You ever get excited to head out to a destination you’ve been meaning to revisit for some time and never quite make it, then get there and realize what a sty it is?
No, I’m not talking about Bridgeview, Il – I’m talking about 1979. Oh, not the entire year. What I am actually, specifically referring to is one simple little Australian movie called Mad Max.
What a piece.
So I would have to say that – like most – no matter how awesome I thought I remembered mad max being, over the last decade or so I’ve developed a grudge against it simply for kicking off Captain Asshat’s career – yes, I’m referring to ol’ Sugar Tits himself, mel gibson. If it wasn’t for mad max we may have never had to endure this guy’s bullshit*. But I’m here today to tell you no matter what you may think of The Beav, or Lethal Weapon, or Edge of Darkness** if you go back and watch mad max you will find yourself regretting it.
Well, except for one scene. But I’ll get to that in a moment.
Let’s start with the title. mad max? Mad as in angry or mad as in crazy, ‘cuz from what I saw ol’ mel didn’t get even the slightest bit out of shape and never what I’d call crazy, or at least not if – in the context of the film – we are to use the Knight Rider’s performance during the opening sequence as a judge of what crazy is in the world of the not so distant future. And wait, while we’re here let’s talk about that opening sequence. Wow, and I thought the opening sequence of superbad was drawn out and poorly edited! Good lord, superbad‘s opener looks like a hyper-edited music video from Autechre compared to the ridiculous Knight Rider sequence in mad max, where cops chase and chase and chase this carrrr-aaaaa-zeeee bad boy and his admittedly kind-of-hot-in-an-‘it-was-futuristic-in-1979-to-have-pink-hair girlfriend as they… ah, drive fast and declare their craziness over the CB. And of course what helps really make this scene suck, more so, are the completely ridiculous scenes of mel biding his time. The shots never reveal his face, always showing us via the back of his head or the reflections in his aviators how he is indeed watching what’s going on – watching and apparently waiting for all of his law enforcement buddies to blow up or crash before he finally feels the need to jump in and pretty much finish the reckless, high speed chase in a matter of seconds.
Good show douche bag.
I know this film is supposed to be post apocalyptic, but really, I guess I only know that because of the subsequent sequels, which now a few people have told me are actually waaaaay better than this sad little movie. Based on this I’m not sure if I even want to try to believe them and watch one of them, but one thing is for sure – watching this first one in the series again and having enough distance between myself and the franchise (like probably twenty-four years or so distance) I find it impossible to see how, exactly, mad max sets up the post apocalyptic angle. I mean, its setting isn’t really PA because, well, it’s Australia, so it looks like Australia looks. And the subsequent “no gasoline” thing that Wikipedia reminds me the later movies in the series play with is definitely not even mentioned here – unless we are to take the fact that the bad guy BMX punkers try to rob a gas tanker as a sign of scarcity, despite the fact that all anyone does throughout the ENTIRE MOVIE IS DRIVE. I mean, if these folks are hard up for gas why is everyone driving all the time?
Next I’d like to examine the ‘Only when needed for dramatic effect’ Baby that apparently flits in and out of mel and his woman’s life throughout the picture. near the beginning they have breakfast and little mel is there in the background, playing with daddy’s Smith & Wesson. Then mel retires and the loving couple head out to, once again, DRIVE ALL OVER THE PLACE but there’s no sign of babs. They even stop and commune with nature and apparently either leave the kid in the car or displace him for safe keeping into the negative zone cuz he’s nowhere to be found. Then when sugar tits finds herself alone and in danger, well there’s the kid again. It’s almost as if the filmmakers shot the movie without the kid, felt as though it would have more impact with the kid, then went back and reconfigured shit so there was a baby added in.
Ridiculous.
The one scene I did absolutely love – and really it’s not an entire scene per se, merely a moment within yet another stupid scene inside a series of many more stupid scenes strung together to make corky’s version of a PA action flick – is the scene with the gas tanker because one of the bad guys (why do I keep wanting to call them the dreadnoks retarded cousins?) actually POLE VAULTS off a small cliff onto the tanker. This is so from out of nowhere that I had to rewind it (as opposed to a lot of the fast-forwarding I found myself doing to speed up the process) and watch it again, my wife not having noticed it and, of course, not believing that something so bizarre could have taken place. And when I saw it again and proved it to her I found myself wondering if the three acrobatic dreadnok-style douche bags in Punisher: Warzone*** were perhaps openly based on and mocking this film.
I’d like to think so.
I guess there truly is nowhere to go but up with the remake.
…………………..
* Although come to think of it I’m not really sure how a movie this bad could have launched anybody’s career – and yet it did and we do, so…
** Haha, that was my little joke. NO ONE liked that one. And despite the common sense sentiment that it is not possible to judge a film without seeing it, we all have and we are all right, at least in regards to this one.
*** And this is not a jab – I LOVED WarZone. How it took three freakin’ tries to get the simplest marvel character right on film I do not know, but Warzone finally did!!!
9 comments
You’re either trolling or you have no taste in film or appreciation for its history and context. Either way, piss poor article.
You may be unaware of the brass balls required to get that kind of driving on screen. That’s OK.
