We just got back from Mad Max: Fury Road.
I was disappointed. Everyone kept telling me it was some kind of crazy feminist movie. I kept waiting for the castrations, the misandry, the “I HATE ALL MEN” shrieks, the long didactic lectures about the superiority of women, and the goddess worship, and it didn’t deliver. Instead, we got a lively action movie with non-stop pacing, and an ensemble of men and women working together as equals, and being equally human…
Oh. Hang on a sec.
I guess that makes it a radical feminist movie. It was pretty good, I recommend it. Just go in expecting what it is, a vivid rapid fire thrill ride that manages to avoid tired tropes, using women as props for men to be manly around, or being patronizing.
OK.
on the list
Here is a woman who appreciated Fury Road because of the portrayal of Furiosa :
My serious reaction isn’t all that far from PZ’s sarcastic one. I obviously didn’t think the MRAs were going to be right about it but I did, thanks to them, go in expecting an overtly feminist movie. And in my world, the mere existence of capable, confident women is not enough to make something overtly feminist.
I asked a Slate writer on Facebook if the bar is really that low. He said “actually, it’s lower than that.”
I am so going to see this. Not just because I’m a huge fan of dystopian post-apunkalyptic SF or of George Miller who pretty much defined it, not just because it’s my patriotic duty as an Australian, not just because I love every single thing about George Miller’s mashup vehicles and unhinged baddies who are still somehow uniquely Australian, not just because of the sweet aroma of MRA tears, not just because I love chase movies but also because it’s so heavy on practical effects and so light on the CGI. In this day & age (the age of the Fast & Furious non-playable videogame sequel franchise and the CG city-destroying superhero/giant robot epic, brought to you by MoviePhotoshop) I have massive respect for any director who says “I want to have crazy people on wobbly sticks bouncing between cars and trucks like swashbuckling pirates. So, turn that fucking computer off and go and get me a convoy of trucks and muscle cars, some wobbly sticks and some crazy people.”
Well, actually it’s just about the MRA tears. Boycott the film all you like for whatever reasons you can extract from your arses, trilby-donners, your lachrymose torrents will only refresh me all the more between my mouthfuls of popcorn.
I can’t handle violent post-apocalyptic films, so I won’t be seeing it. However, Furiosa sounds pretty cool.
As a disabled woman myself, I love the description of her, and the fact that her missing hand just is and is not given any attention. That is very cool.
I liked the Vuvalini and the Doof Warrior.
And Immortan Joe. I love a good baddie.
In a press conference for Fury Road, a member of the press said the following to Tom Hardy:
“I’ll preface my remarks by saying I have five sisters, a daughter, a wife, and a mother, so I know what it’s like to be outgunned by estrogen. As you were reading the script, did you ever think “Why are all these women in here? I thought this was supposed to be a man’s movie.” ”
Hardy’s response to that stupid as fuck question (available at the link) is niiiiiiiiiiiice.
I wasn’t really expecting to like it but I found it really enjoyable. I was also surprised by the warboy’s arc in the story, which I thought was socially powerful as well.
I went to see it last night and was a little disappointed. I was expecting more substance because of all the reviews and the misogynist tears but it was all action, very sparse dialogue. If I’d known that ahead of time though I think I would have enjoyed it more for what it was.
To clarify, I think I hyped myself up too much beforehand and my expectations were flawed. I think it will grow on me over time. And I’d definitely go to see a sequel.
Oh. And though there was no “I HATE ALL MEN” there were slogans painted on the walls of the prison/harem that said “We are not things”. Radical feminism indeed.
Hands down the best movie that’s come out the past year.
The visual was just amazing, from the dirt and the grit to the over the top rigs (rocking war-guitar!), it was basically eyecandy all the way through.
And definitely, despite the title of the movie the main character was Furiosa and not Max, since it was her actions, her story, that provided the motivation and impetus to drive the plot along.
Heck, pretty much every character was wonderfully portrayed. I loved how Nux was just like a little kid, how all the brides had their own individuality and strength and weaknesses, especially Angharad. That moment right after Max gave his little thumbs up . . .
Never really understood where the whole deal with this movie being some kind of crazy feminist propaganda thing popped up from, but depictions like this should be more than welcomed in the movie industry, it should be encouraged.
