Skip to main content

Everybody's gone out of their mind.

Trailers
Mad Max: Fury Road

George Miller’s directorial career, the impressive action spectacle cast by his initial Mad Max trilogy aside, seems borderline random. Miller, not to be confused with the for-good-reason less celebrated director of The Man from Snowy River and The Neverending Story II: The Next Chapter, could probably have conquered Hollywood if he had so wished. If he’d just stuck to making action movies. But Miller went his own way, taking in black comedies, true-life dramas, and family features. A meagre five features in 30 years. Miller will turn 70 next year. The character that made his name turned 35 in April. And now Miller’s come back to Max. The warrior Max.


The director has said he has lots of stories to tell, and the reason he left Max at the end of the first trilogy was because he was done with him. Following Beyond Thunderdome he made his second biggest hit The Witches of Eastwick, which, aside from sharing a devilish sense of humour, couldn’t have been more removed from the brutal elemental force of Outback autogeddon. Lorenzo’s Oil, a little seen story of a self-taught curative treatment drew on Miller’s own training as a doctor. 


After that, his credits would relate to family features, a reflection of the preoccupations of fatherhood, but with a pronounced dark edge. Chris Noonan, the director of Babe (which he and Miller wrote) professes to have fallen out with Miller since, unhappy with the credit he perceives Miller for the film. He no doubt sees it as justice that Babe: Pig in the City, which Miller steered himself, tanked. It may not be the classic that the original is, but it is a fascinatingly twisted descent into urban nightmare territory for the poor pig.


I don’t know how fair Noonan’s view is, but, purely on the level of physical credits, Miller has officially co-directed three of his nine features, which doesn’t suggest an egomaniac. First with George Ogilvie on Thunderdome; Ogilvie concentrated on the actors and Miller on the stunts It’s been said that Miller’s interest in the project waned after his producer-friend Byron Kennedy died during pre-production, but the real problem with the picture is that Max has been grafted onto another idea (the tribe of children). Miller then co-directed both Happy Feet; like Babe, the first was a big hit and the second fizzled.


Miller’s career could have looked very different at this point; he was in the director’s chair for Contact until issues with the producers saw him replaced by Robert Zemeckis. A few years later, the first iteration of Fury Road couldn’t get off the starting line due to a combination of political sensitivities and the value of the dollar. With its demise went any chance of Mel Gibson returning to the role. Then, in 2007, Miller attached himself to Justice League, which we will finally see, like Fury Road, about a decade after it was first planned. That one created unease due to its clash with the Nolan Bat-verse, but was mainly scuppered by a combination of the planned Australian shoot proving prohibitively costly and the writer’s strike.


Any concern that all this not making of a live action movie in 15 years – or any movie with humans as the principals in 20 – or worry that, without Mel (even given all that has happened in the past few years) Max just isn’t Max fell away when the Comic Con trailer hit last summer. This has only been reiterated by the one released last week. This is a world apart from the down-and-dirty exploitation (Ozploitation) picture of the first Max. Yet that trilogy became progressively cleaner and more stylised as it progressed – until we got Mullet Mel and Tina Turner in the final one. But for all its relative finery, Fury Road feels like it is of the same post-apocalyptic universe as Mad Max 2/The Road Warrior.


Miller had said his idea for Fury Road just wouldn’t go away, adding that there are possibly two sequels waiting in the wings.  He’s referred to the picture as a western. Max’s clearly defined origins are, on the face of it, very different to Leone’s The Man With No Name, while Miller’s high-octane action is an opposite to Leone’s luxuriant expansion of time to the point where twitchy tension takes a hold. Yet there is common ground between them; arid settings; bold, cartoonish and grotesque imagery; a ghoulish sense of humour; the same actors playing different characters in different instalments; a (anti-) hero defined by minimalism and a mythic/iconic presence who can be dropped in to a story.


The plot consists of one long chase, taking place over three days, and has
 Max fall in with/get rescued by (and no doubt do a bit of rescuing himself) Charlize Theron’s Imperator Furiosa. Reportedly there’s very little dialogue, but the radio announcements introducing the trailers give us the gist. While we are told, “They are killing for gasoline” the keynote is that everything is dependent on water, and “Now there’s the water wars”. 


Max is clearly reticent, on his own (no faithful hound, but that would be too much of a repeat, and I think it’s more fitting that this is a sideways, non-beholden reimagining (after all, as note above, anyone attempting to marry the previous pictures has problems such as Bruce Spence in two completely different roles). His world is “fire and blood” but he needs to be told “Everybody’s out of their mind. You’re not the only one Max”.


As with both Thunderdome and Mad Max 2, there is the suggestion of a reluctant path back to humanity for Tom Hardy’s lizard-stomping Max (he looks like a straggly hermit when we first glimpse him). Both trailers appear to be focused on the same section of the movie (although, given that it’s an extended chase, I expect that’s not the case), with many of the shots showing Max captured, chained and muzzled  – and rescued. It’s an effective decision, creating anticipation for his character, but predictably provoked complaints that Theron (who looks great, even with a mechanical arm, and reportedly has a juicy character to dig into) seems to be taking the lead role.


