harks back to a sorely missed era of filmmaking by utilising primarily practical effects, composited together with minimal CGI to create some visually incredible stunts. Take a look at this glorious B-Roll footage to see what I mean. Yes some of the explosions and crashes are ridiculous, and that definitely changes the level of realism that may be expected from the previous films, but at the same time this is still very much a Mad Max film. Other old-school effects like speed ramping to create the illusion of extreme motion, really do make this feel like a good old 80s action flick.

I do find it a bit sad that Max takes a step back in this film, but I actually thought that Imperator Furiosa was a well fleshed-out, very likable character and really didn't mind that she took the centre stage, along with her equally badass War Rig. The minimal plot was easy enough to follow, without too much exposition, and the blend of the rolling story with impeccably choreographed visual sequences make Fury Road almost operatic in design. It's a highly visual story and when done well, that is an undeniably powerful form of movie making.

Mad Max: Fury Road gave me a slap in the face more powerful than the strongest caffeinated drink (or other...substances...) and I was fixated from beginning to end. It's action-meets-arthouse and everything in between, and easily the best film of the year thus far. I want to hug George Miller for giving this series another shot...but I'd probably get arrested.

Mad Max: Fury Road

The Mad Max franchise has been a wholly Australian series of films. Yeah, Tina Turner was in Beyond Thunderdome, but we try to forget that. The movies focus on Australian's love of cars and our harsh, unforgiving outback. But Fury Road doesn't quite live up to the sleek vision created by Dr George Miller all those years ago and instead drowns in unbelievable landscapes and physical violence that seems out of place.

In the harsh post-apocalyptic world that has come, Max (Tom Hardy) has been captured by the followers of the cult leader Immortan Joe (Hugh Keays-Byrne). Joe's top lieutenant Imperator Furiosa (Charlize Theron) has been sent out to get oil from the nearby Gastown. It is soon revealed that Furiosa has stolen away Joe's harem and he sends out his armies to get them back. Max is sent along with Nux (Nicholas Hoult), who needs Max's blood to survive, but Max soon joins up with Furiosa to help her on her quest.

Now before I get started with any of my thoughts on the movie, I want you to know that I understand that this is supposed to be a mindless bit of entertainment. But that's the thing. Both Mad Max and Mad Max 2 were fun, but they were also better than this. They had simple story-lines with not too much in depth backgrounds going on. Here you are constantly confused by who characters are and what relationship they have to others (let alone figuring out what some of them are).

Miller attempts to capture the brilliance of the second film and leave all that Thunderdome business behind him. And it works to a certain point. Max has minimal dialogue in this movie, just like in that film, and the plot kind of revolves around oil. It takes a lot of time to figure out what exactly is happening in this movie and when you do figure it out, it seems a little disappointing.

Another big thing that I found in this movie is the violence. No, not that I was expecting it to be a peaceful film, but that it is the wrong kind of violence. These movies rely very heavily on car crashes and bashing into each other at high speeds with the occasional gun being shot (careful, you don't want to waste that ammo), but there is an inordinate amount of physical violence taking place. If I want to see hand-to-hand combat, I will watch literally any other action movie. I don't need to see Max get into fisticuffs with anyone, because the mere threat of him punching you will make anyone back down. And what about those car explosions? These are way too over the top. The appeal of the original films was seeing car accidents that were realistic because they were based on Miller's experiences in the Emergency ward of a hospital. Now it just seems like you throw a whole bunch of kerosene in there and that will appeal to audiences.

The acting in the film is pretty minimal. Tom Hardy does his best Mel Gibson impersonation and only gets an Aussie accent half the time. Charlize Theron does play a tough bitch, which is cool, but there isn't great characterisation on her part. Hugh Keays-Byrne is shouty enough, but fails to either scare or excite. Nicholas Hoult's character is a little weasel that is neither here nor there. Joe's harem gets screen time, but no time to properly act because look out, there's a truck exploding.

This is one that you either watch or you don't. It is littered with references to the original films (but don't worry, assumed knowledge isn't needed), as well as references to other classic Australian films, which you will get if you have seen them. Definitely a movie that you watch to chill out to or be revved up by. Your choice.

A Million Ways to Die in the West

There does certainly seem to be a million ways to die in the west, as we constantly being told by Seth MacFarlane's Albert Stark. It's as if he needs to remind the audience of this every five minutes, as though we have forgotten the title of the film we bought a ticket to see. It seems as though MacFarlane has invested a lot in this movie, having written, directed, produced and starred in it, and while it's not entirely unfunny, it isn't quite hilarious the entire way through.

But what more can we expect from the man who created Family Guy. Now I don't want everyone to jump to conclusions and accuse me of hating Family Guy (I do love it), but it is a show known for not being consistently funny. The majority of the jokes in the film are lavatorial in manner and that did appeal to the 10 year old in me, but the jokes that referenced classic western comedies appealed to the film nerd in me.

And there are plenty of references to these comedies. Films like Back to the Future: Part III, Django Unchained and the original western spoof Blazing Saddles are all referenced and done well. I even spotted a homage to probably the best western ever made, The Searchers.

One thing I found slightly distracting was the use of modern slang. Now while I can understand using the f-word (I mean Deadwood used much worse words on a regular basis), some of the language seemed out of place. It was almost like there was a deleted scene at the start in which Stark used a time machine to get back to the old west.

There are a lot of fantastic actors in this film as well. It's a shame they are all underused compared with the role MacFarlane has given himself. Charlize Theron and Liam Neeson are both extremely talented actors and are just used as scenery in scenes with MacFarlane. There are a lot of great cameos, including Gilbert Gottfried, Ryan Reynolds and Ewan McGregor. Bill Maher also does a western themed stand up set.

Verdict: Funny, but I feel as though MacFarlane could share around some of the bigger jokes to his co-stars to make a better film.