shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,871
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 11, 2015 7:24:12 GMT -5
Got in a double feature tonight, with Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior (1980) and Robocop (1987). Robocop? It might not seem like it fits the criteria at first, but the entire point of the film is that it's taken the greed and corruption of our society and let it run amok to the point that society is utterly devastated except for those at the very top. There's actually a very Farenheit 451 feel to it in that everyone is so complacently distracted by cheerful television to notice. So I count it. Fun film, though certainly not deep. I enjoy returning to it on occasion. As for Road Warrior, I definitely enjoyed it more than the original and agree that it feels like a completely separate entity. I almost feel like I should have watched Road Warrior first and then gone back to see the original out of pure curiosity. Still not a film that I loved, but it was done very well on all accounts; I respect it. I think the point of all three Mad Max films is to set you up for one of the most spectacular action films of all time, which I happened to catch in the theatres tonight. I normally hate 3D films, but this one worked in 3D. Mad Max: Fury Road is just a thing of beauty to behold. I'll probably have to see it. Is Thunder Dome required viewing in order to understand it? |
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,202 
|
Post by Confessor on Jun 11, 2015 9:31:15 GMT -5
First off, I want to make sure that you watched the original Australian dialogue version of the film, not the God awful American accented, dubbed version? The later is so utterly terrible that it will honestly make a lot of difference to your enjoyment of the film, so I just want to make sure. The original. Great! What I personally love about George Miller's direction and story is that it's operatic and fearlessly melodramatic. There are plenty of action-packed car chases, great stunts and lashings of gut-wrenching violence, with larger-than-life, almost cartoonish characters and performances at every turn. However, there are also some lovely, subtle moments and meta-commentry in the direction. For example, in just the opening few minutes of the film we have the opening sequence set on Anarchie Road (as in Anarchy Road) and we also have an MFP officer spying on a pair of naked lovers through his rifle's telescopic sight, which teases the audience with the possibility that he might be preparing to shoot them. This immediately generates an air of tension and a sense that something is very wrong here -- even with the good guys. I could go on, but make no mistake, for all it's stunts and spectacle, Mad Max is a thinking man's action film. I see the first few minutes of the film clearly informing the viewers that government is too soft on crime, a theme echoed several times throughout the film and answered by what Max becomes at the end. Thus the joke of a cop looking like he's ready to snipe the criminal being pursued, but instead using his scope to spy on the couple, having no intention of actually doing his job correctly. Yes, this is correct and you're also right that the judicial system being too soft on crime is a recurring theme. In this respect, it shares a lot with Clint Eastwood's other iconic character and film franchise, Dirty Harry. Still, as meaningful as that moment is, the rest of the film is light on thought of any kind. Heck, there's no central conflict to the story until the last twenty minutes of the film. What goal is the protagonist trying to attain? He says the road is making him crazy, but he seems decidedly happy and unconflicted when at home. Max doesn't really have anything to do in this film until the very end. I disagree completely that the rest of the film is light on thought. The final conflict is a slow burn, sure, but the approach of it is really interesting. Here is a man who is drawn or pushed across the line by tragic circumstance to become the very thing that he's supposed to be protecting the public from. The approach to this climax is littered with warnings, both figuratively and literally (note the big STOP! road sign that the camera lingers on as Max rushes off in his V8 Interceptor to confront the baddies), and thus the sinister portent of the opening scenes, that things are very wrong -- even with the good guys -- is fulfilled. It's thought-provoking stuff, as far as I'm concerned. Something else that I love about the film is that it absolutely revels in the gloriously perverse and unhinged nature of the Toecutter's gang of biker hoodlums. It also revels in the way in which this plays against the poker-faced demeanor of Max's classic anti-hero. In this respect (and with the operatic editing and totally over the top score by Brain May adding to it) Mad Max is kind of like a futuristic Clint Eastwood spaghetti western, only with a weird and unsettling arthouse cinema vibe to it. Elements of the Western genre are certainly present, and the gang is certainly perverse, but I didn't see anything new about that. It's just Reefer Madness for a new (and Australian) generation. And I couldn't stand the score, which was over-the-top in places and completely out of place in others. I was so relieved to learn that it wasn't THE Brian May, but rather some guy I'd never heard of before. The weirdos in Reefer Madness never creeped me out like the Toecutter and his gang, but that's just me. The score is totally over the top, yes, but I think it works really well to reinforce the unsettling, melodramatic and operatic feel of the screenplay and direction. Now, I'm not saying that Mad Max is flawless -- in particular, the nightclub scene where the seductive chanteuse sings at Goose about how she loves "motorbikes and leather men..." makes me cringe so badly that my toes almost curl right through the soles of my shoes. Likewise, some of the acting in the film is hardly of an oscar winning standard. Yet, for all it's faults and technical shortcomings, the film is (as I said in my earlier post) "some kind of low budget, almost arthouse masterpiece." I just don't see it. But if you're getting all of that out of