If ever a Black Widow movie gets made, hopefully it’d be more like Fury Road than the SNL bit, because that was just depressingly on point.
Just saw it tonight myself. Best action movie I’ve seen this decade, possibly ever. The pacing was great, the action was great, the effects were well done, and I loved that they went with Show over Tell. There’s no point where you feel like the screenwriter or director is explicitly explaining to the audience what’s happening or what a character’s motivations are; it’s all there on the screen for the audience to figure out.
@Ibis3, These verbal jackboots were made for walking #10
I want to cry that this depiction could cause any MRA backlash. It would be nice if that sort of message were in *any* dystopian movie (book, other media, etc.) that featured a harem or anything similar. I wasn’t exactly misogynistic when I was younger, but I could have benefited from seeing that in a movie and having it dealt with in a good way. I am still working on being a good humanist and treating everyone as they should be treated.
Saw it yesterday.
Loved the shout out to The Cars That Ate Paris. The Doof Warrior got me thinking of Brütal Legend. And when the dirt bike riders attacked, I had flashbacks to this.
I’ve been meaning to watch it for a while now. As of now, literally everyone who has seen it and whose opinion I respect on movies has recommended it.
Don’t you just love radical feminism? So much better than everyday feminism!
rietpluim @16:
http://everydayfeminism.com/
Don’t knock everyday feminism :)
Didn’t know that website. Nice!
OK, now I’m interested. I had previously assumed it was just another action movie; it is now on the list.
BTW, that video is just excellent :)
@19: it is so much more than just another action movie, it makes most other action movies completely pointless. I second all the positive comments in this thread. It really is a Show Don’t Tell masterclass – nobody _ever_ sits down for a long pointless exposition speech, you learn everything you need to know about the characters and the world of the movie as you go along. Everything in the action sequence feels real because almost all of it actually is real; they achieved the effect of a massive warband of postapocalyptic vehicles smashing each other up in the desert by building a fleet of postapocalyptic vehicles and destroying them in a desert. The dialogue is minimal but utterly memorable, the bad guys are horrible but also fully human and comprehensible, Charlize Theron should get an Oscar.
Also the narrative structure is great. The first half is an epic nonstop action car chase battle, then we have five minutes to catch our breath, then the second half is the same epic nonstop action car chase battle, done twice as hard, backwards and in high heels with all the knobs turned up to 11. I’m sure all the knobs on the Doof Wagon go up to 11, right?
@2: great perspective – in fact I just realised that, during the sniper rifle scene, it didn’t even occur to me that her prosthetic would even have been an issue – because, like everyone else in the movie, I was thinking of it as Furiosa’s left arm (which happens to be made mostly out of spanners), rather than as The Fake Arm.
If you only go to see one superb action movie in which a madman paints his face chrome, screams “I am awaited in Valhalla!”, and leaps from a speeding 18-wheeler to stab a motorised hedgehog with an exploding harpoon, make it this one.
Mhh, using “radical” in combination with “feminism” is kinda dangerous. There are these self-proclaimed “radfems” who a basically the misandrist (and trans-hating) versions of MRAs….
On brighter news: yes, the movie was f*cking awesome. Serves the MRAs right that they can’t enjoy it because of their ideology. I couldn’t believe it at first when a friend told me that on the way back from the movie theater, I wasn’t even sure where they might have interpreted “evul feminist propaganda” into.
@19: Well, it is an action movie. CRANKED UP TO 11!
I did read a fun interview with the props guy – Miller told him to build a doublenecked electric guitar that’s also a flamethrower, so he built a prop, and Miller said “Good, now where do you plug it in?” So he had to go away again and build a _fully functional_ double necked electric guitar that is also a flamethrower. To go on top of a fully functioning Doof Wagon made of a missile carrier stacked thirty feet high with taiko drums and amplifiers.
prae @21:
Don’t know how long you’ve been reading this blog, but PZ (and many of the commentariat) are aware of the presence of radfems and TERFs. PZs reference to radical feminists in the OP is in reference to the people who complain that mainstream feminists are radical.
Geez, by their logic, I’m surprised there weren’t any complaints about Mortal Kombat X’s story mode being feminist propaganda.
So going on the list.
actually, when I watched this a week or so back, all that I was watching was an insane action flick. I never saw it as a feminist or disability poz movie. It’s fascinating now to look back on it in that way.
