Observations about Max in the original trilogy and FR

For any discussions at all relating to the movies

Observations about Max in the original trilogy and FR

Postby Uncle Entity » Tue Jan 30, 2018 11:12 am

My points:

1- Max in MMBT is not insane at all. He's very smart, resourceful and NO MORE driven by vengeance or rage. His belogings are just "THINGS" he needs to survive. And you can apply this very same concept to EACH "MAD MAX MAX MOVIE". They are just belongings. Cars are not the central point of the Mad Max movies, sorry. They are just horses or cowboy guns, they are just the wise and inventive equivalent of the Western movie imaginery. Not the central point integral to Max's journey as human person or hero.
In MMBT, the "original" Max comes full circle. He's sane again. And he's willing to save people far over his "dark side". That "dark side" definitely died in the Thunderdome. Watching Blaster's true face and nature reminded him of the fact he is NOT like everyone else in the Wasteland. It was a brutal awekening, of course, but necessary. He's human.
There's a lot of conceptual violence in MMBT and the movie is perfect the way it is.

2- Max in FR is a different Max. Glory is just ONE of the MANY ghosts produced by his omnipresent PTSD. Glory is not the only trauma. She's just a molecula in a sea of traumas.
He's a different Max. It's an alternate Max belonging to an alternate timeline where MM, RW and MMBT never happened or at least occurred in a VASTLY different way.
"FURY ROAD" is a perfect movie the way it is. The "new" Max used to be a cop in the old cities. He experienced many traumas that made him become "almost totally" crazy. He lives in a state of an on-and-off PTSD hallucinatory condition. His car is just a car. It's his old Police car. That's it. He did not "rebuild" the Interceptor. What you see on-screen is the one and only Pursuit Special in Max's life. It's a new universe and the events of "The Road Warrior" never happened.

Generally speaking, it doesn't make sense the fact that Max wants to rebuild the Interceptor. It's a stupid idea. The character doesn't care. And even if he would care about it, you cannot realistically rebuild a car in the Wasteland. There is no material, no way.
Original Max needs to survive. That's his only "insanity", his "obsession".
The comics, the videogames, the novelizations are not CANON, no matter how much Miller or anyone else is "involved". What you see on-screen is what you get. The creature goes beyond the creator.

The movies are perfect the way they are. And they are 100% relatable.

On a side note, he is called "MAD" Max - in the original timeline - because he is a daredevil. Because he goes against everyone and everything he doesn't agree with. He is a lone wolf, he is an "accident". He is dangerous. More dangerous than anyone else.
Mel Gibson's Max to Tom Hardy's Max: "give me my life back, interdimensional counterpart!"
User avatar
Uncle Entity
 
Posts: 2473
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2000 4:54 am
Location: Naples, Italy.

Re: Observations about Max in the original trilogy and FR

Postby Mad Serge » Tue Jan 30, 2018 4:14 pm

About the original trilogy: the "madness" theme is there in the first movie. "Crazy", "nuts" and "mad" are words used in different contexts. Apart from the famous speech Max gives to Fifi, it is clearly shown that spending time on the road makes you insane (Roop, Toecutter and his gang, et cetera). At the end of the movie, look what he does to Johnny who asks him "are you crazy?". At this point, it could be argue that Max isn't in his right mind anymore. It explains why the very first movie was controversial in many countries; because of its ambiguity. However, after that, they dropped this theme: Max isn't crazy; and he's unequivocally a good man.

Alas, here's the chronology of the new timeline: Mad Max, Mad Max 2, Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome, the comics and Fury Road. By the way, I'm wondering if Miller actually despises Max given how he's depicted in the comics.

I agree with you about Max wanting to rebuild his interceptor. Although, the video game (I know it isn't canon) makes more sense because Max is at least helped by Chumbucket, a mechanic.

Anyway, the real problem is that Miller and his team don't know what to do with this character. I mean, the "plains of silence" is an interesting (and underdeveloped) idea, although I don't see Max having that kind of faith. Maybe it wasn't a good idea to bring back Max after Thunderdome...
Mad Serge
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2014 12:16 pm

Re: Observations about Max in the original trilogy and FR

Postby Uncle Entity » Wed Jan 31, 2018 2:28 am

Mad Serge wrote:However, after that, they dropped this theme: Max isn't crazy; and he's unequivocally a good man.


