Video

This movie sucked

Great review!

Saying that this movie added to nothing to the story of Fury Road makes me consider whether you were actually paying attention. This entire movie makes the events of Fury Road 10x more important. Brain dead take.

This was a great movie, it made me want more Mad Maxina content. It made me want to buy the game. No Mad Max movie before made me want to play the game I am just that thirsty for more Mad Max Content

Seriously, go watch the other Mad Max movies. Fury Road is a great movie, but when your scope of these things is so small you aren't going to get the best experience. Not only should you watch the original Mad Max trilogy, you should also watch: A Boy and his Dog, Book of Eli, Hell(Apocalypse), The Road, Threads, The Day After(1983), Waterworld, Postman, and the Jericho TV series, the FallOut TV Series . Also play the Mad Max game, And Night of the Comet, that movie is awesome. A slightly different genre, but still cool, and while you're on that genre check out: These Final Hours, Seeking a Friend for the End of the World, and Last Night(1998) and once you've done all of this go back and watch Furiosa.

move was epic! Loved it

I also felt "off" when watching it. I think the plot was too thin for 2.5 hours. It should have been 90 minutes. I would cut the first hour, honestly. Open with that shot of the road before the war rig chase scene. Drop us right into the story. The young actress was really good, but that chunk of story should have been a separate animated project (ala the Blade Runner shorts when 2049 was released). Have some quick flashes of her life as a kid. This would also chopped down Hemsworth. He was good, but he was "a lot". During his last scene all I could think about was his prosthetic nose and the pain in the butt it must have been for the makeup artist. Not what I should have been thinking about, ha.

Mad Max is a popular cult franchise but it was never as big as some of the other stuff. This movie would of probably benefited it more if it got released within a few years after mad max, not over a decade later and in this cinematic enviornment, which is full of politics, wokeness, reduced cinemas and a recession and the fact that it looks like another attempt at hollywood replacing another loved character with another... There are just too many things against it, this movie really came out at the worst time that it could have.

Taylor-Joy specifically stated she did not watch Theron's performance. So she did not emulate anything. She's just an overrated actress. Not as bad as Sophie Turner but simply not as good as people want her to be.

It looks cleaner, there is less action, it feels longer, its more boring, but its biggest problem is its missing Max.

It was missing the frenetic madness of Fury Road… Was just a little bland instead…🫣

How is this mad max movie with no mad max in it?

Yea Chris is doing his own thing....he doesn't belong in this world....he comes off as Gay and wierd yet right at home in his skin

I liked it more after I slept on it. It’s just a different tone. Reminded me of Thunderdome. Some things just don’t hit the spark in it though.

I liked the movie 7/10 but the action sequences and background music were not as sensational like fury road. The child actor playing young furiosa is phenomenal. I think Chris Hemsworth was the best thing in the movie, he was as visceral like Tom Hardy in The Revenant. Though the choice of funny prosthetic nose kind of took away some danger from his demented character. The problem with this whole saga is the time gap between movies when you have huge swathes of generational changes in the audience demographics / perception. The target audience being predominantly male, rooting for a loner sigma, Mad Max, and here we have a total polarity reversal with a female lead fighting out in a brutal post apocalyptic world with almost no sense of discomfort or peril to life is super incredible and plastic. ATJ has heft with her acting but her expressions were quite unidimensional through out the movie which on reflecting back is pretty much the same in her filmography. Scrawny ATJ dragging Hemsworth through the desert sand in the end was undeniably absurd. I watched the movie on the opening Friday night with a paltry ~25 other people in the Cinemax imax auditorium. I think the movie is gonna be a financial flop. Though I think it is worth a watch and better than other alternatives at the multiplex.

The timelines just don't work for me. Casting ATJ was a mistake - they should have de-aged Theron or at least included her in the whiplash-inducing segue from the fucked-up tree to the start of FR. So in an ideal world, I'd have cut from ATJ dragging Dementus off to the Citadel while the narrator tells us what happened to him. Then we cut to the Man-Tree and pull back to show a slightly de-aged Theron who then goes off with her fruit salad to plan for FR. Takes time for a tree to grow (and we already saw that time-lapse with the wig) and it would take time for Furiosa to build her legend and get the freedom and unquestioning respect of Jack. It even fits for Max who was clearly younger in the cameo to the wreck he was in FR. Still though, questions remain. Why didn't Joe realise his latest, youngest wife was gone? Why bother with a fucking bank vault door when anyone can get to it, open it and get to his wives? Who runs security in The Citadel? Why didn't we see Scrotus giving a young Slit his scars? Why did Miller think subtle CGI should be replaced with obvious CGI?

