Tuesday, 6 October 2015

Mad Max: Fury Road: Nice … !


5th October, 2015.

Now, it has to be said, I like a film or two, now and again.

Who doesn’t?

After all, I think part of what makes us all human is a desire to tell — and listen to — stories.

All the way back from when — as cavemen/women/persons — we sat around a fire, telling each other of gods and monsters.

All the way to now: when an account with Netflix, Sky or iTunes has replaced the communal fire.

And gods, monsters, myths and legends have been replaced with other things.

Personally … ?   Personally, I’m the same: I like a tale or two.

As, I suspect, do you.

We like stories.

TV.   Books.   Hell, poetic epics!

Oh … and as I think I’m trying to say … movies.

I’ve been looking forward to one for a while, now.

The fourth member of the Mad Max franchise.

The George Miller directed, 2015, film that is … 


And, yes: I think ‘Nice’ may be under-selling it … 

~≈fi≈~

Set in the same universe as previous members of the franchise, Mad Max: Fury Road re-introduces us to Max Rockatansky*: widower, former cop, and survivor in a post-nuclear meltdown Australia.

At the start of the film?

Max is captured by War Boys: members of a cult led by the villainous Immortan Joe†, who heads one of the few parts of the world with a functioning water supply.

Max is captured, and used a live, transportable, blood donor.   For a War Boy called Nux‡.

As Nux, along with the rest of Joe’s army chase Imperator Furiosa^: a Lieutenant of Joe’s, who’s attempting to flee.

It’s only when Furiosa temporary evades capture she stops for a respite, we realise she’s escaped with five of Joe’s slave concubines.

And found that Max, and a badly injured Nux, have caught up with them.

She only realises the pair will come in handy … ?

AFTER a while … 

~≈fi≈~

Now … 

Nice?

Yes, that’s certainly underselling Mad Max: Fury Road.

I realise many will criticise big-budget blockbusters as simple money-making exercises.

Which, to an extent, is a valid point to make about ANY such film: Hollywood is, after all, a business and exists to make a profit.

However?   I can certainly agree that Mad Max: Fury Road is there to make a profit for its producers.

And, in this case?

I think this film does so by being very good.   Mad Max: Fury Road tells us its story visually: showing us its characters thoughts and feeling with minimal dialogue, but extensive use of looks, expression, and glances to camera.

On top of that … ?

It takes visual spectacle — the car chases that are the hallmark, in part, of the franchise — to new highs.   AND features one hell of a strong character, in the shape of Furiosa^.

Personally?

If you don’t see Mad Max: Fury Road, you’ll be missing a very good film …
Mad Max: Fury Road
★★★★












*        Played, this time around, by Tom Hardy.

†        Hugh Keays-Byrne: who made his first appearance in the franchise, in the original Mad Max: he’s Toecutter.   (I watched this one thinking, ‘Oh, yeah … HIM!’)

‡        Nicholas Hoult.

^        Oscar winner, Charlize Theron.   Critics have raved about both Theron’s performance as Furiosa.   I don’t blame them.   Mad Max: Fury Road is not about Max: it’s about Furiosa.   Max only has his name over the proverbial door, as he is, effectively, the narrator: he’s telling us Furiosa’s story.   Frankly?   I don’t know if Ms Theron will get a second Oscar gong for this film.   I couldn’t tell you, one way or the other: I’m NO film expert.   But, between the script, Miller’s direction, and her performance?   I think Ms Theron’s created one of THE characters.   That deserves recognition.

2 comments:

Olga Nunez Miret said...

The machines are fabulous, the bizarre cult is fascinating and yes, Charlize Theron is a great character. I agree it's her story, and by extension, the story of these women. It's a very sad moment when they get to what she thought was the green land and it isn't there any longer (if it ever was). I liked everybody in it and was fascinated by the strange contraptions the baddy wore...It's an upgrade on the old ones but it's close in spirit.

Nik Nak said...

Your right, there, Olga: the look of Joe is unique … !