“Furiosa fire a long shot, using Max’s shoulder to stabilize the gun barrel”
There’s a cool bit of allegory there if you care to look, I think
Upon seeing the headline, my first reaction was: No, no, no, no, that’s not a cool name, it’s just horrible grammar.
“Imperator” is a masculine noun in Latin (meaning “emperor”), and any adjectives modifying it must be similarly declined to match it in gender. You can have “Imperator Furiosus” or you can have “Imperatrix Furiosa;” take your pick. But please, don’t mix them. I’m not talking about sex roles or movies, just about basic grammar. Mrs Bull, my old high school Latin teacher, would have cringed to hear such a name pass my lips.
Perhaps the writers actually knew their Latin, and were trying to make some sly and arcane point about mixing gender roles. If so, I’m afraid the point sailed far over the heads of most of their audience.
@27: it’s more to do with the character of Immortan Joe and the society he’s established. He’s trying to use Latin to make things sound more impressive (his sons are called Corpus Collosus and Rictus Erectus, according to the credits); but his Latin isn’t very good. He uses “Imperator” as a title – when he dispatches the rig at the beginning, he says that it will be driven by “my most trusted Imperator – Furiosa”. So, yeah, it should have been “Imperatrix Furiosa” to be good Latin, but in-world, the characters don’t know that.
#9/10: I agree. It’s an action movie — if you go into it with the idea it’s some highbrow thoughtful story, you’re going to be disappointed. It’s got a lot of explosions and roaring engines, and the feminist theme is remarkable only because it’s treated as an accepted background.
Mary said she was actually bored in the first hour: it was all action, all men, and hardly anybody said anything, they were too busy blowing stuff up. It’s only after the first very long, very spectacular chase scene that it begins to develop a plot. And even then, it’s not a complicated plot: Furiosa liberates a bad guy’s harem, there’s a long violent flight across the desert; planned goal fails, Furiosa turns around and makes a long violent race back to the bad guy’s base. That’s the whole arc right there.
It’s a really simple story.
Hmmm. At least there’s a lovely Seeds Keeper character anyone could identify with. Too bad they made her a bit too much of a second rank character, for she’s the loveliest ever. Without her peacefull peace-pushing and smiling presence, I’d say I wouldn’t have liked that movy that much. (Because it is actually doing rather average, in terms of shifting rolemodels, I was expecting somewhat more than a quasidual superheroes YinYang take).
prae @21:
Self-proclaiming yahoos can self-proclaim themselves anything they want. Also, misogynists can throw around the term as though “radical” in this context means “extremist” or even “aiming to annihilate their enemies with violence” when what it actually means is “looking for and trying to overturn the systemic aka root causes of inequality”. Prime among them, the idea that women are objects rather than people.
Surely, they meant Imperatrix Furiosa. =)
This movie is not for everyone. If you don’t like action, don’t bother with this one because it won’t change your mind.
That said, I have to say one thing. Those that say “there’s not much dialog, therefor there’s no story”. Well, movies are a visual medium. There’s a phrase: “Show, don’t tell”. This movie says a LOT purely visually without a single word. For example, the quote above about a viewer’s reaction to the portrayal of Furiosa’s handicap in the movie. That was entirely visual, every part of that, and it spoke volumes. Heck, even the frantic action that almost never stops in the movie says one thing loud and clear to me. Violence, itself, is madness.
One addendum, but, sometimes I need that madness a bit. Until we humans alter ourselves to remove that part of us that, sorta, “craves” violence, I’ll be content just satisfying it with movies like this. “Feeding the Babadook”, as they (no one) say.
Radical; in this context in sense 2 and 3;
thoroughgoing or extreme, especially as regards change from accepted or traditional forms; favoring drastic political, economic, or social reforms.
So not necessarily violent or bigoted in any way but referring in this sense to a radical departure from the existing political and social status quo; though I must admit that in my personal experience the few morons who genuinely advocate silly measures like keeping men for breeding stock or establishing a true matriarchy (they are very rare, but I have met a couple) will self-identify as RadFems. But anecdotal evidence is anecdotal, and as Ibis3 says, “Self-proclaiming yahoos can self-proclaim themselves anything they want.”
pssst, I gotta admit, that Mel Gibson’s personal behavior after _his_ Mad Max trilogy, kinda poisoned the well of my enthusiasm for the Mad Max story. shame on me.
