What was the last movie you watched?

[Michael Hardner]

Out of curiosity, do you read books or plays?

Exactly. The shark in Jaws was complex too, in that he was a multicellular creature.

[Derek 2.0]

Out of curiosity, do you read books or plays?

Sure, and donate to local theater......why?

[Derek 2.0]

Exactly. The shark in Jaws was complex too, in that he was a multicellular creature.

Are you offering snide commentary on another members artistic tastes and/or sophistication? I would have thought someone with the ability to edit, suspend or ban other members should be at the foremost in setting an example in polite discourse.......

[msj]

I still have to see this version of Mad Max and I love the previous three movies (so 3 out of 4 ain't bad), however, to claim Max is "complex" is laughable.

Yes, CC's claim goes too far - Max is not some one dimensional drooling idiot.

But neither is he a Falstaff, Hamlet, Iago, Lear, or hell, even Edmund from King Lear.

No, really, your claim is beyond hyperbole.

[Derek 2.0]

I still have to see this version of Mad Max and I love the previous three movies (so 3 out of 4 ain't bad), however, to claim Max is "complex" is laughable.

Yes, CC's claim goes too far - Max is not some one dimensional drooling idiot.

But neither is he a Falstaff, Hamlet, Iago, Lear, or hell, even Edmund from King Lear.

No, really, your claim is beyond hyperbole.

Why? Clearly "complex" is both relative and subjective to ones own tastes.......odd that you would offer comment on the character of a movie you've yet to see...

[Michael Hardner]

Are you offering snide commentary on another members artistic tastes and/or sophistication?

How is it snide ? I'm making a comment on a comment, not on a person.

I would have thought someone with the ability to edit, suspend or ban other members should be at the foremost in setting an example in polite discourse.......

Yes I agree.

[Michael Hardner]

No, really, your claim is beyond hyperbole.

I agree with your assessment of this. It is a subjective thing, however you are objectively correct.

[Michael Hardner]

Why? Clearly "complex" is both relative and subjective to ones own tastes

I was being ridiculous in my last post, but...

Yes, the former comment is correct however you didn't say "Mad Max is a complex character compared to...". You (I think) said he was complex. I'm not sure what character he would out-complicate though.

The latter comment, complex is subjective (sic, again I *think*) to ones own tastes. I suppose that's true but again if you're serving up commentary for public consumption, you'd probably expect somebody to be surprised by that statement. Then you could, for effect, quickly explain your offbeat observation.

We don't know you, so we're more likely to assume you're mistaken.

[Derek 2.0]

How is it snide ? I'm making a comment on a comment, not on a person.

You are offering sarcastic commentary in support of another members post directed towards myself..............I can choose to continue with that member (or not) with little to no recourse (if within the defined forum rules)......if I respond in kind to you, I can have my posts edited or be banned......

Hence, an expectation of your position being held in higher regard.

[Derek 2.0]

I was being ridiculous in my last post, but...

Yes, the former comment is correct however you didn't say "Mad Max is a complex character compared to...". You (I think) said he was complex. I'm not sure what character he would out-complicate though.

The latter comment, complex is subjective (sic, again I *think*) to ones own tastes. I suppose that's true but again if you're serving up commentary for public consumption, you'd probably expect somebody to be surprised by that statement. Then you could, for effect, quickly explain your offbeat observation.

We don't know you, so we're more likely to assume you're mistaken.

Why would I do that? I'm not a paid film critic, I was responding in agreement to another members post, all the while in polite fashion......it is you that went down ridiculous road with offensive decorum intending to mock another member's level of artistic taste......

[Michael Hardner]

You are offering sarcastic commentary in support of another members post directed towards myself..............

No, it's your statement that I'm commenting on not you.

...if I respond in kind to you, I can have my posts edited or be banned......

If you think I'm not being objective, please hit 'report' on any post I make and CA will warn me. I do have 1 warning point as a matter of fact.

This is a rather innocuous subject, that being Mad Max as a "complex" character. It's a pretty hard statement to get behind, but you seem like a bright guy - I'd like to hear your rationale. I'm certainly no Film major or even an Arts major.

[Michael Hardner]

it is you that went down ridiculous road with offensive decorum intending to mock another member's level of artistic taste......

Please don't be hurt. I hold your posts in good regard, but that one was a bit of a wowser to me. I have about a 50% expectation that you'd be able to convince me of your point on this, seriously.

[msj]

Since you are unable to appreciate the ridiculousness of Michael's silly post then I know I can discount your opinion about Max's "complexity."

[Michael Hardner]

I know I can discount your opinion about Max's "complexity."

You never know. As I said, there's always the possibility that somebody can rhetoricize some compelling film theory calculus to make you believe that there's something else going on. Surely you have seen similar essays on facebook, cracked.com etc. wherein they explain the *real* meaning of the film/story/character/location.

It's a great time for rhetoric right now...

[Derek 2.0]

This is a rather innocuous subject, that being Mad Max as a "complex" character. It's a pretty hard statement to get behind, but you seem like a bright guy - I'd like to hear your rationale. I'm certainly no Film major or even an Arts major.

I think the theme of the movies (as already outlined) draws heavily upon older Westerns ie Outlaw Josey Wales, the Man with no name series (which is given a nod to in Thunderdome) or old John Ford Westerns like the Searchers or Destry Rides Again (see Thunderdome).........of course such Westerns themselves borrow heavily from Japanese Shinto/Bushido lore.

