Fury Road picked as "...best film of the year...".

[The Romulan Republic]

http://www.abc.net/au/news/2015-09-02/m ... ear/674221

International critics have voted Australia's Mad Max: Fury Road as the best film of the year, their main federation has announced.

The action movie shot by Australian director George Miller will be awarded the Grand Prix of the International Federation of Film Critics (FIPRESCI) at the San Sebastian film festival in Spain on September 18.

"You could have knocked me over with a feather! It's lovely to have this great cohort of critics acknowledge our collective labours in this way," Miller said in the statement.

The vote saw 493 of the world's top critics, who typically reward less mainstream arthouse films, choose from among movies premiered after July 1, 2014.

Mad Max: Fury Road, starring Tom Hardy and Charlize Theron — the fourth film in the apocalyptic adventure franchise shot in the Australian outback — will receive a special screening at the festival, the highest-profile movie event in the Spanish-speaking world, which runs until September 26.

Last year's winner of the award was Richard Linklater for Boyhood.

The festival, held each year in San Sebastian, a picturesque seaside resort on Spain's northern Atlantic coast, was originally intended to honour Spanish language films but has established itself as one of the most important movie festivals in the world.

It hosted the world premiere of Alfred Hitchcock's spy thriller North by Northwest in 1959 and Woody Allen's Melinda and Melinda in 2004.

In other Australian film industry news, Oscar-winning actress Cate Blanchett will be honoured with a British Film Institute Fellowship at the London Film Festival in October.

While I think its a bit much, and I'm not sure how this works what with the year not being over, its nice to see them being open-minded enough to pick a dystopian action movie over the kind of films that might normally be thought of as deserving of critical acclaim.

Here's hoping the Oscars are similarly open-minded, but I'm skeptical of that.

[Mr Bean]

Let me know when the mainline award shows recognize it. Despite excellent acting I don't see this winning any of Hollywood big awards.

[JLTucker]

I thought it was mediocre. The acting was poor throughout and the script thin as a piece of paper. All it had going for it was the action and even then it was tedious to watch. It is beautifully shot, though.

[The Romulan Republic]

Their seems to be a lot of buzz about its Oscar prospects through Google News, but I don't know how much of that is wishful thinking.

At a minimum, it should be up for visual effects, costumes, and maybe director. Best actor, best actress, and best picture nominations wouldn't be terribly out of line either, in my opinion. And that's just off the top of my head.

Edit: Out of curiosity, what specific objections did you have to the acting and script, JLTucker? I thought the acting ranged from adequate to quite good, while the script had its moments but didn't always appeal to me stylistically and alternated between being too vague and too blunt at times.

[Gandalf]

What an award. WHAT A LOVELY AWARD!

More seriously, it's probably the best film I've seen in the last year. So some recognition is nice.

[JLTucker]

At a minimum, it should be up for visual effects, costumes, and maybe director. Best actor, best actress, and best picture nominations wouldn't be terribly out of line either, in my opinion. And that's just off the top of my head.

Edit: Out of curiosity, what specific objections did you have to the acting and script, JLTucker? I thought the acting ranged from adequate to quite good, while the script had its moments but didn't always appeal to me stylistically and alternated between being too vague and too blunt at times.

All of it. I was never invested in the protagonists' mission. Development was sparse for Max and more so for the disposable pregger women. Theron was just awful at emoting and I didn't buy her anguish as she fell to her knees in the desert. The villain, the most interesting character to me, was nothing more than a maniac with an urge to kill.

Perhaps I would like it more if I had seen the original movies. I don't know.

[The Romulan Republic]

At a minimum, it should be up for visual effects, costumes, and maybe director. Best actor, best actress, and best picture nominations wouldn't be terribly out of line either, in my opinion. And that's just off the top of my head.

Edit: Out of curiosity, what specific objections did you have to the acting and script, JLTucker? I thought the acting ranged from adequate to quite good, while the script had its moments but didn't always appeal to me stylistically and alternated between being too vague and too blunt at times.

All of it. I was never invested in the protagonists' mission.

The escaping womens' goal is certainly sympathetic and understandable (though how Furiosa reached that point could, perhaps, have used a bit more development). And Nux at least gets some sympathy for being basically a dying, brainwashed person who just wants to go out in a blaze of glory (until he grows beyond that).

Max is an asshole at the start, pretty much just interested in his own survival, but I kind of understand where that's coming from giving the circumstances.

Development was sparse for Max and more so for the disposable pregger women.

How the fuck were they "disposable"? The main objective of the protagonists for much of the film was to protect them, only one died, and the death was treated as significant.

Max lacking development I sort of get (he says fairly little in the film), but I still get where he was coming from, more or less, and he did develop during the film.

Theron was just awful at emoting and I didn't buy her anguish as she fell to her knees in the desert.

That scene's a little hammy, I guess, but beyond that this seems more a subjective thing.

The villain, the most interesting character to me, was nothing more than a maniac with an urge to kill.

Perhaps I would like it more if I had seen the original movies. I don't know.