I say this only to disparage myself, not this particular movie or the enthusiastic responses from viewers. And to bring up Mel in this thread is also my bad; I’m only trying to “spice”, not “poison”.
ahem
as “we” were saying. This is movie appears to be the way to be “blatantly feminist”, while avoiding the “radical feminist” misnomer. That is, showing the “good thing” in a “good way” without being overly assertive, i,e, without aggressively slapping it in the face of those opposed.
gee me talk too much
I want to echo the general sentiments of this thread. Fury Road is a fantastic action movie, I read a review that said it’s the best action movie since Terminator 2, and I think that’s probably right. But also, I would not describe the movie as particularly feminist, it’s just that women are treated as people (by the film, there are characters who treat them as objects). I guess the bar really is that low, but in my mind, this movie basically is where the bar should be, not something that should be considered pushing any envelope.
Few notes, though, for people who plan on seeing it, because while it is, in my opinion, fantastic, it is not for everyone.
1. It is a Mad Max film. That means it is violent, brutal, and many characters are completely psychotic. Even the good guys are pretty heartless. As I mentioned earlier, characters treat other characters as objects. The film never does, but within the film, a lot of people are viewed as expendable. Just be warned.
2. It’s a very visual film. I know this is a weird thing to say, but you really have to pay attention to what you see, not what you hear. This isn’t like so many modern movies that summarize the plot to you over and over again in case you haven’t kept up (looking at you, Nolan, and others). I once read that Police Squad, the tv show the Naked Gun movies were based on, failed because it had so many sight gags and most audiences don’t want to just sit and watch tv, they just want it on. This is the action equivalent of that.
3. It’s really intense. I can’t tell you how often I caught myself holding my breath or just completely tensed up in my seat. There were moments I had to force myself to relax. This film is a masterpiece of tension and pacing. I’ve gotten so used to seeing “it’s an edge of your seat thrill ride” as a review for so many movies that I’d forgotten it can be literal.
I highly recommend it for so many reasons.
Side note: I work in Infection Prevention. Everytime I see “MRAS”, I read it as “MRSA” and get really confused for a bit. I don’t really have anythng more here, I just find it a little amusing and thought I’d share. This has been your Children’s Fun Fact Science Corner.
I agree that there can be too much exposition. It particularly annoys me when one character explains to another something that character should already know just to inform an ignorant audience. There are far better ways to handle that. However, one can show not tell via dialogue too though. There was that conversation between The Keeper of the Seeds and The Dag. That was kinda the whole point of the story. I’d’ve just liked to see a bit more of that.
I can see people being bummed if they went in excepting something other than what it was. I went to see a film that would be action packed, visually engaging and badass. I LOVE the Road Warrior! This film was visually reminiscent of Mad Max 2 and that turned me on. I also found Mr. Hardy very pleasant to look at.
I wasn’t expecting anything thoughtful or novel so I was pleasantly surprised by the bits of the film that were socially poignant. Unfortunately I think because MRAs overreacted so badly to it people have been given the idea Fury Road is an in depth feminist critique of modern society. No. Its just a Mad Max movie.
I dont get why people are impressed that Furiosa has an amputation. If the character were played by someone with an amputation I’d be impressed but she’s not. I’m not sure able bodied people playing amputees in film is of any benefit to people with physical disabilities. What am I missing?
I saw it as well and was completely amazed. There were a couple times they faded to black to transition and I shook myself because I’d forgotten I was in a theater, and that’s very rare for me.
Also I was highly relieved the movie wasn’t gory. There were a few selected acts of violence that involved rather gross effects (all of which were deserved in the context of the story) but unlike the execrable “300” films and their ilk, the violence is for the most part implied rather than “here’s that guy’s intestines everywhere.”
I love the fact that the movie takes for granted that the audience will agree that the rape and abuse the wives had suffered was terrible and wrong. They didn’t feel the need to show any of that violence, it was just assumed that we would all know it happened and agree it was awful and that we would be rooting for the wives and Furiosa by default without having to make it a Big Thing to convince us of.
[without inferencing bad things about you from such a question, i’ll withhold, and just reply that] the representation of an amputee as a major character has the resulting side-effect of altering the audience members attitudes when encountering the physically disabled “in real life”.
