Mad Max: Fury Road

[NorthCyd]

98% is misleading. Anything over a 66% rating gets thrown into the 'fresh' pile and counted towards the 98%. So honestly 200 reviewers could give it a 70/100 or like a C+ grade and it would be 100% because they all are above that 66 mark. However Metacritic is at 89/100 avg with the top reviewers. With some in the low 70s and some perfect 100.

I disagree that it is meaningless or misleading. It is pretty clear how they come up with their percentages. It is just a different metric. I think you can glean some info on how good a movie is based on how many people "liked" vs "disliked" a movie. In fact, I would say an average of arbitrary ratings has just as much a chance of being misleading vs just giving a movie a thumbs up or thumbs down.

 

[Jacktronic]

FWIW, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. Definitely one you would want to see in the theatre.

 

[bozclone]

My 18 year old son and I went to see it Friday night. I thought the action was awesome. After my son got past the initial "What the heck is going on?" he loved it. Like he said, any action movie with a guitarist playing a flaming guitar on the front of one of the chase vehicles has to be awesome.

 

[ISUChippewa]

My 18 year old son and I went to see it Friday night. I thought the action was awesome. After my son got past the initial "What the heck is going on?" he loved it. Like he said, any action movie with a guitarist playing a flaming guitar on the front of one of the chase vehicles has to be awesome.

That part was really 'effin sweet.

 

[Gonzo]

That part was really 'effin sweet.

[video=youtube;on35CDEjd5k]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=on35CDEjd5k[/video]

 

[dahliaclone]

I disagree that it is meaningless or misleading. It is pretty clear how they come up with their percentages. It is just a different metric. I think you can glean some info on how good a movie is based on how many people "liked" vs "disliked" a movie. In fact, I would say an average of arbitrary ratings has just as much a chance of being misleading vs just giving a movie a thumbs up or thumbs down.

If you want to rely on a pool of 200 reviewers where 40 or so are actual movie critics and the rest are fanboy bloggers so be it. I'm not saying it's meanlingless. I just don't base anything of it whatsoever. People see 98% and think it's great and it is for sure but there is a difference between liking it and loving it and you have to dig to find out true reviewer ratings on there. I choose Metacritic as a better snapshot of consensus that's all. Top 45 critics all rating movies on a a scales of 100 and easy to see and its averaged out.

 

[Gonzo]

I disagree that it is meaningless or misleading. It is pretty clear how they come up with their percentages. It is just a different metric. I think you can glean some info on how good a movie is based on how many people "liked" vs "disliked" a movie. In fact, I would say an average of arbitrary ratings has just as much a chance of being misleading vs just giving a movie a thumbs up or thumbs down.

Yeah but if you asked people what they thought of 'Independence Day' I'm sure a majority would say they liked it, even though it's without question the stupidest movie of my lifetime. There are even plenty of critics who loved it.

Makes no sense to put any stock into what critics or the masses think about a movie. If it looks good and has actors that I like, I'll see it. If I get burned so be it. But I'll never decide to see or not see a movie based on what a review site or critics say. They're as full of ***** as the rest of us.

 

[Judoka]

I saw it yesterday and enjoyed it. The action sequences are absolutely insane (in a positive way). That being written, there's really not a whole lot of plot or very strong character development to it, which I can see as off-putting to some people.

Ironically, even though Mad Max is in the title, it can be written that Charlize Theron's character is actually the main character.

I think it's worth paying matinee movie ticket prices for. The action sequences are worth the money alone.

Gotta strongly disagree with you there. There was a huge amount of plot and character development. Max goes from basically being a feral animal to slowly caring for and being willing to sacrifice himself for the group, with clear and believable progression along the way. Nux goes from being a zealot to actually sacrificing himself so the wives (the property of the prophet of his religion) could live and be free. Again, with clear and believable progress. The wives go from being timid things to taking an active role in their survival and freedom. Again, with clear and believable progress. And so on. Even the warboys had individual personalities rather than just being replaceable henchmen. The character progression and plot wasn't thrown in your face like it is in a lot of movies, but it was very strong and clearly there.

 

[Judoka]

Yeah but if you asked people what they thought of 'Independence Day' I'm sure a majority would say they liked it, even though it's without question the stupidest movie of my lifetime. There are even plenty of critics who loved it.

Makes no sense to put any stock into what critics or the masses think about a movie. If it looks good and has actors that I like, I'll see it. If I get burned so be it. But I'll never decide to see or not see a movie based on what a review site or critics say. They're as full of ***** as the rest of us.

The hell you say.