Not quite true. In MM2 he was still "healing". He was alienated, maybe psychotic... and definitely tormented.
MMBT is set 14 years after that, so he changed again. The events of MM2 were a catalyst for this new change, of course.

Mad Serge wrote: By the way, I'm wondering if Miller actually despises Max given how he's depicted in the comics.


Comics are not canon.
The way they used Max II in "Fury Road" is pure genius.

Mad Serge wrote:
Anyway, the real problem is that Miller and his team don't know what to do with this character. I mean, the "plains of silence" is an interesting (and underdeveloped) idea, although I don't see Max having that kind of faith. Maybe it wasn't a good idea to bring back Max after Thunderdome...



They didn't bring him back, indeed. Max II is a different character from the Original Max, and the way Miller wrote him in the Fury Road storyline is pure genius and I would say even groundbreaking for a male action hero.
Mel Gibson's Max to Tom Hardy's Max: "give me my life back, interdimensional counterpart!"
User avatar
Uncle Entity
 
Posts: 2473
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2000 4:54 am
Location: Naples, Italy.

Re: Observations about Max in the original trilogy and FR

Postby Mad Serge » Wed Jan 31, 2018 3:56 am

Image
"George Miller" is written on the cover. Why do you refuse to acknowledge the comics as canon?
Mad Serge
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2014 12:16 pm

Re: Observations about Max in the original trilogy and FR

Postby Taipan » Wed Jan 31, 2018 5:23 am

Because "the creature lives beyond the creator" rofl....

He doesn't even acknowledge what the writers have to say, what the production has to say, Uncle lives in his own little world with his own headcanon that will soon probably merge with Waterworld because why the hell not.
He thinks that Miller developed a character called "Max II" for Fury Road when in fact it's the same Max that was created for Mel Gibson just with a new face. He probably doesn't even know that in storyboards they drew Max to resemble Mel Gibson
because Fury Road was for him... They just pulled new skin over that character, the rest is the same. You will see the actual "Max II" in The Wasteland which wasn't written as a sequel to the original trilogy at all and not for Mel either. Uncle simply doesn't understand the mechanics of how Fury Road came about so he's going on about how this is a 're-imagining' but the truth is that is BARELY a re-imagining. 95% of Fury Road is Mad Max 4 made for Mel Gibson as the final Mad Max movie.
Now it's just a new paint job on an old script for Mel with a different ending and plot holes because Tom Hardy's age doesn't match (which as always are explained by the 'mythology' angle.... that I'm getting sick and tired of because it's such a lazy explanation).

Now, the re-imagining part of Fury Road that Uncle is banging on about is actually all in the 2 scripts and the comic books (which he doesn't think are canon btw). THAT'S THE NEW RE-IMAGINED MAD MAX UNIVERSE WE DIDN'T SEE YET. Fury Road in itself is barely a soft-reboot with attempts to dissociate itself from its 'sequel for Max' identity. But you know what? I don't think that putting on a broken Nokia on Immortan Joe's armor does a great job at doing that lol. Or a couple of modern vehicles hidden in the background to make it look like Fury Road is not a continuation of the apocalypse that started off in 1979 with the first Mad Max. Albeit, it is called 'a reboot' or a 'revisit' or whatever Miller wants to call it. From what I know it's 95% Mel Gibson's Fury Road - sequel to the original trilogy, and 5% reboot because they didn't get Mel on board.
At last the Vermin had inherited the Earth
User avatar
Taipan
 
Posts: 1507
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 9:14 am
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Observations about Max in the original trilogy and FR

Postby Uncle Entity » Wed Jan 31, 2018 11:06 am

Taipan wrote:Because "the creature lives beyond the creator" rofl....

He doesn't even acknowledge what the writers have to say, what the production has to say, Uncle lives in his own little world with his own headcanon that will soon probably merge with Waterworld because why the hell not..


You're starting to become offensive and aggressive because you know you're dead wrong. Okay. LOL

I don't live in a "little world", I live in a REAL world where these movies were TRULY FILMED and RELEASED in the theatres. They exist FAR FAR FAR beyond the scripts, the unused ideas and Miller's original purposes. They exist from an objective standpoint.