@marinerachel #39
What you are missing is spelld out in the OP. I will try and tell it with my own words.
It is not about able bodied or not actors (that is completely irrelevant statement, btw. actors always play someone they are not, that is the mark of good acting).
It is about lack of representation of handicaped people in mass media. If you look at story telling media, whether it is literature or movies, the main protagonists are overwhelmingly male, white, conventionally beautifull, attractive and able-bodied. While there is nothing wrong with male, white, beautifull, attractive and able bodied protagonists per se, their disproportionate overabundance in media means that everyone who is not male, white, beautifull and able-bodied very, very seldomly sees a poverfull protagonist they can viscerally identify with.
To each their own, and media are about providing people with pleasant escapist fantasies. Making a movie with handicapped kick-ass heroine can provide just that. That she is played by able-bodied actor is not the core of the issue.
I have not seen any Mad Max movie, but I might want to watch this one.
I loved also that the Strong Female Characters were not just “women who act like men.” Their “feminine” qualities made them just as badass – empathy, teamwork, nurturing, emotion. Angharad couldn’t ninja-kick the shit out of some baddie, but her actions ended up being as essential to the group’s survival as Furiosa was. Capable’s empathy and compassion earned them a valuable ally. The Keeper of the Seeds had a vision for the future that she knew she wouldn’t live to be a part of. And so on.
@marinerachel #39
Not sure if you’re old enough, but perhaps you recall how significant the movie Philadelphia was in changing the public perception of gay AIDS sufferers. Instead of deviant perverts being wiped out by God with a plague, gay men with HIV could be seen as sympathetic, nice normal guys going about their lives like anyone else, taken down not just by a horrible disease but by horrible, unwarranted prejudice. Not saying that it changed everyone’s minds (or that everyone’s minds needed to be changed) but it did make a big impact. And you know what? Tom Hanks? Neither gay, nor HIV positive. Fancy that.
marinerachel @39:
Did you see my comment #2? The author is a woman with a physical disability who was thrilled to see a lead character-a woman at that-with a disability that’s treated as if it’s just *there*. For her, it was important, because she’d never seen anything like that in movies.
Unfortunately, Radical Feminism is a technical term, the name of one very particular idea – “Radical feminists locate the root cause of women’s oppression in patriarchal gender relations, as opposed to legal systems (as in liberal feminism) or class conflict (as in socialist feminism and Marxist feminism).” Not every feminist who is in some way radical is a Radical Feminist.
It’s a really badly chosen name.
Oh what a lovely, lovely, lovely movie! Going to see it again!
(Charlize, you rock!)
As is often in life, Grannies were the key!
Grannies on big fucking desert motorcycles? +1!
I thought it was the most awesome bad movie I’ve seen (awfulsome!). I loved all of the first 3 in the series. [Even though I can’t stand Gibson as a person, Max was a good character] They had decent dialog and characters (heroes and villains) that I thought were interesting. The movie guys like to call this new type of work “Show, don’t tell” but that’s the new code for don’t bother with dialog because that costs money to translate for foreign markets. I like to think of action sequences and special effects as the frosting on a cake [which is story / dialog]. Fury Road was all frosting, no cake. A 2+ hour chase masquerading as a movie. Worst of the series. [Mary was right].
purestevil@ 48 – Out of curiosity, if you genuinely think “Fury Road” was somehow a bad movie, what would you consider a good movie?
I’ve enjoyed the first few movies in this franchise to various degrees, but I also happen to enjoy driving machinery as fast as possible, making large fires, and blowing things up. Judging from this clip and the descriptions, this is actually a pretty good stylistic homage to the first two movies. The whining of the MRA brigade is disengenious at best. Thunderdome was big budget cheesy shlock, but the characters of Master-Blaster and Aunty Entity were pretty central to the story. Tina Turners performance and the T-dome are pop culture icons. At the very least they might have noticed the theme song We Don’t Need Another Hero.
Definitely one of the biggest highlights of the film for me. I ride a dual sport motorcycle (and happen to be a woman), and this movie was possibly the first I’ve seen where a woman motorcycle rider wasn’t played up as “sexy” (riding around in dangerously skimpy clothing, their skin apparently impervious to the elements and pavement at 135 mph) and “exotic” (because women can’t ride motorcycles).
