Mad Max Fury Road (D: Miller) S: Hardy, Theron
http://www.cnn.com/2002/SHOWBIZ/Movi...eut/index.html
I, for one, am thrilled - having always considered Mad Max one of the best science fiction series. (And I always wanted to see another one so I could stop dwelling on how they ended it with "Thunderdome." It wasn't exactly the way I want to remember the conclusion to the Mad Max saga!)
Last edited by Daytripper; 12-10-02 at 09:45 AM.
I, for one, am excited about this, too. I was skeptical when I first heard rumors about this awhile back, but if Miller's writing and directing it, I am all for it...even if it is an older Max. I don't blame Mel for saying "yes" to this, especially considering he will get paid $25 million for it AND he will make many fans of the series happy for doing so (I don't think too many people would have been happy w/ a new Max and/or Miller unattached to the project). Its sounds like a win/win situation to me. I just hope it isn't PG-13.
I just hope it isn't PG-13.
I just hope it isn't in Aramaic.
he will get paid $25 million for it
Is it just me, or does it seem like whenever I hear so and so is getting paid 20+ million to star in a movie it will most likely suck.
Anyway, thank God George Miller is involved. I can't wait...another Mad Max movie. I just hope they don't soften him up. I hope Mel Gibson lets George Miller do his thing. We do remember what happened with Payback. Of course, George is the man who made Mel Gibson's first slew of successful movies in the Mad Max trilogy, so I have faith.
Ok, so they're paying Mel Gibson 25 million for this. You know, his name is gonig to get people to see this. Mad Max without Mel Gibson means most likely lower grosses. Yeah no George Miller and the movie would probably suck. But if Mel is there it'll make money. The man just brings people in. I can't even remember the last movie he made that grossed less than 90 million US box office. When you're part of the studio, that justifies the grosses completely. Do I think he's worth 25 million dollars? In this case, yes. His name is that powerful. Talent isn't the question...it's commercial viability and his name brings that to this project.
Anyway, thank God George Miller is involved. I can't wait...another Mad Max movie. I just hope they don't soften him up. I hope Mel Gibson lets George Miller do his thing. We do remember what happened with Payback. Of course, George is the man who made Mel Gibson's first slew of successful movies in the Mad Max trilogy, so I have faith.
Pluto Nash (Eddie Murphy, not Gibson) and Payback, We Were Soldiers, etc... ring any bell? I don't think people go to see a movie just becuase Mel is in it. They go to see interesting or entertaining movies. If it happens to have a big star, that means more money. But just beacuse so and so is in it, doesn't guarantee that it will make it's money back. I think actors should get a % of profits instead just being offered 20 mil because he is who he is.
I just don't see this one as a big bluckbuster type movie. Just for Gibson, 25 mil is gone. Since he's in it, you know that production value will be 50 mil+. I just don't think this is a wise decision. I'm just being anal about this because I was reading the thread about how it sucks that we have to sit through commercials before the movie and the big reason for this is because..., well read the above.
There's absolutely no reason why Mad Max 4 needs CGI. It's about a muscle car with a blower (with an on/off switch), real stunts, and lots of explosions.
Forget Thunderdome even exists, go back to The Road Warrior and continue from there. Hot chicks, awesome chases, and that kid with the razor boomerang.
There's been many, many film announcements over the past few weeks that seem to have fizzled a little while later.
Do "King Conan" and "The Fountain" ring any bells?
Whatever dude, Max R. is back and he is going to kick some ass! Can't wait for this movie - PLEASE GEORGE NO CGI crap. Give us the barebones, real gas fueled adrenaline rush you gave us in the Road Warrior and Mad Max...
Pluto Nash (Eddie Murphy, not Gibson) and Payback, We Were Soldiers, etc... ring any bell? I don't think people go to see a movie just becuase Mel is in it. They go to see interesting or entertaining movies. If it happens to have a big star, that means more money. But just beacuse so and so is in it, doesn't guarantee that it will make it's money back. I think actors should get a % of profits instead just being offered 20 mil because he is who he is.
I just don't see this one as a big bluckbuster type movie. Just for Gibson, 25 mil is gone. Since he's in it, you know that production value will be 50 mil+. I just don't think this is a wise decision. I'm just being anal about this because I was reading the thread about how it sucks that we have to sit through commercials before the movie and the big reason for this is because..., well read the above.
http://www.imdb.com/StudioBrief/#1
'Mad Max' Sequel Appears Dead
Prospects of Mel Gibson returning to the screen in his Mad Max persona faded today (Tuesday) when Daily Variety reported that the actor is in talks with Warner Bros. to star in Under and Alone, about an ATF undercover agent who infiltrated a motorcycle gang. Gibson had originally intended to shoot Mad Max: Fury Road in the southern Africa country of Namibia in May but halted preproduction citing security concerns following the outbreak of war with Iraq. Production offices in Swakopmund were shut down, dozens of contracts and leases for homes, apartments, car rentals, and caterers were canceled, and sets built for the $100-million movie were warehoused. Gibson later plunged into post-production of his biblical film The Passion, seemingly snuffing out the fire on the back burner, where the Mad Max feature had been placed. It had been reported earlier that Gibson decided to shoot the film in Namibia because George Lucas had booked all available studio space at Fox Studios in Australia to shoot Star Wars: Episode 3. Lucas completed principal production there last week.