The villain, I think, had no particular bloodlust, at least compared to his followers. He was in it for power, and his perverted idea of family, and perhaps a semblance of order in a chaotic world. I'm inclined to see his savage death cult as more a tool to pursue those objectives than what he actually believed.

I obviously don't entirely disagree with you though. And I would say that the script was far from flawless.

[streetad]

Whilst it was a competently directed action flick and ten times more enjoyable than the latest Bay/Emmerich CGI fest, I have to admit feeling a little baffled by all the love this film is getting.


The pregnant women were pretty much a disposable mcguffin, there to serve Theron's redemption arc. I think they did try to give them a character trait each. Without looking at the credits could you even pick out which is which and what their names were?

Max himself is something of a cypher. He goes through the same perfuntory character arc over and over again in each film after the first, i.e he's a burnt out shell of a man that finally finds something worth fighting for. A standard Western trope, really. Tom Hardy was OK although there was a point where I was worried that he would be stuck wearing that mask for the whole film.

The only genuine 'characters' the film presents are those played by Theron and Hoult. They were both fine at portraying a basic archetype going through a basic 'redemption' plot. I understood the characters and their motivations, so they both did their job, but I'm not sure there was anything award worthy there.

I genuinely think people have got caught up in what are admittedly some unusual and very creative visuals and are ascribing this film more stature than it really deserves.

[Thanas]

Is it a genuinely good movie?

[Elheru Aran]

I enjoyed it. I thought the action was fairly well done. Plot wise... well, it's not the most high-art cinema out there, but it takes a very simple set of ideas: Max is taken prisoner. Furiosa steals Immortan Joe's wives and runs off. Max ends up helping them. It's a bunch of chicks, a guy, and a big-ass truck in the middle of nowhere, with a horde of raging maniacs after them. That's about it, and they don't pretend that it's much of anything else. It's a very honest movie, for lack of a better term.

[The Romulan Republic]

I would say that while the hype is somewhat disproportionate to its quality, it is still, on the whole, a good film. Certainly one of the better science fiction/action films I've seen that's come out in recent years. Its got a certain intensity and flair, and in terms of themes and characterization it is reasonably solid for the most part, if not quite as brilliant as its reputation might suggest.

I can't say how it holds up compared to the other Mad Max films, as I haven't seen them, but the fact that I hadn't seen them didn't keep me from understanding and enjoying this film.

[madd0ct0r]

Is it a genuinely good movie?

Yes, it is a genuinely good movie.I went to see it twice and enjoyed.it just as much the second time. All elements of the film are used to build it in at least 2 ways. The plot is honest and as robust as the setting, but there are multiple characters that interact with each other as they develop.
It touches the right notes for a epic poem. Does it tell us more about the human condition? Maybe nothing new, slavery and pregnancy are older then troy, but it speaks clearer and more intelligently about human nature then most

[biostem]

Given that the Warboys are the bulk of Immortan Joe's forces, and that at least some of them live for a good while, (as evidenced by the older Warboy Furiosa initially went out with), it'd be interesting to expand upon how exactly she managed to gain the position that she had, (Imperator, IIRC). I recall someone mentioning that she was infertile, thus coudn't be one of Joe's wives, and that she was brutal enough to fight her way to the top, (a point which brought about her realization that she had to make amends for her past).

[Bob the Gunslinger]

I enjoyed it. I thought the action was fairly well done. Plot wise... well, it's not the most high-art cinema out there, but it takes a very simple set of ideas: Max is taken prisoner. Furiosa steals Immortan Joe's wives and runs off. Max ends up helping them. It's a bunch of chicks, a guy, and a big-ass truck in the middle of nowhere, with a horde of raging maniacs after them. That's about it, and they don't pretend that it's much of anything else. It's a very honest movie, for lack of a better term.

There are a lot of themes and subtext that really aren't'the very subtle. There's definitely more to the movie than you are describing.

But it is a vary love it or hate it movie. I personally thought it was a game changer in how much the film conveyed without direct dialogue or obvious cocking of Chekov's Gun. For that alone, it deserves recognition.

[loomer]

It was a worthy successor to The Road Warrior. Both films had extremely simplistic plots with a lot of very important things to say once you look past the outright dialogue and into the symbolism.

[Elheru Aran]

I enjoyed it. I thought the action was fairly well done. Plot wise... well, it's not the most high-art cinema out there, but it takes a very simple set of ideas: Max is taken prisoner. Furiosa steals Immortan Joe's wives and runs off. Max ends up helping them. It's a bunch of chicks, a guy, and a big-ass truck in the middle of nowhere, with a horde of raging maniacs after them. That's about it, and they don't pretend that it's much of anything else. It's a very honest movie, for lack of a better term.

There are a lot of themes and subtext that really aren't'the very subtle. There's definitely more to the movie than you are describing.

But it is a vary love it or hate it movie. I personally thought it was a game changer in how much the film conveyed without direct dialogue or obvious cocking of Chekov's Gun. For that alone, it deserves recognition.