Bonus points for there being older women on the bikes — again, this was probably the first movie I’ve seen where older women were portrayed as useful and bad-ass (without any “isn’t it so funny that this older woman think she’s being useful, haha!” undertones…which usually ends with said woman ultimately failing and needing a man to step in).
Fury Road is one of the few truly great action films I’ve seen in a long time…possibly my whole life. Refusing to adhere to predictable tropes only helped.
Uh, wow. This is truly incredible. PZ just straight up LIKED a movie? That truly does not happen often. Of all the years I have been visiting Pharyngula, I believe I have seen PZ talk positively of two other movies; Iron Man and 12 years a slave. I have heard lots of good things about this, so might give it a shot.
@49 As stated, I thought the first three were good films. Alien, and Aliens were also quite good. “Cloud Atlas”, “Run Lola Run” [“Lola Rennt”], “Harold and Maude”, “The Day of the Jackal”,… the list goes on and on.
purestevil @48
You think “Show, don’t tell” is somehow new? In a medium that was silent for the first 30 years of it’s existence? Have you forgotten that Max had about 15 lines of dialogue in in “The Road Warrior”?
purestevil @48:
No idea if you’re joking but ‘show, don’t tell’ is a concept that’s been around for a while. I became aware of it as a teen when I started collecting comic books and got to know a writer or two who said that good writers don’t engage in exposition dumps, but allow the art to convey information (god, Chris Claremont of Uncanny X-Men fame is awful about exposition). When exposition is conveyed through dialogue, it should serve a purpose in the story other than just “catch readers up”. I suspect film directors have known about the concept for a long time.
Ibis3, These verbal jackboots were made for walking
Ugh. “Let me, a rocket scientist, explain some very incredibly basic physics stuff anyone learns in high school to you, my world-famous colleague rocket scientist.” It always brings me out of a movie.
Tethys @ 50 Agreed on all counts. Tina Turner was simply great as Aunty Entity. I thought the film got off to a strong start but kind of went off the rails near the end. :)
I appreciate that (IMO) Fury Road stayed on track all the way through.
@54/55 Not new as in never before, just new as in the new fad/rage. @54 only ~15 lines, but that seemed like ~5 times more than Fury Road. And it had other great characters like the Toecutter and the Nightrider that had dialog as well.
Fury Road was “see the trailer, saw it all.” I know I’m in a minority here as the rottentomatoes and reddit kids all loved it. I just did not think it was good. I wanted it to be good, maybe too much.
Funny thing about the principle of “show, don’t tell”, the other day I saw someone say Fury Road violated this principle because we never saw the wives being raped by Immortan. Because the chastity belts and the fact that at least two of the wives were pregnant and the fact that their desire to get away was the whole friggin’ plot was just exposition I guess.
http://kajedheat.tumblr.com/post/120197647144/mohala-sumiko-jamesfactscalvin
@zenlike #56
Yes! Forensic scientists who need their colleagues to explain basic chemistry to one another, criminal profilers who are certain their co-workers aren’t familiar with basic psychological terminology, archaeologists who need a history 101 lesson, lawyers who passed the bar but don’t know squat about court procedure or client privilege, self-proclaimed “l33t hackers” who require someone to define for them what a DDOS attack is, people who have lived in a town their whole lives but need another local to explain customs or geography… It’s all just so lazy and unnecessary.
It’s almost as bad when they have someone who is an admitted outsider that serves as the proxy for the audience, but that person is just so much dumber and more ignorant than they’d be in real life. Sure, a government bureaucrat might not be as much of a scientific expert as the actual scientist, but if they’re involved on a project, they would usually know enough of the subject matter that they wouldn’t need to have a course on the very basics. Especially stuff that should come with a general knowledge of the world or even a high school education.
carbonfox @ 51 Before they “unmasked” I anticipated that the riders would be women, I was pleased to see that they were women of a certain experience.
I don’t think that the MRAs comprehend that the franchise has always had strong, non-stereotypical female characters (starting with May taking a shotgun to Toecutter and the Acolytes, Jessie was a great character as well).
I also liked that the “defenders” in Road Warrior‘s ensemble cast presented the community as men and women working together as equals and equal contributors.
And they did all their own stunts. How awesome is that?
@^ Totes!
karley jojohnston
That is… horrible.
