Seems Mainly Out-Takes from Fast/Furious #306

Rating: 1/10 (23 May 2015)

Rule number 22 from "The Ultmate Rules of Film Criticism" (don't worry if you can't find the book -- I only printed 7 copies) says quite clearly "Where there is an attempt to re-imagine or re-create a classic, and the attempt is made by the creator of the original, no blame shall accrue if the new effort is of less quality than the original."
So, as I critic, I am a little hamstrung by that rule. And wish I had never written it.
I saw the original Max Max in a theatre (which sort of dates me); and I remember Mel Gibson when he was the "next big thing" (which definitely dates me); and I had always respected Miller for going from the "end of the world" to "talking pigs" without even pausing to catch his breath.
But, for this film, George and I have a problem, as indeed I would have with anyone who gives this film a "10" and wonders why they are always getting carded when they try to order alcohol.
The original Max Max was an attempt to impose humanistic values on a post-apocalyptic world. It had characters, plot, dialog, acting, common sense, and a bunch of other things that most of us USED TO TAKE FOR GRANTED before the arrival of this film.
If you want non-stop action, go to a hockey game.
If you want to see what happens when one man has many wives, go to Utah.
If you want great special effects, watch the Matrix series again.
If you want to see a fine film built around a tough hero, watch Chronicles of Riddick. (Which really is a "10")
I do not overstate my case when I say that, if we reach a post-apocalyptic world in my lifetime, it will be because of the people whose sense of values considered this film to be high art.
This is a very scary film. Not because of what is in it. Simply because it exists.