the film, then more power to you. I'll still check out the second one. It sounds like it's leaps and bounds better. As I said in an earlier post, Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior is my favourite film of the franchise and this time round the action is very much set out in the post-apocalyptic wastelands. The budget is bigger and it's a more polished film as a result, but the budget isn't big enough that you completely loose the "indie film" vibe. That's why it works so well and also why the third film, which had a really big Hollywood budget, suffers in my opinion. However, Mad Max 2 is a much simpler film that its predecessor in many ways, without the meta-commentary of the first movie and much more focus on action, stunts and innovative set design (and in the 1980s, the punk/bondage look of Mad Max 2 was very influential on everything from fashion, graphic design, pop videos, album cover art and, of course, other '80s sci-fi/futuristic movies). As for Road Warrior, I definitely enjoyed it more than the original and agree that it feels like a completely separate entity. I almost feel like I should have watched Road Warrior first and then gone back to see the original out of pure curiosity. To be honest, this is how I experienced Mad Max for the first time. I was 13 and tricked my mum into renting Mad Max 2 out from the video store, despite it being an 18 certificate. The "forbidden fruit" aspect of watching Mad Max 2 was a big reason why it made such an impression on me, for sure. I think the point of all three Mad Max films is to set you up for one of the most spectacular action films of all time, which I happened to catch in the theatres tonight. I normally hate 3D films, but this one worked in 3D. Mad Max: Fury Road is just a thing of beauty to behold. I'll probably have to see it. Is Thunder Dome required viewing in order to understand it? As I understand it, none of the earlier films are required viewing to understand Fury Road. |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jun 11, 2015 16:09:57 GMT -5
Now that I'm off from work for the summer, I hope to get a lot more film viewing in. A few that I'd like to watch this month: 1. Robocop 2 2. Terminator 3. Terminator 2 4. 12 Monkeys 5. Brazil 6. Things to Come 7. Day of the Dead (and maybe Dawn and Land) 8. Beneath the Planet of the Apes (I've recently watched the first, fourth and fifth films, and the third one doesn't really meet this month's criteria) Brazil is definitely on my to watch list, and you just have to see a pota film for this theme and I'm thinking I might watch Metropolis as well. We'll see how it goes. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,871
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 11, 2015 18:28:25 GMT -5
Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within is another I'd like to watch this month. It's been years, and while I always liked the story, I worry about how badly the CG will hold up.
|
|
|
|
Post by coke & comics on Jun 12, 2015 0:25:00 GMT -5
I think the point of all three Mad Max films is to set you up for one of the most spectacular action films of all time, which I happened to catch in the theatres tonight. I normally hate 3D films, but this one worked in 3D. Mad Max: Fury Road is just a thing of beauty to behold. I'll probably have to see it. Is Thunder Dome required viewing in order to understand it? No. It's very much its own story, just set in a post-apocalyptic world. With a guy named Max. Who seems to be mad about something. Connections to the previous films don't go much beyond that. |
|
|
|
Post by coke & comics on Jun 12, 2015 2:35:37 GMT -5
I watched Zardoz.
|
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Jun 12, 2015 9:38:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jun 12, 2015 10:25:03 GMT -5
Ha, I think it falls into the so terrible its fun catagory. I mean, come on how can this image not make you smile?  |
|
|
|
Post by coke & comics on Jun 12, 2015 11:31:42 GMT -5
I thought it was a surprisingly good film.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,871
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 13, 2015 21:04:46 GMT -5
Robocop 2 (1990)
I can distinctly remember my ten year old self discussing with my friends and our all agreeing that Robocop 2 was waaaaay better than the original.
Wow. I was one stupid kid. This movie was TERRIBLE.
|
|
|
|
Post by coke & comics on Jun 13, 2015 22:25:53 GMT -5
I watched Quntet. Still uncertain what my review is. Certainly an intriguing film and well-made. Not gonna claim Altman doesn't know how to direct a film or that Paul Newman isn't a compelling actor to watch. I was impressed by the film in the beginning. But by the end, I'm not sure if I was entirely satisfied. The final large chunk of the movie didn't offer a lot beyond its initial premise. But all in all, it's definitely a film worth watching. And among the better films of a world waiting to die I have seen, alongside On the Beach and Children of Men.  |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,871
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 14, 2015 7:17:14 GMT -5
Thanks for reminding me. I definitely need to see that one. |
|
|
|
Post by coke & comics on Jun 14, 2015 11:58:20 GMT -5
Thanks for reminding me. I definitely need to see that one. A great film, but too new for this club. |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jun 14, 2015 13:41:30 GMT -5
Too new to count but I just saw This is the End and it was pretty funny.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,871
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 17, 2015 22:26:51 GMT -5
Just wrapped up watching Terminator (1984) for the first time in over 20 years. Wow. Nearly a perfect film in all regards. I always remembered it being slower, smaller, lower budget than the first sequel, but watching this film as an adult with a better appreciation for film -- it just does everything right. Fantastic concept, fantastic execution, and possibly the only time Arnold is a good match for the role he is playing on film. Going to continue on with Part 2, and, while I've never seen Part 3, the reviews for it aren't so bad, so I may check it out too.    |
|