Because I’d read a review of the movie that praised it for not making rape a thing in the movie – like, you don’t need to see it to know it has happened, and you don’t need to see it to empathize with these women’s need for revenge. Makes me wonder about the kind of person who needs to see a rape happen before believing it exists.
On second thought, I don’t want to go there. :/
microraptor
Beyond the awesomest awesome is an awesome too awesome for awesome.
(I still don’t know if I will see the movie, as I’m not a fan of violent action movies. I have been known to watch one or two in the past, though, but I would also have to go against my ‘if there’s hype, move away’ instinct. But I’m really enjoying all the reviews and all the great things people mention in it.)
marcus @61,
Exactly! It felt very natural. (Just like in real life…in an apocalypse-type scenario, a good deal of women–just like a good deal of men–wouldn’t magically disappear or just sit around waiting to die.)
microraptor @62,
Are you serious?!? I didn’t know that! Shit, that’s awesome!
Here is some insight by Guy Norris (supervising stunt director for the movie) into five of the stunts done in the movie (microraptor, thanks for mentioning this @62):
http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/features/mad-max-fury-road-the-story-behind-its-most-insane-stunts-20150518
Here’s another more insight-
http://www.npr.org/2015/05/15/406731120/the-women-pull-no-punches-in-fiery-feminist-mad-max
I loved it for reasons covered above, but I did have one gripe: the casting is, shall we say, a little monochrome. I noticed just one non-white character in the whole film; I understand there are a couple of others for sharper-eyed viewers, but compared to real-world Australia it’s way off.
I’d heard great things about Furiosa and wasn’t disappointed, but the arc that surprised me was Nux.
@ Tony! ^ Thanks for all the great info!
NPR:
Hell yeah!
One thing that I noticed too that I haven’t seen mentioned anywhere else. The presented-as-ethereally-beautiful Wives got themselves saved, but the Milking Mothers were neglected. Since there’s no exposition, we don’t really know if there was an in-story pragmatic reason for that (i.e. Furiosa wanted to liberate them too, but couldn’t because it would have made the escape impossible since she needed to be away before Immortan Joe discovered her treachery), or was it a decision on the filmmakers’ part to have them there so we can see horrible treatment of women by Immortan Joe (without showing the Wives being raped on-screen) but without having them be characters/people in their own right. Not sure if I’m explaining myself very clearly. I guess I just thought it was sad that *these* slave women got rescued and look how gorgeous they are spraying themselves down in water while wearing flowing white garments, while *those* slave women are displayed in gross circumstances then pretty much ignored.
The Milking Mothers appeared to have near-continual attention from Immortan Joe and his troops, unlike the Wives who had been kept in a locked vault away from the War Boys. In-story pragmatism seems likely based on what was there, but it could easily be both possibilities.
Re: characters of color in the movie.
Ibis3 @69,
That’s a good point. My most charitable interpretation would be that it would be easier to “kidnap” the wives since they were hidden in a special room where their disappearance wouldn’t be instantly obvious, but the Milking Mothers seemed to be out and in the open, so their absence would be immediately noticed. But in retrospect, of course the non-conventionally beautiful women wouldn’t be the ones getting saved. :-\ (Although I guess they would have been freed at the end of the movie, but that certainly wasn’t part of the original plan.)
Tony @66,
I’ve already had people telling me that I’ll want to get rid of my motorcycle “when I have kids” (because of course, being a woman, OF COURSE I’m going to have kids, and OF COURSE I’m going to give up my hobbies
ifwhen that happens). Ummm, no. Kudos to Jaffer for being a role model in proving that women don’t stop existing once they pass 25 years of age (and Kudos to Miller et al. for showcasing “un-conventional” roles in the movie!). I’m hope I’m half as bad-ass as she is (and still riding!) when I hit 78!SPOILER FOR THE ENDING OF THE FILM:
Tony @66 and carbonfox @ 72 – the Milking Mothers join the rebellion at the end. They’re the ones who turn on the water. Furiosa and the Wives are still down at the entrance to the Citadel, with the Pups all kind of looking on not sure what to do while the crowd is mingling around Furiosa. It’s the Mothers (who have gotten free from their shackles inside the Citadel somehow) who are standing at the levers and have turned the water on for the people below.
Yeah, the in-story explanation is, well, sorta valid on the surface. But of course had they really wanted to, they could have just written that bit differently (e.g. had the milking room being a locked-away vault too, or had even just one of them given an opportunity to escape too–say because the machine she’d been attached to happened to be being repaired and so she was shut away with the Wives when they made their own departure…whatever).
