Originally posted by Guynemer
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Because Hollywood sucks, that's why
Collapse
X
-
The first original is actually quite lame.
It's the second one that put the series on the map.It's almost as if all his overconfident, absolutist assertions were spoonfed to him by a trusted website or subreddit. Sheeple
RIP Tony Bogey & Baron O
Comment
-
I guess the question is how one defines "good." IIRC The Road Warrior was about saving a town made of junk from the ravages of a bondage-gear biker gang by driving away in a big convoy. The sequel involved Max in a no-rules cagematch against Lenny from Of Mice And Men with a dwarf on his back. Both fun, but not what one would call "good movies" exactly. Have not seen Fury Road; is it just missing the particular brand of campy/trashy we expect from a Mad Max film?
Comment
-
I dunno, I think I just got hyped by rotten tomatoes giving it something like 99% or whatever. In the end it was like a mashup of #2 and #3, with some great imagination and great characters, but just the usual lazy suicidal stupidity of the bad guys with the outrageous luck and implausibility of the good guys.Originally posted by Elok View PostI guess the question is how one defines "good." IIRC The Road Warrior was about saving a town made of junk from the ravages of a bondage-gear biker gang by driving away in a big convoy. The sequel involved Max in a no-rules cagematch against Lenny from Of Mice And Men with a dwarf on his back. Both fun, but not what one would call "good movies" exactly. Have not seen Fury Road; is it just missing the particular brand of campy/trashy we expect from a Mad Max film?
Yes it's a no-brain chase movie, it's just that it could have been a lot better no-brain chase movie...
"Aha, you must have supported the Iraq war and wear underpants made out of firearms, just like every other American!" Loinburger
Comment
-
You're describing #2 and #3.Originally posted by Elok View PostI guess the question is how one defines "good." IIRC The Road Warrior was about saving a town made of junk from the ravages of a bondage-gear biker gang by driving away in a big convoy. The sequel involved Max in a no-rules cagematch against Lenny from Of Mice And Men with a dwarf on his back. Both fun, but not what one would call "good movies" exactly. Have not seen Fury Road; is it just missing the particular brand of campy/trashy we expect from a Mad Max film?
The original was called Mad MaxIt's almost as if all his overconfident, absolutist assertions were spoonfed to him by a trusted website or subreddit. Sheeple
RIP Tony Bogey & Baron O
Comment
-
The second one is the only one watchable. I agree that the third one was just stupid.Originally posted by kentonio View PostThen you're both wrong, the first one was the only decent one. After that it just went stupid.
The first one was a low budget hack To give you an idea on the budget.
But because of the low budget it was the most profitable movie for a long time.Because of the film's low budget, almost all the police uniforms in the film were made of vinyl leather, with only one genuine leather uniform made for stunt sequences involving Bisley and Gibson. Most of the biker-gang extras were members of actual Australian outlaw motorcycle clubs, and rode their own motorcycles in the film. Many of the other cast had previously appeared in StoneIt's almost as if all his overconfident, absolutist assertions were spoonfed to him by a trusted website or subreddit. Sheeple
RIP Tony Bogey & Baron O
Comment
-
Yes, I know, but Mad Max is also the name of the character, no? Hence "Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome." I've seen all three, and the first was rather boring low-budget junk. Like an hour and a half of meandering would-be buildup so that by the time he actually goes "mad" you've just about lost interest.Originally posted by rah View PostYou're describing #2 and #3.
The original was called Mad Max
Comment
-
Sorry, I got confused when you called #3 the sequel.
And yeah, that about summed it up for me also.the first was rather boring low-budget junk. Like an hour and a half of meandering would-be buildup so that by the time he actually goes "mad" you've just about lost interest.
And probably why they made the effort to portray Gibson as already mad at the beginning of the first lethal weapon.
It's almost as if all his overconfident, absolutist assertions were spoonfed to him by a trusted website or subreddit. Sheeple
RIP Tony Bogey & Baron O
Comment
-
Haven't seen Fury Road; definitely plan to do so.
And back to the OP, I have always thought Snow Crash had great movie potential.Apolyton's Grim Reaper 2008, 2010 & 2011
RIP lest we forget... SG (2) and LaFayette -- Civ2 Succession Games Brothers-in-Arms
Comment
-
It has the potential, but it'd need to be done just right; it'd be easy to screw up. Starting with Hollywood's fondness for whitewashing the cast. And parts of the novel would translate poorly to the screen, like the meeting near the end where Hiro just vomits exposition for several consecutive chapters. I'm not totally sure how you convey concepts as complicated as nam-shubs and metaviruses onscreen. But the number one concern would be getting a director who gets it, and I think this'n does. And NS himself loved the script.Originally posted by -Jrabbit View PostAnd back to the OP, I have always thought Snow Crash had great movie potential.
Then again, Orson Scott Card himself worked on the Ender's Game script for years, and hoooooweeeee was that a stinker.
Comment
Comment