/film/ - Film

you'll have better luck at /tv/ with new mainstream releases

>>4649

> starts thread about a movie

> doesn't give a clue as to it's title

>>4652

Sorry, Mad Max: Fury Road.

>>4651

Mainstream doesn't always mean shit. Some artists can balance this medium of being mainstream while maintaining their singular vision.

Your not going to get kicked out of any brooklyn coffee shops if you say you saw this movie.

>>4653

it's not a matter of mainstream being good or bad. it's more about keeping the board from overlapping so much with /tv/ so we aren't competing with them.

personally i don't care what people choose to watch as long as they enjoy it.

>>4654

Now were getting into pretentious-ville on what is allowed to be posted and what isn't.

If a movie is released with a wide distribution, does that disbar it from being talked about here?

Are you honestly suggesting we just sit around and jerk each other off about how great metropolis was?

I posted a thread about Fury and no one gave two shits but now since something is popular, the hipster instinct kicks in and you actively take a stance against this and then a decade from now you'll watch it and be like damn what a great movie this is such a classic.

I'm not mad at you I'm just surprised that /film isn't all over this movie.

>>4655

It's a slippery slope thing, the more open we are to mainstream media the easier it becomes to justify discussing the mainstream more regularly until eventually we would blur the lines between /tv/ and /film/.

True, not every modern big budget action movie will be average, some will be quite spectacular- like Mad Max: Fury road is for instance- but I feel as if there are enough boards discussing this movie right now already, this board should open people up to movies that might never get mentioned on other boards.

Any way, Mad Max: Fury road was brilliant. Great snappy editing, the camera wasn't completely static during quite scenes and the pacing was balanced. Good fun.

>>4656

I understand you 100%. I just saw it today and was pretty excited over the whole experience. I didn't do my due diligence upon starting my thread in film. I was, as the hippies on my block say, caught up, in the moment.

Please put an end to this hyperbole.

The universe design was very good, the action scenes were good, but ultimately, 2 hours of no plot, no script, no real character development, and cars crashing into each other became tiresome.

Not to mention the meandering second half of the film and the obvious, ham-fisted attempts at plot progression - I'm looking at you, Nux.

This all while considering the fact that neo-Max and his flashbacks were used as a method of wiping the slate clean and telling the audience, 'no need to worry about the Mad Max you knew. This Max is haunted and he's quiet as a result, and you need not concern yourself with anything else.'

Tom Hardy using the Bane voice yet again.

I really can not understand why people are losing their minds over this. It's a good popcorn film, but it is not second coming of christ.

>>4681

*plotless

My bad.

>>4680

>literally "I didn't like it therefore it is shit"

>>4651

/tv/ is a fucking warzone over mad max right now

besides this board is as dead as my grandparents

People are overreacting because this movie was viral marketed as a paradigm changer, feminist flick, and most critics are eating this shit up. It definitely raised the bar for the action genre and showed the world the level of realism that practical effects can deliver, but all the gender-related massive hysteria is just bullshit inherent to the time we live in. I don't think this movie will age well.

>>4680

Most of the criticisms about the movie being plotless, or redundant, and about the lack of character development may be true, but there's something that works so fine for the movie just being as it is, perhaps it is like >>4681 says, it's like such an over-the-top post-apocalyptic world that people behave like in a videogame (and actually drive as if they were in Mario Kart). Perhaps it might be a simplistic or silly view of a dystopic world, but the action is executed with such grace that it just feels right.

I'd liked it better if the film actually tried to put in context the wars for natural resources, but the treatment of genre issues was actually well done, since I went expecting hamfisted liberal feminazi bullshit and didn't got any of that (at the end of the day it was just Internet being retarded, as usual), so I felt that there was at least a tiny little semblance of thematical depth in there (at least for an action movie). Or perhaps I'm looking too much into it, but I guess that's because the movie is vague in the first place, it leaves room to imagine that sort of things, something that other modern blockbusters don't do.

Still, clearly Miller wasn't set out to do a complex movie with a compelling plot, characters or depth. He was set out to do an explosive spectacle. And he was greatly successful. A movie should be judged on what it sets to achieve, and it did it masterfully.