@drst Good point. But still…none of them get to really be people.
@75 – I can’t disagree with any of your points, Ibis3, but there’s another possible reason that only the Wives were rescued and not the mothers, I think. I got the distinct impression that Furiosa and Capable were in some sort of relationship, from the long glances at each other and Furiosa’s heightened concern for Capable over the other women. I haven’t read anything about that anywhere though, so maybe that wasn’t really a thing, but I thought I saw it, especially in the early scene with the bolt cutters.
sawells @ 20
I just think Cueball and Megan should have gotten the credit they deserved
bojac @ 37
Oh, MRSA is way more pleasant.
(I suppose. I’ve had MRSA; my only real exposure to MRAs is on WHTM)
Ibis3 @ 44
Sure. But you wouldn’t be so on board with a white actor in blackface. Non-rhetorical question: why is “straight actor playing a gay character” a) okay and b) a better analogy?
Me too. I enjoyed the women characters for all the reasons others have discussed, but I thought Miller’s deconstruction of the warboys’ roles was just as interesting, and hasn’t gotten nearly as much mention. They had their own hypermasculinist ideology; they wanted to be heroes, to be noticed by the big shots, to make names for themselves and feast with the warriors in Valhalla after they died.
Nux’s character humanized them and showed their reality: young men, slowly dying of radiation sickness (I assume that was the cause of his tumors?) being used as disposable tools for the powerful, and helping to maintain a toxic system: “WHO KILLED THE WORLD?”
@Hershele Ostropoler #77
Not generally, no. The short answers to your questions (cos it’s late and I’ve got to go get some sleep): Because the context and effects are more similar. The historical context of blackface is mockery, racism, and cultural appropriation. Were a current white actor to wear blackface, they would be right in the thick of that context. There are only a few special circumstances where that could be done (say calling that history out and making a commentary on it) in a non-offensive way (and I would speculate that for some people, no context would justify it). On the other hand, a straight, already liked, well-known actor playing a likeable sympathetic gay character at a time when it was risky for actors to come out as gay served to normalise being gay, to make homosexuality come across to the public as non-threatening. I’m not a gay man, but I get the impression that portrayals like those of Hanks and later with Kevin Kline’s character in In & Out or Eric McCormack’s on Will & Grace helped to improve the acceptance of actual gay guys (including actors) at the time and subsequently. Similarly, positive portrayals by well-known, popular actors of characters who are disabled or mentally ill (for example) can and have helped to break down barriers and taboos, and inspire members of those marginalised groups. Seeing a kick-ass fellow amputee played by a two-handed Charlize Theron on your movie screen is faraway better than seeing no kick-ass fellow amputees in a movie ever.
Of course, if that practice were to continue and only straight actors played gay characters and disabled characters were only played by people with CGI disabilities forever, that would get problematic. It would be like going back to the days when boys had to play women because women weren’t allowed on the stage.
I saw fury Road for the second time today. I drove an hour away to hit a matinee with the kids. The kids had never been to that theater. I hadn’t been in ages.
As the woman selling tickets handed me mine I looked up and saw she was missing her left arm from the forearm down. My 8 yr old, despite all our talks about not announcing every observation out loud*, said loud and clear, “Mommy, that girl only has one arm”. I was able to respond, “Cool. So does the woman in the movie we’re about to see.” *fin* No more needed to be said.
What that movie did for my little girl’s view of disability I could not have done with a life time of lectures about equality.
I also got to drive home hearing the kids rhapsodizing about the action and the characters. There was also much speculation on how Imortus Joe’s breathing apparatus worked and how it *Spoiler*
rips his face off.
I think my youngest son wants a guitar that shoots fire now.
We may have to go see it again.
*Her older sister had trouble with that too. She once looked at a man with long, dark, wavy hair and an eye patch, scrunched up her face and I started blushing because I knew what was coming.
“Mommy, is that man a pirate?”
His gaze met mine and I said the only thing I could, “Yes. Yes, he is.” He grinned and did not correct me. So, my daughter believed for some time that pirates got their gas right up the street from us.
I’ll remember all of that the next time I think of other personal names like Gaius Caligula and Gaius Scaevola.