The real reason David Lynch turned down Jedi was because he didn't want to work with John Williams and Ben Burt. And that's according to Howard Kazanjian's auto-biography. If he became the director, Jedi would have not sounded like Star Wars.

I loved this movie. A perfect continuation from where the original trilogy ended with great new characters and world building. Great review, Matthew

Maybe people don’t have the money to spend on movies in the theater

So evokative period 70 is ..rome 1971 So real Pure art cinema Mesmerising baroque sexy nightmare Ave satanis Greezings from Croatia

Its deff amazing but not the best of the year. Shogun is by far a better tv show, its more complex, better written, more gripping, has better acting, better storytelling, better vfx and cinematography

Good review. Fallout is a great show , I agree.

I had never played any FO. I am liking fallout 3. 1 and 2 are a thirs person turn based game, not what I expected.

Walton goggins

House of the Dragon: "hold my beer" Fallout was great though.

"Fallout" is really good but the best show of the year? It's "SHOGUN".

Shogun by far...lol

Exceptional, well-rounded review, offering interesting, sensible, thoughtful opinions! Congratulations! I've subscribed and hope that your channel will grow and we'll have the opportunity to hear more of your thoughts on interesting topics like this show.

Thou shalt be sidetracked by bullshit every single time !

Had my doubts with the show going in...but damn I enjoyed it.

Nah sorry, but Shogun is the best show of the year.

one of the only videos ive agreed with about this film. I think alot of people miss the point of it and cant cope with the idea of not knowing the poltics. I also think people struggle to see that there is no good guy because they are journalists and they just needed to survive.

Agreed the first combat scene with the guys with the Hawaiian shirts definitely made me feel a certain way. Defiantly set the mood for the rest of the film.

I never binge watch shows, but I drank this one down in one sitting on Saturday, and now I'm rewatching one episode at a time now along side my friends with more sane schedules and busy lives.

I saw it last night with a friend. I probably related most to Sammy but each character reminded me of myself at various times of my life. I do not think this film was meant to read as literal. It was a fable. Apocalypse Now & Children of Men meet The Odyssey. We aren’t supposed to try and imagine why Texas & California would unite but Nevada and Arizona would remain with the Union. The politics are deliberately obscured and fuzzy. Maybe Ron Swanson is Trump. Maybe he’s a Clinton-style Democrat. It doesn’t matter. He made himself unaccountable and lost support of his military. All we do know is normal people can’t get water and no one trusts anyone. Civil War is a dissolution of promise for the future. It’s a suspension of hope. Nihilism is the only rational response. Alex Garland spoke through Sammy: “All I know is every instinct in me is telling me that way leads to death.”

I love this film and I loved the needle drop of "Say No Go" by De La Soul. That whole scene put a big smile on my face.

34:00 "people who chose to stay out of politic and stay neutral are dumb and don't realize that's a problem" Classic leftist ideology 'if you don't speaks up for racism and trans rights then you are a bigot'. But for some reason all the bad guys in the movie are whites and right wingers. It's another british director/writer/closet leftist who doesn't understand a single thing about guns ownership in America and want to take a jab at it. And you! being American are eating up all the propagandas. You know what you guys haven't realized? If you want to learn about how civil war works in the modern world, it takes 2 seconds to see how reality works with other countries that having a civil war right now. If war breaks out in America, people that don't want nothing to do with it isn't going to be running a designer store while there's shooting outside...you got to be extremely smooth brain to do that...like a literally NPC. In real life, anybody that doesn't want to pick up a gun are going to evacuate and run...hence why we have the mass immigration from South America to the U.S. because the city are literally runs by the cartels. You want to talk about Civil war? there's your prime example right there. But of course, let's just leave it to some soy brit who understand politics and war through the lenses of CNN.

Great point on the film being a Rorschach test. Have not heard that said by anyone else yet, and I think its right on the money. First time coming across y’all’s show. Good work gents, keep on keepin on

"I'll let you infer what that movie is" - just tell us the movie, please.

Jamis is played by the guy who's playing Dr. M'Benga on Star Trek Strange New Worlds....a fine show, BTW.