[Derek 2.0]

Please don't be hurt. I hold your posts in good regard, but that one was a bit of a wowser to me. I have about a 50% expectation that you'd be able to convince me of your point on this, seriously.

I'm not hurt the slightest, I've been called far worse by far better

[Michael Hardner]

I think the theme of the movies (as already outlined) draws heavily upon older Westerns ie Outlaw Josey Wales, the Man with no name series (which is given a nod to in Thunderdome) or old John Ford Westerns like the Searchers or Destry Rides Again (see Thunderdome).........of course such Westerns themselves borrow heavily from Japanese Shinto/Bushido lore.

Ah, yes... the old man of mystery thing. While I see a little more what you're getting at, I don't know that complex is the word you're looking for. Maybe cryptic or enigmatic, something along those lines...

There's a story of Clint Eastwood going through his scripts with a pen and scratching all of his lines out...

[Guest]

I just watched the last two Planet of the Apes movies on Netflix. I had never watched one before. I was pleasantly surprised.

[Derek 2.0]

Ah, yes... the old man of mystery thing. While I see a little more what you're getting at, I don't know that complex is the word you're looking for. Maybe cryptic or enigmatic, something along those lines...

There's a story of Clint Eastwood going through his scripts with a pen and scratching all of his lines out...

I never heard that, the lack of dialogue from Max would draw further similarities to Clint then........

Cryptic or enigmatic sure, you could also add primal and introverted, but the complexity is born from these traits and why the character has adopted them.......from a "normal" man with a wife and child to a leather clad loner riding a horse Supercharged V8 through the desert wasteland, helping those in need even though the character is seeking a sort of absolution from his past through a personal forced isolation.

And to think, all it took was a nuclear war resulting in a breakdown of society to find ones inner humanity.......The living really will envy the dead

[sharkman]

So, who hasn't seen this movie yet? It sounds like there is lots of fans of this series.

[kimmy]

So, who hasn't seen this movie yet? It sounds like there is lots of fans of this series.

I wasn't really a fan of the series before this new movie. I wasn't even aware it was happening until a few weeks ago, and I wasn't really interested in seeing it until the incredibly positive reviews started coming in. I've never heard of an action movie getting such enthusiastic reviews. I think it's almost unprecedented for an action film to get such an overwhelmingly positive response.

I suspect the original movie was mostly a cult favorite. It probably influenced a lot of movies that came after. Is it the first "post apocalyptic" setting that attained mainstream popularity? I don't know.

I doubt there were legions of fans sitting at home thinking "when are we going to get a Mad Max reboot?!" until it actually happened. I think it probably happened because George Miller wanted to do it, not because some studio exec was thinking "there's a massive demand for this that we need to cash in on." Which is cool.

Like, you just know they're going to keep rebooting Batman and Spiderman and Superman and James Bond over and over, because people keep going to see them. You knew that as soon as Christian Bale hung up the cape, they'd be searching for a new Batman; you know that as soon as Daniel Craig hands over his martini shaker they'll be casting a new James Bond. And not necessarily because there's a new story that just needs to be told, but because some movie studio holds the rights to a popular franchise.

I'm all in favor of movies making money, and some of these franchise movies have been terrific-- Skyfall being a prime example. But sometimes they feel incredibly fake-- you can tell that the whole thought process started with "let's cash in on this franchise" and everything else followed. The worst examples I can think of are the GI Joe movies and Transformers.

With Mad Max, it might be a brand with some name recognition, but I'm not sure anybody thought there was a massive public demand for a reboot. I expect that there'll be a lot of interest going forward, because this was a lot of fun. I'm certainly interested in spending more time in their world.

-k

[cybercoma]

Yes, CC's claim goes too far - Max is not some one dimensional drooling idiot.

That's not at all what I said. All I was trying to get at is that the situations in the plots exist without his influence. He's a vehicle for telling the story and conflict of others. He rarely changes or grows as a character. He's just there to advance the plot and create a focal point. It's the other characters who grow and evolve in the stories. I didn't say he was "a drooling idiot." I'm just saying he's more of a plot device than a character who evolves and grows throughout the story, as the main protagonist in stories usually does.

[cybercoma]

Oh and I'm only talking the films past the first Mad Max. In that film Mad Max actually developed as a character.

[cybercoma]

I just watched the last two Planet of the Apes movies on Netflix. I had never watched one before. I was pleasantly surprised.

The first of the reboot I found uninspired, but then I can't stand James Franco and wish the laws of gravity would stop applying to him. The second one was well beyond my expectations. It was actually a very good film that contained excellent social commentary and philosophical explorations.

Edited June 2, 2015 by cybercoma

[Black Dog]

I saw Fury Road. Loved it. And I think I have an idea as to why it's hitting home for so many people. For the past several years the bulk of action/popcorn fare has been, as kimmy mentioned, either superhero movies or reboots of old cartoons (Transformers, TMNT). Among the former, you've got your ponderous, humourless Batman and Superman films that are trying (and failing) to use superhero stories to Ask Important Questions or your Marvel movies that exist solely to perpetuate more Marvel movies. Along comes a movie like Fury Road that pares the summer action movie down to its basic essence: basic plot, lots of action, minimal dialogue yet still managed to deliver better female characters than every single Hollywood blockbuster of the past 25 years and some degree of actual social commentary. Go figure.