I like this one best on DVD where I can skip over the rough, boring parts but common, scrooge, that’s some of the most spectacular stunt work ever put on film. Every action sequence is absolutely kick-ass. Everybody knows this is one of the greatest films of all time because it gave us Mad Max 2.
Has CHUD been hacked and some moron has posted this article just to piss off fanboys ? In the 10 years I have been coming to CHUD this would honestly have to be the most piss poor article I’ve ever seen. Nick, if you read these comments at all please get rid of this tool immediately.
Keep in mind, this is a blog. Thus the horrendous lack of editing. It’s his world view, so take it for what it is… not an “article.” Msr. Baker is entitled to his opinion and likely provides this for free.
“I guess I only know that because of the subsequent sequels, which now a few people have told me are actually waaaaay better than this sad little movie”
Right. Beyond Thunderdome is a *way* better than Mad Max. Got it. Moving on…
Hmmm. Curious as to what, exactly, is historically significant about this film? This isn’t a challenge, it’s a sincere question. Just please don’t say the driving – The French Connection was eight years before MM and blows it out of the water in cinematography, stunts, timing, ingenuity and utter insanity.
Shawn…Well let’s see…Mad Max pretty much created and entire genre of film..Was Mad Max great?..To be fair it’s hard too classify Mad Max as a great film.But what it did,And the impact it made..I don’t know how old you are Shawn but I’m figureing your much younger than me,I’m 41..I remember all the creepiness of potential nuclear war no one knew that we would make it too 2012 back then it as actually a very scary time in the world..Mad Max took place soon after the initial exchange between super powers we are led too believe in the story that the MFP is struggleing too mantain order as the rest of the world has been plunged into chaos..A scary time frame too be sure..Mad Max had the wierdness of the post apocalyptic gangs with the added strangeness of regular suburban life still surrounding all this insanity..It seemed very a plausible scenario too us at the time..The “driveing” your refer too is not what Mad Max is noted for it’s the motorcycle stunt work and the way it was all filmed the camera mounts in half those shots were never even thought of before that film,There’s alot of innovation there maybe your just not sure what it is your seeing..
Vegasrobo – I’m 36 in about a month – I remember the nuclear threat – it shaped a large part of my early awareness of the world at large, what with overly anxious or overly politial teachers/relatives/celebrities seeming to populate my everyday world. I also remember how the film mad max from my childhood was riveting and disturbing. However I rewatched it to find that it’s neither.
Now, granted I’m looking at this in hindsight – but so is everyone else. Hindsight is a funny thing, especially when dealing with film. Example – for whatever reason I realized after the release of that last Indie Jones movie that most folks look back on movies that were important to them during their childhood as do-no-wrongs. After that film I also realized that I do not. Hence, when crystal skull didn’t completely infuriate me people my age I knew were shocked and argued the point – the crux of that argument was ALWAYS how bad crystal skull was and how great the originals were. Guess what? I still enjoy those old indie movies, but great works of cinema they are not. They serve a certain purpose and crystal skull, despite the horrible reliance on CG, hit the same g-spot for me. What I’m taking a long-winded approach to saying is that just because something was great, enduring or important to me as a kid doesn’t mean it’s a great film.
Also, mad max is known to have the nuclear apocalypse thing going for it, but as I state in my original blog we only really know that because of the subsequent movies in the series, wikipedia or maybe, at the time, accompanying press. Nowhere in that first film is there a reference or set-up to it being a post-nuclear anything. The set-up line at the beginning is “A few years from now”. That’s a pretty big gap to leave up to the imagination. Why not at least ‘A few years from now a nuclear blah blah’. And create the genre it did not, because I can think of at least one other Post-nuclear landscape film about roving packs of whatever off the top of my head – A boy and his dog, and it predates mad max by four years or so.
I was completely shocked to throw mad max on last week and find that – to me – it had no redeeming qualities – I was expecting the same thing it sparked in me way back when. I remembered it being so much darker and actually disturbing. It’s not and I cannot believe for a minute anyone who watches it today will feel to the contrary. They might nostalgically remember how it made them feel, but it won’t make them feel that way again. All it does in present tense is look sloppy and silly.
As far as the point you make about the camera mounts – I’m not versed enough in biker movies preceding mad max to know whether or not the camera mounts were used before but I’ll gladly take your word for it. I mentioned the driving simply because of the mention in a previous comment about the “brass balls required to get that kind of driving on screen” and obviously I’m not the only historically challenged folk out there – The French Connection was 1971 and consised of waaaaay more brass than mad max could lay claim to.
Wow, you’re a fucking moron. Good luck with that.
Well its obvious that the author of this article doesn’t like Mel Gibson and uses that as an excuse to bash a good movie. The first real paragraph is just Mel bashing, if you can’t seperate the art from the artist, well then you probably shouldn’t be reviewing movies.
As for not knowing that this is set in a post-apocalyptic world, well just because its not obvious to you, doesn’t mean it isn’t made clear to others. It was very obvious to me and everyone I know that has seen the movie, that its set in a world thats winding down. Its called subtlrty and nuance, watch the Hunger Games if you need something a little simpler.
Although, I suppose I really shouldn’t bother with someone who regards Crystal Skull as entertaining as the old Indy movies.
Comments are shown as archived from the original site; new comments are closed.