I read the book. If this movie works there could be a solid four or five sequels.

Kristen Dunst is amazing. Yes, she should win some awards for this role. Jessie Plemmons as indeed scary as foop. Excellent movie - I would see it again.

Thanks for that insight. I was avoiding this movie because I didn't want to be preached at either way. If it tried to pick a side, I felt the movie would come across as propaganda and I'm a little tired of that in real life already. Now I'm interested!

It was so disappointing. I mean a waste of time. I skipped watching the final 3 episodes of Shogun to watch this

dont lie. you saw wagner in narcos.

Fuck California.

The big flaw in this movie is idea that journalists still exist. They do not. They have not existed for at least 15 years. Every single thing that crosses the airwaves or is streamed from media platforms is first run thru the narrative machine to make sure the "journalist" story fits the narrative the news outlet wants to push. If there is a civil war - each side will push a completely different story - ignoring any facts that do not support their preconceived ideas about what is happening. Exactly like the news today. Journalism is completely dead - along with the once useful concept of objectivity. I can still remember a time when the news was the news - and worth my time - but now, I do not believe any of it.

This is GenZ's version of Under Fire (1983)?

Now I know that I don't want to see the movie. Thanks for saving me a few dollars. I was wanting to see a nice traditional war movie. I don't care about Reps or Dems. I'd hate to stain my name by labeling or branding myself with either gang. I don't support terrorists. But it's too bad. Another movie like Saving Private Ryan would have been nice.

I tried to watch this but stopped the moment I heard you say, "This isn't about left or right." There's basically only 2 forces fighting in this film: - The more "diverse" force named "Western Forces," which just so happens to consist of multiple races, multiple sexes, and by evidence of its armed members, multiple sexualities... - The "Loyalist States," which drastically outnumber the Western Forces if the number of states this group has is any barometer. This is the group that the President is basically the leader of. All throughout the film, we see war crimes being committed by both sides, but if you pay attention to the emotional reaction of the protagonists when these events occur, you see how they become more emotionally overwhelmed when you see the Loyalists committing the crimes. We can argue if this is true or not, but by my reasoning, it's a giveaway that we're supposed to side more with the Western Forces. As I said above, the Western Forces are depicted more with more diverse members. We see their groups consisting of more races like Hispanics / Latinos, multiple black people, a few white people, and I think I remember seeing an Asian person a few times... It also shows as having the most female fighters. And as I stated above, we also see what appears to be an LGBTQ sniper at one point as implied by the painted finger nails and hair dye. Again, we can argue about whether any of this carries any weight, but I think it's pretty evident when you see it and think it over. The Loyalist forces get shown as having members dumping dead bodies from a dumb truck into a mass grave the same way The Left loves to conflate conservatives as being Nazis in many mainstream contexts. I've lost count to the number of times I've seen things like interviews at protests or live lectures being interrupted by lunatic leftists who love to hurl insults at attendees and call them Nazis... Coincidence then that we should see a Nazi-like activity being committed by a trio of white guy Loyalists? You do the math. Finally, we have the "3-term president" (gee, I wonder who he's supposed to symbolize?) being literally lynched at the end but not before the Western Forces murder various members of the president's cabinet (one being what appears to be some sort of secretary who attempted to broker a peaceful transition with many of the others attempting to simply flee the destruction who got murdered after exiting an escape vehicle with their hands up to surrender) without anyone showing any inkling of remorse (as if to imply that it's permissible because of who it was that was murdered)... The lynching of the president at the end was essentially turned into a caricature of terrorism as the Hispanic / Latino journalist guy ensures he's able to grab a quick quote from the white male president just before the black Western Forces woman murders him with the naive teen girl taking pictures of the whole thing... If you t think this film was devoid political bias and wasn't a core theme of it, you're absolutely bonkers. Yes, you're absolutely right in how it's ALSO about the journalists and how they experience all this stuff, but in a best-case scenario, that's only in *parallel* to these other observations of subversive political bias this project was baked with. More people than I want to believe think the film is some sort of weird effort to groom leftists into an effort of 2024 action should Trump win, almost like a playbook of sorts... I don't know if I believe that, but what I do believe is that this movie is more so absolutely propaganda than it is some kind of film for people to "enjoy" despite the Gypsy Moth-mentality types probably loving it for what they see on the surface, and for probably obvious reasons...