Quote:
Originally Posted by *Anya*
steampunk vibe
Mad Max!
|
I've been told the turn of phrase for settings like those of Mad Max is "dieselpunk." I think it fits well enough, even if you could call it more gasolinepunk or petrolpunk or whatev.
Anyway, I just saw it today (with my first cousin once removed), and it was bloody glorious. I don't really even watch movies, let alone action movies, but it was an excellent piece of cinematography: a film that works because it's a film and because the entire work was designed from the ground up for a visual medium, as opposed to all the movies out there that work better as books. No scene or visual is wasted: every single one tells you something about the world and the people in it, and well enough so that you can grasp what's going on even with very little dialogue, owing both to the quality of the scene-setting and the quality of the acting. You don't have to be told what's going on, because you can see it clearly, in a way so well-presented that it makes the unbelievable believable. It's an action movie, and yet it works as well as it does because it has a narrative and a world that feel real, and because the narrative isn't a flimsy justification for what's happening on-screen but rather
is what's happening on-screen. It also fits a great deal into two hours as a result of being fast-paced and not lingering on anything more than it needs to, but is still put together with enough skill that it's easy to follow in spite of this. The only real challenge is enduring the sheer intensity, because it is a very visually rich and powerful work. There may be sensory overload.
Also, it manages to be very creepy and intense and tackle profoundly dark subject matter while somehow showing the restraint to not degenerate into a vulgar exploitation flick. It's definitely an R-rated movie, with violence and with segments that made me squirm a bit, and yet it avoided violence for the mere sake of titillation and limited itself to what actually served the narrative. This may be part of the complete lack of wasted time, where for being a two-hour movie it is nonetheless very concise and only shows what actually serves the experience. It's entirely possible that quite a bit ended up on the cutting-room floor.
Suffice it to say there's a lot that can be said about the movie without spoiling it, because what makes it great isn't simply the plot itself but how that plot is executed.
I am still left wondering one thing, though. The conventional wisdom is that action movies don't make their money off of women viewers. I find myself wondering if that holds true for Fury Road--or if it would hold true if more action movies were like it.