Furiosa - Történet a Mad Maxből

Furiosa és várható bosszújának története, ráadásul a Citadella részletesebb megismerésével együtt, dramaturgiai szempontból sűrűbb, mint végtelen hajsza az első filmben. Ennek ellenére a legkegyetlenebb jelenetekben vagy érzelmekre való utalásokban sem túlzottan érzelmes. És főleg nincs benne Tom Hardy. A Furiosa gyerekkora óta az erőszak, a kegyetlenség és a gusztustalanság által formált karaktere mégis elég erős húzóerő, a film dinamikája az első jelenettől hihetetlen, az őrült maszkok és jelmezek, vizuális és részletes elemekkel együtt pedig egyszerűen lenyűgözőek. A filmdíszletek csúcsa és egy különleges fantázia világ létrehozása. Azonban gondban voltam, hogy Chris Hemsworth-nak teljesen elhiggyem ezt az őrült gazembert. (2024.06.05)

Mad Max is an Australian cultural treasure that should have only stayed at three or four episodes. For the first hour, it felt like a sequence of mini-stories, with the disgustingly overacting Chris Hemsworth twitching like a pigeon eating grain and his performance actually making it into a kind of interlocking semi-comedy sketches that I really don't want to see in the Mad Max saga. He was the weakest link in the film. The other one was the overuse of obvious green-screen and over-stylized colors. Back then, years ago, with the first two episodes, I admired the punk spirit that came out of them. A punkness that was related to the low budget, when everything was handmade, so to speak, when the wastelanders were played by real bikers, the cops by real cops, the props were invented in the breaks during filming, and it exuded a wildness and realness that George Miller partially revived in the equally wild Fury Road. This is rather closer Thunderdome, which was also over-stylized and implausible in its depiction of the post-apocalyptic world. I didn't believe it. Mad Max doesn't benefit from a swollen budget because then Miller can't keep it up and in trying to cram in as much as possible, it's like that dog and cat fairy tale where they cooked a cake with so many ingredients that it made them puke (the quarry scene is too over the top). As time goes on, you find that you don't really care much about Furiosa's fate because, unlike Mel Gibson, she's not a pivotal defining character for you, you don't experience it with her, and you pray all the while that there's as little Hemsworth as possible. In fact, the only thing worth singling out is the ten-minute attack on the tanker, because you can feel the punk genuineness of it, where the stuntmen have honestly worked their magic along with those who came up with the choreography. And that's not enough for me, George. Too little. (2024.07.18)

George Miller took a nine-year hiatus after Fury Road dabbling in a less exciting romantic fantasy, before returning to deliver one of the best action films in recent years. Furiosa is an absolute blast, albeit different from its predecessor. It tells the epic tale of Furiosa’s relentless quest for revenge in one of the most brutal cinematic worlds ever created. The film oscillates between sheer brutality and absurdity, keeping the audience entertained despite the mind-boggling moments that seem to defy imagination. At times, it felt like watching a Tarantino flick on steroids, especially during the meticulously planned revenge in the second half. Chris Hemsworth shines in his role, clearly having a blast. Anya Taylor-Joy and her younger counterpart Alyla Browne are also fantastic, but it was Tom Burke who unexpectedly stood out to me in this harsh world. Each actor contributes to a story that is gritty, thrilling, and occasionally illogical, yet not as shocking as Fury Road. I have a feeling this will be one of the standout films of 2024. (2024.06.04)

Furiosa was still a child when she was taken from her home. She grew up surrounded by violence and madness, but she never stopped wanting revenge. In the wasteland, a war is brewing between two armies of brutal dictators, and Furiosa intends to be on the front lines. George Miller returns to a harsh post-apocalyptic world, but in a slightly different way than you might expect. There's still plenty of action, and there are so many ideas in a single scene that other Hollywood blockbusters could live off of it for years. However, this time around there are more complex characters and, above all, a greater effort to immerse yourself in a world full of chaos and discover that it too has its own order. Miller delivers another one of his visually lavish and uncompromising visions, and he knows he can afford not to pander to audiences who expect nothing more than more of what they got last time. (2024.05.22)

After nine years, the spin-off prequel to the fourth installment of the established franchise from a nearly 80-year-old geezer... If it weren't for the Mad Max franchise and the old-timer George Miller, one would have expected a mess. But that series is Mad Max and that old man is the visionary Miller, or once again, a peculiar, lavish, audio-visually polished spectacle, brimming with ideas in literally every scene. My only criticism is that the running time is too (especially in one particular chapter). It teeters on the edge of "more of the same" vs. "more room for characters and world building but not more of the same". Which isn't necessarily a criticism, but a more pronounced lean to one side might not be out of place. Either way, they are just minor details. (2024.05.23)