Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > Entertainment Discussions > Movie Talk
Reload this Page >

Mad Max Fury Road (D: Miller) S: Hardy, Theron

Movie Talk A Discussion area for everything movie related including films In The Theaters

Mad Max Fury Road (D: Miller) S: Hardy, Theron

Old 12-10-02, 09:55 AM
  #1  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 2,286
Received 9 Likes on 8 Posts
Mad Max Fans Rejoice!

Looks like years of rumors are finally official, and a new Mad Max film titled "Fury Road" will be created with Mel Gibson starring and George Miller directing.

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!)
Old 12-10-02, 10:02 AM
  #2  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 9,868
Received 27 Likes on 22 Posts
Ditto. I'm thrilled with this news as well. I wouldn't have been if Miller wasn't associated with the project. Although I wasn't a *huge* fan of "Thunderdome", I still think it's a decent sci-fi action film. But "The Road Warrior" is a classic.

Last edited by Daytripper; 12-10-02 at 10:45 AM.
Old 12-10-02, 10:14 AM
  #3  
DVD Talk Hero
 
B.A.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East County
Posts: 33,551
Received 13 Likes on 11 Posts
rennervision, you beat me to it. I was just going to post this.

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.
Old 12-10-02, 06:16 PM
  #4  
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: At da Island having a Drink! :)
Posts: 1,431
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally posted by bahist17

I just hope it isn't PG-13.
Same here.But with the recent trend of PG-13 movies nowaday,i don't know.
Old 12-10-02, 08:26 PM
  #5  
Moderator
 
Groucho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 71,200
Received 49 Likes on 38 Posts
Originally posted by bahist17
I just hope it isn't PG-13.
OH NO! That would the most horrific thing. Simply because we'd have people bitching and moaning about it nonstop here in this forum.

I just hope it isn't in Aramaic.
Old 12-10-02, 08:37 PM
  #6  
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: At da Island having a Drink! :)
Posts: 1,431
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally posted by Groucho


I just hope it isn't in Aramaic.
Same Here
Old 12-10-02, 08:47 PM
  #7  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: ...wait a minute, where the hell am I?
Posts: 2,786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by bahist17
he will get paid $25 million for it
How the hell does Hollywood expect to make any $ on their movies when they have to dish out that much $ just for one actor!

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.
Old 12-10-02, 09:36 PM
  #8  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 4,551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.

Old 12-10-02, 09:55 PM
  #9  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: ...wait a minute, where the hell am I?
Posts: 2,786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by jaeufraser
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.
Old 12-11-02, 12:49 AM
  #10  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 9,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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...
Old 12-11-02, 03:26 AM
  #11  
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yeah!, I don't want to see any cgi stunts.
The recent James Bond movie was ruined because of the cgi fx instead of stunts.
Old 12-11-02, 04:30 AM
  #12  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 3,292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Did The Fast and The Furious use CGI? Only seen it once, can't remember.

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.
Old 12-11-02, 07:25 AM
  #13  
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by k-qwick
Same Here
Aramaic only in the subtitles on the SE. But I'm hoping for William Shatner to make a cameo speaking Esperanto
Old 12-11-02, 09:49 AM
  #14  
Moderator
 
Geofferson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: The Village Green
Posts: 39,321
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes on 14 Posts
Wonderful news!
Old 12-11-02, 11:37 AM
  #15  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 6,049
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for this to happen.

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?
Old 01-31-03, 06:10 PM
  #16  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Bartertown due to it having a better economy than where I really live, Buffalo NY
Posts: 29,728
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
how'd I miss this news before today?
if I hadn't seen a little blurb on darkhorizons I wouldn't have known
this kicks ass
Old 01-31-03, 08:17 PM
  #17  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Oklahoma, USA
Posts: 8,494
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Yeah, awesome isn't it? I can't wait. Beyond Thunderdome may not have been too hot, but The Road Warrior is one of my favorite movies of all time.
Old 02-01-03, 09:57 AM
  #18  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I kinda like thunder dome, i thought it was an interesting look at civilization after the apocalyps. It doesnt quite fit with the Mad Max theme but I still liked it. Id hope this one was more like the first two though.
Old 02-01-03, 07:41 PM
  #19  
DVD Talk Legend
 
d2cheer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 10,161
Received 64 Likes on 43 Posts
Originally posted by chanster
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...
Exactly!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Old 02-03-03, 02:29 AM
  #20  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 4,551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by purplechoe
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.
Yes, you're right a big star doesn't guarantee a hit. But quite frankly it raises the odds much higher. Would this movie be made with Gibson and a 104 million dollar budget if he wasn't the star he is, and was on the level of say...Kurt Russell? I doubt it. Celebrity is not the end all be all of success, but to deny that it doesn't bring in money is just kind of naive. For instance, Vanilla Sky. Honestly, did that movie crack 100 million because it had such great word of mouth? Did the commercials and story bring the people in? Well, sort of, but the only a large number of people paid attention was its star...Tom Cruise. They are like insurance policies...perhaps a movie's concept can sell itself, but stick a star in there...and you've got another thing that's fairly easy to sell. Why do I say Gibson is worth the 25 million? Because rest assured his movies will make a good amount, and his celebrity and popularity is key to that. Sometimes studios make mistakes. Eddie Murphy has shown that his ability to open and make money on movies is...fairly weak. He's bombed three movies in the last year. But look at his track record, and for that matter his movie selection, and you can see he isn't quite the star Mel Gibson is. I'm not saying just because a studio pays someone that amount they are worth it. 20 million to Reese Witherspoon? Vin Diesel? Eddie Murphy? Sly Stallone? No way, I don't think they're worth that. Their box office history as of today doesn't warrant it in my mind. But Tom Cruise, Julia Roberts, Tom Hanks, and Mel Gibson? Yeah, they pull in the money and henceforth...the demand for their celebrity and box office pull definately warrants the payout in terms of what will come in return. That's my opinion.
Old 09-24-03, 08:36 AM
  #21  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 2,286
Received 9 Likes on 8 Posts
No Mad Max 4 (Or Another Reason to Hate George Lucas)

Just saw this news item on IMDB. After hoping for almost 20 years for another Mad Max film, it looks like it's never going to happen.

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.
Old 09-24-03, 08:52 AM
  #22  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 1,471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
God forbid George Lucas should actually rent studio space to shoot his own film without consulting all other filmmakers. How thoughtless.
Old 09-24-03, 08:55 AM
  #23  
Moderator
 
Groucho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 71,200
Received 49 Likes on 38 Posts
I think it's a bit of a stretch to blame Lucas for this. I doubt Gibson is.
Old 09-24-03, 08:56 AM
  #24  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Numanoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Down in 'The Park'
Posts: 27,881
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
It's spelled "Luca$".
Old 09-24-03, 09:02 AM
  #25  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Exit 10, NJ
Posts: 2,753
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
After Thunderdome, I think it's better that Max fade back into legend. What would Max do in Part 4, confound the baddies by tripping them up with his walker?

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.