Hell, even Miller aknowledged that his movies acquired NEW meanings over time, and you insist you're some kind of superstar of the Mad Max fandom (LOL) who knows Hollywood and knows Miller and knows everyone involved in the production. Please, don't be Michael Jackson now.

Taipan wrote:Uncle simply doesn't understand the mechanics of how Fury Road came about so he's going on about how this is a 're-imagining' but the truth is that is BARELY a re-imagining. 95% of Fury Road is Mad Max 4 made for Mel Gibson as the final Mad Max movie.
Now it's just a new paint job on an old script for Mel with a different ending and plot holes because Tom Hardy's age doesn't match (which as always are explained by the 'mythology' angle.... that I'm getting sick and tired of because it's such a lazy explanation)..


I'm part of this fandom since 2000. I know EVERYTHING about the Fury Road production. Stop acting like you're a super-expert.
Miller remodelled the character right AFTER Mel jumped out of the ship. Even if Miller didn't explicitly state it's a NEW Max, what you get on-screen is a NEW Max. And it works. And the movie is a supreme masterpiece.

Stop being childish, grow up and don't twist my words to fulfill your "agenda".

FURY ROAD is a new universe. It became a new universe in 2003-2009. And I'm sure Miller refined this "new universe" idea until the day they started filming the movie for good.
It was a long way.

Don't try to connect "Fury Road" to the original trilogy. It's delusional. It doesn't work. It doesn't mean to be this by default. Miller, Hardy and Charlize clearly stated it's a "REIMAGINING". And details like the Nokia and anachronisms like that are just "touches" of genius. If you don't appreciate that, well, it's your problem... "super-fan". ;)
Mel Gibson's Max to Tom Hardy's Max: "give me my life back, interdimensional counterpart!"
User avatar
Uncle Entity
 
Posts: 2473
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2000 4:54 am
Location: Naples, Italy.

Re: Observations about Max in the original trilogy and FR

Postby Taipan » Wed Jan 31, 2018 2:49 pm

Who cares that you've been part of this site since 2000, you only perceive those movies from a consumer standpoint and base all of your theories on that.

If you really KNEW EVERYTHING about this movie then you would not be looking at Fury Road like that at all.

Uncle Entity wrote:Don't try to connect "Fury Road" to the original trilogy. It's delusional. It doesn't work. It doesn't mean to be this by default.


Do you really want me to pull up an interview with McCarthy who says otherwise? McCarthy coined this movie to Miller and worked on it. For SIX years Fury Road was a sequel to the original trilogy, from 1997 to 2003, so how can you even say that it wasn't meant to be like this? To claim that in the face of this evidence is what you call 'delusional' indeed. The replacing of the main actor later on was just a cosmetic change, almost all of it that movie is exactly the same. Sure, right not on paper it's a 'reimagining' but only because there's no Mel in it. Miller doesn't even want to admit he re-dressed a sequel, calls it a 'revisit' 'reimagining' 'maybe after Beyond Thunderdome'. But of course he won't say it straight up, funnily enough, the further away from Miller you get, the more people are willing to admit what Fury Road really is. Mark Sexton told me that to him this movie is a 'soft reboot' which is:
"a "soft reboot" is a sequel which introduces a film, television, or video game series to a new audience while still maintaining continuity with previous installments".
While McCarthy straight up said he worked on a sequel.
Those are the 3 crucial people that wrote that movie and only Miller doesn't openly state what this movie is. Wanna know why? Because he's a smart man. He always wanted Mad Max movies to appear as if they don't have any continuity, he loves the Campbellian hero myth template. But ask anyone from his closest circle and they'll tell you that's just a show he puts on. No continuity? Bullshit. No rhyme and reason as to why Max is the way he is? Bullshit. There production documents written about that, ask Colin Gibson, maybe he'll let you have a look into his notebooks. Miller doesn't even say half the stuff about Fury Road to keep people guessing. Which is exactly what you're doing.

Doesn't this mean anything to you at all? Or are you still going to defend your position with 'the creature lives far beyond the creator' thing?

I don't claim to be the superstar of Mad Max fandom, but I am a huge fan to the extent of actually tracking down and talking to all those people and getting really awesome inside info and documents. That gave me a totally new perspective on this movie and I decided to talk about it which clearly made you very butthurt because it ruins your theories about what Fury Road is based on just watching that movie.