Well, yeah, it's deeper than I painted it, but overall, it's not a particularly pretentious movie. It's not all 'Ooh, we're talking about CHILDHOOD, about MATURITY, about PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT, if you can't see this you are obviously an illiterate savage. Go pick fleas'. It's not Tarantino, where every goddamn line or scene is a reference to something or struggling with complicated personal or social shit like Linklater. No. It's straightforward.

The deeper elements are in the background, there to be seen if you search them out, but on the surface, the plot is simple and direct. The least... what's the right word... solid elements of the story are the occasional visions Max gets, but they do play a part in establishing his mindset and giving him his motivation. The film works on several levels-- first there's the basic plot (big-ass car chase/survival/action), then there's individual stories with the various characters (Max, Furiosa, Nux, Joe, etc), and underneath that there's a larger social and ecological commentary.

[Themightytom]

Who here has seen Book of Eli? Is it that kind of post apocalyptic movie, or are we talking the Postman, because I don't know if I want to pay to buy it.

[The Romulan Republic]

The setting has some similarities (and some notable differences, of course) to the Book of Eli, but I'd say Fury Road is a better film.

Never seen The Postman and know little about it, so I can't really compare.

[Elheru Aran]

Book of Eli is a different kind of story, put it that way. Fury Road is, in many ways, a more desperate situation for the people involved, while Book of Eli was more about a single, bad-ass hero fighting his way through the post-apoc. Fury Road is a tough guy and girl just trying to get to freedom and survive while keeping some more delicate followers alive, being chased by a pack of nearly literally frothing madmen. To put it another way, Book of Eli is almost a superhero story versus an everyman story in Fury Road.

[Dread Not]

I for one loved the doof out Fury Road and agree with pretty much every bit of praise its gotten, and I haven't yet heard criticism to dampen my enjoyment of it. If my schedule hadn't prevented it, this would have been the first movie I've ever seen twice in theaters. I'll just have to look forward to watching it on my parents enormous home theater system when I visit them for Christmas.

At a minimum, it should be up for visual effects, costumes, and maybe director. Best actor, best actress, and best picture nominations wouldn't be terribly out of line either, in my opinion. And that's just off the top of my head.

The cinematography, art direction and editing were also second to none, and I'd say it deserves some recognition for its sound and score.

There are a lot of themes and subtext that really aren't'the very subtle. There's definitely more to the movie than you are describing.

But it is a vary love it or hate it movie. I personally thought it was a game changer in how much the film conveyed without direct dialogue or obvious cocking of Chekov's Gun. For that alone, it deserves recognition.

Yeah, a lot of little touches like Spoiler

Miss Giddy's tattoos, Max having to use his own blood to draw a map, and Nux eating the beetle

went a long way in subtly conveying the setting to the viewer.

The character dynamics also add a lot of substance to the seemingly basic plot developments. Take Max and Furiosa's first meeting. The fight plays out in such a way that it convincingly leads Nux to mistakenly believe he and Max are allies, despite Nux using Max as a hood ornament only minutes earlier. Simultaneously the scene shows the wives are highly motivated by having them help Furiosa in the fight in what ways they can despite their inexperience.

Who here has seen Book of Eli? Is it that kind of post apocalyptic movie, or are we talking the Postman, because I don't know if I want to pay to buy it.

It's very little like either of those movies in terms of look, tone, plot or setting. Outside of the other Mad Max films, the closest post-apocalyptic analogue might be Waterworld, only with a lot less water and much, MUCH better execution. Humanity has all but forgotten the old world, has adapted to the new one and regressed to a war-loving state, and warfare has similarly adapted into a bizarre new form.

[The Romulan Republic]

You might get another chance to see it in theatres- its getting a brief re-release in Imax:

www.ew.com/article/2015/09/04/mad-max-fury-road-imax

[Thanas]

I saw Fury Road. It is a decent popcorn flick that works if you shut off your brain and don't think critically. I wouldn't watch it again, too little meat on the plot bone to keep me interested. It has great costumes and visuals but I didn't appreciate a lot of the acting besides the two leads. Not a great movie, it is what it is - a well executed action peace worth my money and entertaining.

I'd rate it in the C-category of movies (A being perfect, B being good but not great, C entertaining, D for Fans only and E for boring failure).

[The Romulan Republic]

I think to dismiss it as a popcorn flick that requires not thinking is going too far, personally. I mean, that's the kind of language one might use to describe, say, one of the lesser Marvel films, like Ant Man or Iron Man II. Their's more substance than that, at least, to Fury Road, and more flair and originality in the execution of it.

Oh well. You're always going to have some critics.

[ray245]

I would say it's a really good film because of its lack of focus on plot. Purely from a visual/audio experience, Fury Road is a wonderful movie. It has manage to keep audience interested in what is basically a two-hour long chase sequence.

It's pure visual storytelling, and showcase the strength of cinema in the absence of a plot heavy script.

[Thanas]

I think to dismiss it as a popcorn flick that requires not thinking is going too far, personally.

If you start to think about it, the problems with logic are obvious, so better not to think about it.