I can't for the life of me understand the critical approval George Miller gets for movies set in a dystopian world with (as far as I know) no particular explanation as to how it got that way, characters for whom there is nothing to emotional invest in, and no real thematic coherence: just an excuse for car chases combined with circus acts and a general heavy metal vibe. I mean, if the only approval it got was from recreational drug taking revheads and heavy metal freaks, I could understand it - they might think it a kind of world they would enjoy living in. But no, lots and lots of otherwise credible, mature age critics thought Fury Road was the bee's knees, including Peter Bradshaw from the Guardian, whose byline photo makes him look like the last person on Earth who would be caught owning a V8.
I mean, I don't "get" Tolkien either - but I can kind of see why some might take enjoyment from him. I just put it down to "a difference in genre tastes". But with Mad Max, I am at a complete loss as to understand why it doesn't have the smallest audience, and (perhaps more importantly) why more proper critics don't agree with me!
Anyway, that's by way of background to noting that (thank God) the new Mad Max film which is soon in cinemas is getting "not quite as good as Fury Road" reviews, but still reviews that are (no doubt) far too good. (Again, see Peter Bradshaw).
I hope it is a box office disappointment, but it will probably be me who is upset.
Update: I just went back and re-read my 2016 opinion of Fury Road. It was even more savage than I remembered.:)
No comments:
Post a Comment