Uncle Entity wrote:They exist FAR FAR FAR beyond the scripts, the unused ideas and Miller's original purposes. They exist from an objective standpoint.


You mean a subjective standpoint, which is how you perceive them. Objectively is what the creators of those movies had in mind. It's something that I was very interested in, I wanted to get into the heads of those people to find out and they told me, and now that I'm relaying this info - you don't want to listen to that. You ridicule me as some sort of a self-proclaimed super fan because I did all the legwork. All to clear up the things about those movies that people STILL speculate about.
So go ahead and have another go at me for that, but maybe also consider why you need to bump up your own 'timeline' threads while my vids on the same topics are actually backed with evidence and are approved by people who wrote those movies. But of course... they are wrong as well am I right?
At last the Vermin had inherited the Earth
User avatar
Taipan
 
Posts: 1507
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 9:14 am
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Observations about Max in the original trilogy and FR

Postby Immortan Joecutter » Wed Jan 31, 2018 3:56 pm

Honestly I never really understood this strange obsession to classify Fury Road. I simply enjoy the film for what it is and what I see on the silverscreen.
I'm not interested at all in endless discussions about if it's a 95%-sequel, 50% reimaganing or maybe a complete reboot to 100%...

The sheer quality of the movie speaks for itself. I don't use the word 'masterpiece' very often but here we have one.
With Fury Road George Miller managed to exceed my expectations on every possible level and he did it in a very progressive way.

Unlike other continued franchises nowadays, which are bathing in pure fan-service (LOOKING AT YOU: STAR WARS!!)
I think the use of all the nostalgia elements from the previous trilogy was simply perfect in Fury Road.

Call it what you want, I'm still happy as f#@% that we got this Madmaxsequelreimaginingreboot after 30 years!!!
User avatar
Immortan Joecutter
 
Posts: 258
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 10:45 am

Re: Observations about Max in the original trilogy and FR

Postby Mad Serge » Wed Jan 31, 2018 4:12 pm

I wouldn't say that Miller is really hiding it. Why? Because they released the comics shortly after Fury Road. They provide a clear explanation of what the movie really is. There's nothing cryptic. The fact is: most of the people don't want to hear about it.
Mad Serge
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2014 12:16 pm

Re: Observations about Max in the original trilogy and FR

Postby Taipan » Wed Jan 31, 2018 4:34 pm

Mad Serge wrote:I wouldn't say that Miller is really hiding it. Why? Because they released the comics shortly after Fury Road. They provide a clear explanation of what the movie really is. There's nothing cryptic. The fact is: most of the people don't want to hear about it.


And yet, here we are. Most folks don't even consider the comic books as canon, just some strange almost independent offshoot of Mad Max. Which is really strange not only because Miller's name is right on these stories but also that those stories have been actually developed for years along with the movie! The moment they came out folks thought they were this typical last minute addition to the movie which isn't true whatsoever.

Regardless, Miller was never up front about what Fury Road really was. Sure he talked about the hurdles and troubles but nothing that would truly reveal the mechanics of the story and how that came about. It was pretty jaw dropping to hear McCarthy admit they worked on a Mad Max movie for a 50 year old Max as his last journey. Whatever Fury Road is called now that's still the same story.

Immortan Joecutter wrote:Honestly I never really understood this strange obsession to classify Fury Road. I simply enjoy the film for what it is and what I see on the silverscreen.
I'm not interested at all in endless discussions about if it's a 95%-sequel, 50% reimaganing or maybe a complete reboot to 100%...


I totally see what you mean and I understand that. To me the obsession began upon finding out that this seemingly completely separate Fury Road as it came out in 2015 is basically the Mad Max sequel for Mel that was almost filmed in 2003.
Everything in this movie has the markings of the most epic and also the final Mad Max movie that was going to be made. The culmination of Mad Max if you will and Max's true redemption. That to me is mind blowing, regardless of what product we got in the end (still epic!).
At last the Vermin had inherited the Earth
User avatar
Taipan
 
Posts: 1507
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 9:14 am
Location: The Wasteland

Next

Return to General Movie Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest