Visually amazing. But a good Mad Max film??? I don't think so.......

Rating: 4/10 (20 May 2015)

Well, after 30 years we finally get another Mad Max sequel after years of development hell and false starts.
Firstly the good: This film is visually incredible. Production kept the film as real as possible with the stunts, etc and you can see that every penny made it up there on screen. I saw this in IMAX 3D and was blown away by how it looked and towards the end, it has quite possibly the best 3D effect ever in a film. Yes it was cheesy, but it suited the film. The films characters (with the exception of Max, which I will come to in a minute) was brilliantly portrayed by an excellent cast which you would only get in a Mad Max film. Nicholas Hoult should get a special mention as should Hugh Keays-Byrne returning to the franchise after playing the Toecutter in the original 1979 film. He was quite frightening as Immortan Joe and had the appearance to go with it. The guy with the flame throwing guitar needs a special award as 'Most crazy awesome minor character in a movie'. However, this is where the films only strengths lie.
The bad: I'm sorry folks, but Tom Hardy is VERY overrated as an actor and he is quite possibly the worst one in this film. He is NOTHING like Mel Gibsons version of Max. I bet he only has a few lines of dialogue in this film and the film really shouldn't have been called Mad Max but Mad Furiosa, as the film seems to be all about Charlize Therons character. When Hardy did speak its as though he was trying to find a middle ground of him being Mel Gibson and being his own actor and it was very badly done. I really think that the films praise is exactly what happened with the movie 'Gravity', and although Mad Max is nowhere near as bad as that movie, I think its another classic case of people being in so much awe of whats on screen, they have completely forgotten if they are watching a good film or not?? To me, this film is NOT what Mad Max should be. With the original three movies there was something towards the end of each movie that sent Max over the edge which made him 'Mad'. But with this film he is just along for the ride and for this reason and the fact that Tom Hardy was awful as Max, I didn't like it. Yes I am a HUGE fan of the original three films and its obvious that we will NEVER get back the grittiness of the first two films which in my book are the action equivalent of Leones Spaghetti Westerns, especially in style. Also the music was just awful as well. I liked Junkie XL's music for 300: Rise of an Empire but god, I missed the brilliance of Brian Mays scores from the first two Mad Max films.
The above is why I don't get why this film is being praised so much?? I recently watched the original film for the first time on blu-ray. It looked and sounded amazing and I still love it today. Probably because the first film is more relevant for todays times than ever before. I really did try and go to watch Fury Road with a fresh mind, but as I have mentioned, this just wasn't Mad Max for me. Its just a damn shame that George Miller didn't get to make this film 15 years ago with Mel Gibson. Sets were built, everything was a go, then the damn Iraq War started and everything got shut down.
Just a thought why the series hasn't been as good since the second one?? Its obvious that the 'glue' that made the first two so special was obviously down to Byron Kennedy who produced the first two and sadly died while location scouting for the third film. Just like the Star Wars films, it was the same when Gary Kurtz left, the films have not been the same since. Although the director is responsible for the actual end product, its obvious that lots of help and ideas comes from the producer. Its a shame really.
Anyway, there is already talk of another Mad Max sequel and I hope it goes back to basics next time and not the overblown and overpraised movie that is Fury Road. 5/10 and that was pretty much for the visuals.