Movies

"Mad Max: Fury Road"

By May 16, 2015No Comments

MMFRTom Hardy and some prob­ably very uncom­fort­able stunt­men. The movie really kind of IS about his char­ac­ter, maybe, I think. 

Last week an online movie colum­nist pos­ted an early review of Kent Jones’ doc­u­ment­ary Hitchcock/Truffaut, and in the com­ments sec­tion there was a lot of “they-don’t-make-’em’-like-that-anymore” sigh­ing over a per­ceived ebbing of Hitchcock-influence on con­tem­por­ary film­makers. Now, I sup­pose that if we’re strictly talk­ing about a dearth of film­makers inter­ested in craft­ing movies that play and feel like Hitchcock movies, or that spe­cific­ally treat what we refer to as Hitchcockian themes, then maybe, yeah, we don’t get a lot of that. 

If, on the oth­er hand, we’re talk­ing about film­makers who com­bine a vir­tu­osic grasp of tech­nique with an avid pas­sion for test­ing the elasti­city of film lan­guage, we aren’t doing so badly nowadays. Certainly more than a few of the dir­ect­ors who par­ti­cip­ate in Jones’ documentary—I’m think­ing of David Fincher, Wes Anderson, and, yes, Martin Scorsese among the Americans, for instance—fit into that cat­egory. (I admire the work of James Gray, yes, but I also think he’s less bravura by design than the afore­men­tioned.) Steven Soderbergh, too. Sometimes Steven Spielberg. Sometimes Francis Ford Coppola. Michael Bay even sort of fits into this cat­egory, in a “Bad Kirk” kind of way. And there are oth­er examples, old and young, dotting the cinema land­scape, all over the world. 

George Miller’s Mad Max: Fury Road is a really mag­ni­fi­cent slab of cinema lan­guage at its most effect­ively elast­i­cized. I’ve seen it twice with­in four days, once in 3D, and again in super-big-screen 2D (I prefer the lat­ter, but the 3D was­n’t bad), and both times I felt pos­it­ively trans­por­ted. The speed­i­ness and the sus­pense of the sim­ul­tan­eous car chases/firefights/hand-to-hand com­bats and more had, for me, the effect of being sus­pen­ded; meta­phor­ic­ally hold­ing my breath and wait­ing to get pulled out and up into a place to exhale. Every shift of cine­mat­ic gear accom­plished by Miller does that job of manip­u­la­tions perfectly.

I also love the movie’s unapo­lo­get­ic­ally bizarre and grot­esque imagery, which draws a straight line all the way back to Lang’s Metropolis and provides, as A.O. Scott poin­ted out in his New York Times review, a bra­cing rebuke to the bright cor­por­ate bland­ness of the Marvel Universe films. I love the way it lets it images do the talk­ing: show­ing the lumpy, pasty, tumor­ous torso of Immortan Joe semi-camouflaged by a ripped and rippled and medal-covered plastic exo­suit is a far more vivid way of say­ing “The Patriarchy is rot” than, you know, say­ing “The Patriarchy is rot.” I love the clean­li­ness and, yes, the logic of its cir­cu­lar nar­rat­ive; to any­one who finds the final quarter of the movie exhaust­ing, I’m temp­ted to drag out the old clas­sic rock brom­ide “if it’s too loud, you’re too old,” or something. 

Miller and his crew and his money and his act­ors bring to life an unreal world that, as exhil­ar­at­ing as the action con­tained with­in it can be, one is glad to be watch­ing from the remove of a movie theat­er. As with Alexei German’s great Hard To Be A God (the only oth­er 2015 U.S. release I’m as excited to see mul­tiple times as this one), one admires all the per­formers, down the the last extra, not just for their work but for their seem­ing abil­ity to with­stand the depic­ted environment. 

