Mad Max: Fury Road

I have not seen such a crazy movie in a while. It almost looks as if George Miller shot his craziest dream the way he’s seen it and lived through it. Nobody talked into it, nobody interfered with it and he just did it exactly the way he wanted. You can feel the madness, helplessness and despair of the post-apocalyptic world even two thousand light years far from you. When it comes to acting, Tom Hardy, Nicholas Hoult and Charlize Theron are a sure bet. Nevertheless, some moments in the movie were so crazy that I was not able to process them and the only thing I was left with after those scenes was a bewildered face which still could not comprehend what it had seen. However, one thing is for certain. I have not seen such a well-filmed action, where digital effects fade in comparison to the real action ride, in a long time. If I even saw anything like that in this millennium. Hard to say. I think I didn’t. (20/05/2015)

Thirty years is a long time, and George Miller has left the original Mad Max far behind. Not only is Mel Gibson surprisingly sorely missed, given that Tom Hardy's hesitant grumbling moments simply don't work at all, but Fury Road draws on the worst of the echoes of the original trilogy. Namely, the usual bizarreness, flatness of characters, and the fact that it's mostly just about one city and its fate. The fact that this time it's done in a grandiose way through to the last shot results in an audiovisual delight led by a breathtaking motorcycle raid, but without at least one truly interesting character, it's a massacre that simply doesn't mean anything to me outside the basic action layer. (27/05/2015)

I've never been a big fan of movies with big attractions and effects and it's just something I'm not into. However, every now and then I let myself be enticed by dazzling visuals, as evidenced by my rating of the first Pirates of the Caribbean. However, I need a meaningful story and well-written characters for that. In the case of Mad Max: Fury Road, there is practically no story, the characters' motivations are, to put it mildly, weak, and the characters themselves serve only as tools for the director to shape an endless series of action scenes and evoke the simplest of emotions. They are mere controlling elements of the vehicles, ready to be attackers or victims for the entertainment of the audience. The mythos of the depicted world is highly reduced, and it is clear that the director does not expect anyone to ask questions or, God forbid, use their brain while watching his film. You would search in vain for any logical structure in the world depicted by him. While in the case of the new circus, there is a tendency to build a plot from uncomplicated acrobatic acts, to tell a story, and thus move towards theater and film art, Mad Max, on the other hand, operates on the principle of a classic circus performance. Here, the action genre has stripped away all impurities and exposed itself in its essence. Mad Max will be appreciated by viewers focused on dynamism and action, top-notch acrobatics, and choreography. For the target audience, the film can offer excellent camera work and clear editing, beautiful women, machines with powerful engines, and adrenaline. This is not nothing, and I understand that it can excite many male viewers. But I need a lot more for a film experience. Overall impression: 30%. (15/08/2017)

It seems that someone at Warner Bros must have gone mad because to approve budget in the amount of an expensive blockbuster for a 70-year-old director who has not made any feature film (let alone action or high-budget) for almost twenty years, that even includes bizarre scenes (breast milk, flamethrower guitar!) "from the world after the fall of values" filled with psychedelic metal opera/road movie madness about mad guys (on top of that hidden "remake" of the General), which is a continuation of his own amateurish “Grindhouse-like" cult post apocalypses trilogy, it requires a lot of courage. What is the most surprising is not the above-mentioned but rather fact that the new Mad Max is not a ridiculous dull follow-up or an indecent smooth derivative of the original trilogy, but it is an unusually confidently made straightforward (not to be confused with dull!) "dirty movie" (basically a mix of the ending of the second movie extended to full-length footage, Doomsday, Wages of Fear and Spaghetti Western in an unprecedented and a world that is depicted in detail where madness is the standard and not the eccentricity) with playfully inventive and imaginative non-stop action, which is not just an empty mandatory filler, as it is typical for most blockbusters today, but there is something special about it and moves the story forward; moreover, it way it is shot is captivating, independent and clear. Thanks to which the fourth Max movie becomes an instant genre classic. It will take you back to a time when this type of film did not mean over-the-top CGI adventures with no a stuntman (let alone an actor) at all. On the contrary, this movie has everything that a great movie of 80s show have in all respects. The only difference is the possibilities and budget corresponding to the 21st century and with the best action heroine "who is not just a guy with breasts" from the times of Ripley from the first Alien. It is sad that such a movie is only a kind of unrepeatable studio anomaly, but because of this we should admire (of even love) the fourth Max even more. PS: Refined Mad Max: Fury Road Black and Chrome Edition is a great watch, which is easy to believe that Miller wanted it like this from the beginning. (13/05/2015)