[video=youtube;oj16vfbsM9A]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oj16vfbsM9A[/video]

 

[SplitIdentity]

Saw it Friday. Had no idea what the original story line was. Didn't read the synopsis. Just went and ******* loved it.

Watched the originals this weekend. First one blows but the others were good.

 

[NorthCyd]

Saw it Friday. Had no idea what the original story line was. Didn't read the synopsis. Just went and ******* loved it.

Watched the originals this weekend. First one blows but the others were good.

You had honestly never seen any of the others? I'm not surprised you hadn't seen the first, but I am surprised you hadn't seen at least one of the other two. I have never been a big fan of the first one. I imagine for it's time it was good, but it definitely hasn't aged well.

 

[SplitIdentity]

You had honestly never seen any of the others? I'm not surprised you hadn't seen the first, but I am surprised you hadn't seen at least one of the other two. I have never been a big fan of the first one. I imagine for it's time it was good, but it definitely hasn't aged well.

Never saw them. Heard of them, never sat down and watched. I have now though.

 

[Cyclonetrombone]

http://www.mtv.com/news/2161513/mad-max-fury-road-guitar-player-doof-warrior-colin-gibson/

My wife was into this movie but the second that guitar was on screen it put her to a different level.

 

[oldman]

I got to the theater half an hour before its scheduled time, and as soon as they started seating, I was in. Got IMO the best seat in the house -- dead center, dead middle. Wouldn't have mattered though. Total of five people in the place for the whole show -- not sure why.

I thought the (3D) movie was awesome!! Like Road Warrior on steroids! Lots of creepy villains, antiquated human-powered gears and chains, souped up vehicles and explosions. And just weird post-apocalyptic craziness. Pretty much two solid hours of action.

 

[The_Architect]

I saw this last night and I'm still not sure I'll be able to put into words what I witnessed. I mean, the guy playing the flame guitar just put me in a hysterical laughter every time they showed him. What a weird and totally awesome spectacle.

 

[isukendall]

You had honestly never seen any of the others? I'm not surprised you hadn't seen the first, but I am surprised you hadn't seen at least one of the other two. I have never been a big fan of the first one. I imagine for it's time it was good, but it definitely hasn't aged well.

Generation gap. Ask anyone younger than the age of 30, and most hadn't heard of them.

 

[HoraceGrant]

If you want to rely on a pool of 200 reviewers where 40 or so are actual movie critics and the rest are fanboy bloggers so be it. I'm not saying it's meanlingless. I just don't base anything of it whatsoever. People see 98% and think it's great and it is for sure but there is a difference between liking it and loving it and you have to dig to find out true reviewer ratings on there. I choose Metacritic as a better snapshot of consensus that's all. Top 45 critics all rating movies on a a scales of 100 and easy to see and its averaged out.

You don't really have to do all that much digging on RT. there is an average rating out of 10 directly below the percentage, and it's usually pretty close to what the metacritic score is

 

[BCoffClone125]

Saw this last night having never seen any of the other Mad Max films and really liked it! Definitely a movie you need to see in a movie theater instead of waiting until it comes out on video. Like others said, I couldn't stop laughing every time they showed the dude playing the flaming guitar in the chase vehicle. I think it was close to a 2 hr run-time, but the movie is so action packed that it feels much shorter than that.

 

[BoxsterCy]

Weird to read all of the posts on critics and ratings and such when the obvious go to source for such things is Cyclone Fanatic.

:smile:

 

[BigLame]

Saw it Friday. Had no idea what the original story line was. Didn't read the synopsis. Just went and ******* loved it.

Watched the originals this weekend. First one blows but the others were good.

I can definitely see how many who may go back & watch the first would think it is not good. It was a low budget movie with a weird premise & a bunch of no-name Aussie's acting in it. At the time, though, it had a very different feel to it and it was weird and creepy, especially the villain, Toecutter. Hugh Keays-Byrne was the actor who portrayed Toecutter, and it just so happens he plays the part of Immortan Joe in Fury Road. Dude's come full circle

Anyways, Mad Max set up the Road Warrior, which was friggin' awesome & holds up a lot better (Can't believe that was 1981!). The third had its good moments but imo it could have done without the whole group of kids/Lord of the Flies in the desert thing which was too far out there. As long as Fury Road & any other continuations of this series stay away from that sort of thing will be the way to go.

Crazy thinking George Miller's work as a director is limited as it is & goes from the Mad Max franchise to the Witches of Eastwick, then Babe Pig in the City and then the two Happy Feet installments, then now back to Max. Seems he's still got it though with Fury Road, to which I'm very happy.