I've written at least three essays here over the years about how the depiction of disability in Mad Max is way better than most contemporary movies and most modern movies. I'm saying this because I almost launched in to another one and I have a meeting in five minutes and I need to stop!

[–] Aradina@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 months ago

Awh but I want that essay

[–] SorosFootSoldier@hexbear.net 16 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I-was-saying I like Thunderdome.

[–] Maturin@hexbear.net 3 points 2 months ago

Finally, a real hot take

[–] take_five_seconds@hexbear.net 13 points 2 months ago

the first mad max is goated, great flick, very minimalist, a lot of cool shots, good vroom vroom sounds.

[–] HarryLime@hexbear.net 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Hot take: this but Terminator

[–] AmericaDeserved711@hexbear.net 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

agree, I prefer the dark moody atmosphere of the first one to the fun action blockbuster vibes of T2, though they're both good movies. also prefer Arnie as a silent antagonist

Cameron definitely makes sequels that are better than most but I think people go overboard with saying T2 and Aliens are "better than the original" sorry but more explosions != better

[–] comrade_pibb@hexbear.net 14 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Alien >>> Aliens and if you disagree you are a treatmaxxing baby brain

[–] SorosFootSoldier@hexbear.net 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Alien >>> Aliens and if you disagree you are a treatmaxxing baby brain

But I enjoy both equally? Aliens still gets the win though because I'm in love with it's props.

[–] comrade_pibb@hexbear.net 5 points 2 months ago

I don't make the rules, sorry

[–] Aradina@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 months ago

The climax of alien has way too much strobe lighting

[–] Belly_Beanis@hexbear.net 2 points 2 months ago

I think Alien > Aliens, too. I also think 3 is a good movie. Alien Resurrection was a dumpster fire, but worth watching for Weaver making the basketball shot and Ron Pearlman breaking character when he gets that dumb grin on his face.

[–] AndJusticeForAll@hexbear.net 1 points 2 months ago

We need a balance of treats to brains.

[–] enkifish@hexbear.net 6 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Toecutter > Humungus

[–] Aradina@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 months ago

100%.

Rest in peace Hugh Keays-Byrne.

[–] Belly_Beanis@hexbear.net 4 points 2 months ago

Naw Mad Max 1 sucked. 2 and 3 were decent. Fury Road is GOAT and Furiosa wasn't bad.

I only saw the original trilogy after Fury Road, so obviously I'm correct since I don't have nostalgia glasses on.

[–] ElGosso@hexbear.net 1 points 2 months ago

Eh, I think 1 is kind of scattered and has some pacing issues. Watching it feels like they wanted to dress up like hooligans and drive around too fast. The charm of 3 is that it's fuckin' weird, in the same way Fallout is.

[–] roux@hexbear.net 1 points 2 months ago

1 is basically a product of it's time. The story is there but it's very early 80s. I think Road Warrior gets more love just because it's when we really get to see Miller's vision of the wasteland. I'd like to see these both remade with the love of Fury Road and Furiosa but it will never happen.

I think Thunderdome is ok. It used to be my favorite but after doing a huge deep dive, I can see where people are coming from. You get this great aesthetic with Bartertown, then they had to add kids to the mix. I read that there was a push in the mid and late 80s to add more kid stuff to movies and that this is probably why. I'd like to see a soft reboot of Thunderdome though.

Furiosa(the movie) is basically the character's coming of age story. If you like that idea and also the same set pieces and more of Fury Road you'll dig it. I have a hard time deciding which I like more but also they work well as essentiall6 one long movie.

[–] Diuretic_Materialism@hexbear.net 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I like that it's not even a post-apocalypse movie. It's just like... a shitty town in Australia.

[–] Aradina@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Its set during the pre-apocalypse. The decline is starting, and eventually it leads to a nuclear exchange.

[–] Diuretic_Materialism@hexbear.net 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'm curious how much of that was intentional. I think Miller just wanted to make a cool action movie, and the whole idea it was the apocalypse came while he was working on 2. When I watch the first one it just feel like it was an exaggeration of what life in rural Australia was like in the 70s, in that everything was run down, cops were more blatantly psycho than they are now, and gangs could get away with some crazy BS. Less like there is an actual looming apocalypse.

[–] Aradina@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If you listen to the police radio in the background of several scenes its implied that things are in rapid decline and that the police are losing territorial control.

[–] Diuretic_Materialism@hexbear.net 3 points 2 months ago

Yeah, so rural Australia in the 70s