As for the movie’s much-vaunted fem­in­ism, it did­n’t really register for me as such. Which is one of the most com­mend­able things about it, in a sense. There’s nev­er really any ques­tion in the movie as to the cap­ab­il­it­ies of Charlize Theron’s Imperator Furiosa; there’s nev­er a moment in which she has to “prove” her­self, or “earn” the respect of a male. (While Max’s inter­ac­tion with her is ini­tially adversari­al,  any inclin­a­tion Max might have toward under­es­tim­at­ing her is cor­rec­ted very quickly.) Which isn’t to say she does­n’t rep­res­ent an ideal; the scant inform­a­tion the view­er is giv­en about her his­tory makes that plain. Miller does­n’t strut his pro­gress­ive ideo­logy in any way; he does­n’t end the movie with some kind of bald state­ment that, for instance (implied spoil­er alert) a mat­ri­arch­al order is going to make The Citadel a para­dise on earth for the pre­vi­ously down­trod­den. He presents Max and Furiosa as equals, dam­aged war­ri­ors who man­age to help each oth­er out. To say that the movie is more Furiosa’s nar­rat­ive than Max’s is maybe a little too easy; true, Miller pur­pose­fully sets a scene in which Max goes on his most effect­ive ram­page off-screen, but there’s also the fact that Max is the only char­ac­ter in the film whose con­scious­ness the view­er is made to inhab­it for brief peri­ods (not a com­fy place to be, as you might have guessed).

You should see this film soon, and often. 

No Comments

  • Clayton Sutherland says:

    My loc­al theat­ers are only play­ing this one time daily in 2D (4pm). The rest are all the excess­ively over­priced (and under­lit) 3D showings.
    Anyways, this def­in­itely looks to be the action film of the year (if not the dec­ade), so I’m sure I’ll see it a few times. Metropolis is one of my all-time-favourite films, so the visu­al design will be right up my alley.
    The new film also seems like more refined cheese than the earli­er installments.

  • george says:

    Pitch Perfect 2 is reportedly clob­ber­ing Mad Max at the box office.
    Maybe it’s time to cast Anna Kendrick in a super­hero movie. Oops, I for­got – Marvel/Disney (and the rest of the industry) does­n’t think women can open a movie.
    Fury Road has the year’s best trail­er, and the most of the reviews have been all-out raves. I plan to see it ASAP.

  • Oliver_C says:

    After the expli­cit anti-fundamentalist satire of ‘Happy Feet’, did any­body really think Miller was going to keep his women in the kitchen?
    I was ini­tially ambi­val­ent about going to see this, but any­thing that pisses off the MRAs can­’t be all bad. (See also: Michele Bachmann and ‘The Lion King’.) The con­tri­bu­tions of British under­ground comix artist Brendan McCarthy seal the deal.
    My uncle had a bit part in the second ‘Mad Max’ too.

  • Petey says:

    I just wish the uni­ver­sal accol­ades this film is get­ting would bring about a nation­wide the­at­ric­al re-release of Babe: Pig in the City…

  • george says:

    I just wish the uni­ver­sal accol­ades this film is get­ting would bring about a nation­wide the­at­ric­al re-release of Babe: Pig in the City…”
    I’d pay to see TWILIGHT ZONE: THE MOVIE in a theat­er again just for Miller’s “Nightmare at 20,000 Feet” segment.

  • Jesus Lepe says:

    Can’t wait to see this one. However, I’m con­cerned it won’t have the charm of the original.

  • Owain says:

    As much as I like Tom Hardy, Fury Road does sorely lack the huge star cha­risma and bona fide insan­ity of Mel Gibson at its centre.

  • James Keepnews says:

    I was gonna see this ASAP, but now Dr. K has primed me for a double-bill of MM: FR and Hard To Be A God. Maybe round it out with, I don’t know, Begotten?

  • mw says:

    After see­ing the latest Marvel piece of crap, I berated my son for not car­ry­ing out my expli­cit instruc­tion to whack me upside the head the next time I even think about see­ing anoth­er stu­pid super hero movie that I gave him the last time I took him to see a stu­pid Marvel piece of crap.
    Before Mad Max, I told him that if it sucked as much as I feared, he was to whack me upside the head the next time I even con­sidered see­ing anoth­er stu­pid sum­mer action block­buster. It’s prob­ably unfor­tu­nate, but at least one sum­mer action block­buster of the future will get my hardly earned $15 bucks, or whatever. I really enjoyed Mad Max.
    The chaos of the first act was best and worth the tick­et, but there were many oth­er great scenes and no less-than-great scene went on too long. From a cam­era work per­spect­ive, I was impressed with how Miller some­times backed out and showed the majesty of the waste­land dwarf­ing the little people rush­ing head­long to battle down below. And the blue scene with the stilt walk­ers, although brief, was special.
    I also gotta say that my favor­ite char­ac­ter was the war boy who changed sides. The scene where he expects his blood bag to be loy­al to him was priceless.
    I agree with the com­menter above who misses the cha­risma of Mel Gibson. Although I don’t like him per­son­ally, his is the defin­it­ive inter­pret­a­tion of Mad Max. Unlike Hardy, you believed Gibson when he yet again tried to escape the com­fort of com­munity to again roam the waste­land, a sol­it­ary figure.
    But then again, these movies (start­ing with Road Warrior) are much less about Max than they are with how oth­ers cope with the loss of civil­iz­a­tion and the dif­fi­culty of find­ing water, gas­ol­ine and ammunition.
    The pre­vi­ous two were more about the green places, although nev­er pic­tured, than they were about the waste­land. Or, in the par­lance of this one, they were about hope with not much thought of redemp­tion. This one did, nicely, com­plete the circle by mer­ging the one with the other.

  • paris says:

    Assuming you are in New York, what was the super big screen 2D theater?

  • partisan says:

    The one Ivy League film stud­ies pro­fess­or I know has said that this was one of the most bor­ing movies he’s ever seen. And he’s actu­ally an Alexei German fan. I sup­pose my encounter with the ori­gin­al tri­logy is an example of the vagar­ies of movie watch­ing. I saw THE ROAD WARRIOR on VHS in the mid-nineties. I liked it, I sup­pose, but it did­n’t have that strong an effect on me. I sup­pose one reas­on was that by the time I saw it the dysto­pi­an theme had so thor­oughly infused itself into pop­u­lar cul­ture the actu­al movie itself was redund­ant. (Yet that was­n’t my reac­tion to JAWS, which I must have seen for the first time around the same time.) I cer­tainly recall being more struck by THE QUIET EARTH, which was made a few years later, and which I saw a few years earli­er. I saw the MAD MAX the next dec­ade, and THUNDERDOME some­time this dec­ade, and they were less intriguing.

  • Oliver_C says:

    The one Ivy League film stud­ies pro­fess­or I know has said that this was one of the most bor­ing movies he’s ever seen.”
    Like Haig Manoogian said of ‘The Third Man’, “It’s just a thriller.”

  • Petey says:

    I’d pay to see TWILIGHT ZONE: THE MOVIE in a theat­er again just for Miller’s “Nightmare at 20,000 Feet” segment.”
    But now, just by typ­ing that, you’re an accom­plice to murder, george. Why, oh why, would you want to be an accom­plice to murder?
    I’m sure you’re think­ing, well, I’ll get a high-priced law­yer, get acquit­ted, and take the jury out to party. But it won’t play out that way. You’ll be con­victed, and sent off to do hard time. Why, oh why, george?
    (I won’t judge, and I’ll vis­it you and smuggle in a DVD of Breaking the Waves to help make the time pass.)

  • george says:

    Petey, I’ll be glad to get you a high-priced psy­chi­at­rist. You clearly need one.

  • Petey says:

    Petey, I’ll be glad to get you a high-priced psy­chi­at­rist. You clearly need one.”
    Thanks for your gen­er­os­ity. I will await your cash­ier­’s check.
    Who woulda thunk that merely com­ment­ing on Glenn’s blog would PAYZ THA DOCTAS BOI? *
    * (Due to unavoid­able incid­ent­al costs, such as trans­port­a­tion to appoint­ments, meals at expens­ive res­taur­ants, and the like, the amount of your con­tri­bu­tion that will actu­ally go to THA DOCTAS will amount to less than 100%).