If pushed I prefer the teaser trailer, but both are deliriously effective pieces, doing a great job of selling a movie without letting everything out of the bag (Confidential Music’s atmospheric, scene-setting version of Wild World segueing into Ninja TracksThe Module Remix, with its engine sounds, gear changes, and revving, is quite exhilarating). They also both show a welcome sense of humour. It’s there in the editing and the choice of music; Verdi’s Requiem is used as quirky punctuation, set to clear, precise visuals. It’s clear Miller knows exactly where he wants the camera and the effect he wants to achieve. 


One of the un-Baned shots of Hardy in both trailers completely sells his charisma; his little smile, looking back from the cabin of a truck, and tiny thumbs-up. This is going to be epic and brutal, but also enormous fun. Nicholas Hoult’s bald, chaff-lipped Nux seizes his moment with “Oh, what a day! What a lovely day!Fury Road gives him the chance to stretch himself with something bigger and bolder than we expect from him.


The design work is persuasive, from big drums and big guns and big pole-vaulting, to the expected designer savages (Hugh Keays-Bryne, Mad Max’s Toecutter, cuts an imposing semi-visage as Immortan Joe). Big hair and shoulder pads may be out, but the cannibal-opulence chic suggests what Road Warrior’s punk marauders are wearing this summer. There are also abundant skull motifs, inventory tattoos,  curious dashboard toys and steering wheel totems. And what looks like an auto from Peter Weir’s The Cars that Ate Paris.



One might exercise a note of caution concerning a plot that seems to partly revolve around stealing beautiful women straight out of a lingerie catalogue (albeit with toothsome chastity belts), as that seems more in line with the grand fantasy of Thunderdome, and the whirling CGI sandstorm that surfaces seems like a stark betrayal of the promise that all the car stunts are real.


 But really, doesn’t this just look great? That shot of Theron kneeling on the sand. I’m yet to be convinced by the announcement that George Miller is a mastermind, but he’s an enormously accomplished filmmaker. I just wish he’d been making more of this order over the last 20 years. 15 May 2015 will indeed be a lovely day.




Popular posts from this blog

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.

In a few moments, you will have an experience that will seem completely real. It will be the result of your subconscious fears transformed into your conscious awareness.

Brainstorm (1983) (SPOILERS) Might Brainstorm have been the next big thing – a ground-breaking, game-changing cinematic spectacle that had as far reaching consequences as Star Wars (special effects) or Avatar (3D) – if only Douglas Trumbull had been allowed to persevere with his patented “Showscan” process (70mm film photographed and projected at 60 frames per second)? I suspect not; one only has to look at the not-so-far-removed experiment of Ang Lee with Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk , and how that went down like a bag of cold sick, to doubt that any innovation will necessarily catch on (although Trumbull at least had a narrative hinge on which to turn his “more real than real” imagery, whereas Lee’s pretty much boiled down to “because it was there”). Brainstorm ’s story is, though, like its title, possibly too cerebral, too much concerned with the consciousness and touting too little of the cloyingly affirmative that Bruce Rubin inevitably brings to his screenplays. T

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…

You ever heard the saying, “Don’t rob the bank across from the diner that has the best donuts in three counties”?

2 Guns (2013) (SPOILERS) Denzel Washington is such a reliable performer, that it can get a bit boring. You end up knowing every gesture or inflection in advance, whether he’s playing a good guy or a bad guy. And his films are generally at least half decent, so you end up seeing them. Even in Flight (or perhaps especially in Flight ; just watch him chugging down that vodka) where he’s giving it his Oscar-nominatable best, he seems too familiar. I think it may be because he’s an actor who is more effective the less he does. In 2 Guns he’s not doing less, but sometimes it seems like it. That’s because the last person I’d ever expect blows him off the screen; Mark Wahlberg.

Do you know that the leading cause of death for beavers is falling trees?

The Interpreter (2005) Sydney Pollack’s final film returns to the conspiracy genre that served him well in both the 1970s ( Three Days of the Condor ) and the 1990s ( The Firm ). It also marks a return to Africa, but in a decidedly less romantic fashion than his 1985 Oscar winner. Unfortunately the result is a tepid, clichéd affair in which only the technical flourishes of its director have any merit. The film’s main claim to fame is that Universal received permission to film inside the United Nations headquarters. Accordingly, Pollack is predictably unquestioning in its admiration and respect for the organisation. It is no doubt also the reason that liberal crusader Sean Penn attached himself to what is otherwise a highly generic and non-Penn type of role. When it comes down to it, the argument rehearsed here of diplomacy over violent resolution is as banal as they come. That the UN is infallible moral arbiter of this process is never in any doubt. The cynicism