Mad Max: Fury Road (1 Viewer)

[Officer Pete Malloy]

When you have ten nominations there is room for movies that aren't perfect. Ten perfect movies never come out in the same year.

Nobody is asking for perfection.

Of course the Academy has always been "snobby". Rarely do action/superhero/comedy movies receive recognition at the Oscars.

Fury Road is a very good action movie but lacked too many things for it to be considered a very good movie over all.

 

[KarmaPolice]

It belongs in the best picture nom for some of its technical achievements like special efx, sound, music, direction just like gravity did. There are other things that make a great picture besides dialog. Does it deserve to win? Probably not but out definitely deserved a nom

No.

IMO Best Picture should be an accumulation of all the other awards and categories. Like I said before a best picture nom should have good directing, acting, sound, story, etc.. If a picture only does a couple of those, it should be nominated in those individual categories. I said it before, but a movie like Ex Machina checked off far more of those categories than Mad Max.

 

[Chadstroma]

When you have ten nominations there is room for movies that aren't perfect. Ten perfect movies never come out in the same year.

Increasing the nominations to 10 was an idiotic decision. A film like this one getting nominated is a good example why.

Like most things in life the explanation for this is money.

 

[KarmaPolice]

When you have ten nominations there is room for movies that aren't perfect. Ten perfect movies never come out in the same year.

Increasing the nominations to 10 was an idiotic decision. A film like this one getting nominated is a good example why.

This X10 when they don't even use all the slots for best picture and leave off something like Sicario for Mad Max.

 

[packersfan]

It belongs in the best picture nom for some of its technical achievements like special efx, sound, music, direction just like gravity did. There are other things that make a great picture besides dialog. Does it deserve to win? Probably not but out definitely deserved a nom

No.

IMO Best Picture should be an accumulation of all the other awards and categories. Like I said before a best picture nom should have good directing, acting, sound, story, etc.. If a picture only does a couple of those, it should be nominated in those individual categories. I said it before, but a movie like Ex Machina checked off far more of those categories than Mad Max.

I haven't seen Hateful Eight yet but I'd be absolutely shocked if it wasn't better than Mad Max.

And if it's just pretty things to look at and cool special effects that make it nomination worthy I'd put Ultron and Star Wars over Mad Max too.

 

[MaxThreshold]

We did it, guys! 10 Oscar nominations, including best picture!

Terrible

How about that, OPM hates another movie. That's unusual. For someone that is only 175 years old you would think he would less critical about EVERYTHING.

 

[MaxThreshold]

When you have ten nominations there is room for movies that aren't perfect. Ten perfect movies never come out in the same year.

Increasing the nominations to 10 was an idiotic decision. A film like this one getting nominated is a good example why.

This X10 when they don't even use all the slots for best picture and leave off something like Sicario for Mad Max.

Sicario AND Mad Max were both awesome and both deserve BP nominations.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

We did it, guys! 10 Oscar nominations, including best picture!

Terrible

How about that, OPM hates another movie. That's unusual. For someone that is only 175 years old you would think he would less critical about EVERYTHING.

Never said I hated Fury Road. I think it is terrible that it is included in the BP noms. ####face.

 

[Ketamine Dreams]

It belongs in the best picture nom for some of its technical achievements like special efx, sound, music, direction just like gravity did. There are other things that make a great picture besides dialog. Does it deserve to win? Probably not but out definitely deserved a nom

Can't agree with that. Just because a movie looks great doesn't mean it is a great movie. There has to be substance underneath the style. And "Gravity" shouldn't have been nominated either.

Yeah, Gravity was pretty to look at, but otherwise is a piece of ####.

 

[MaxThreshold]

We did it, guys! 10 Oscar nominations, including best picture!

Terrible

How about that, OPM hates another movie. That's unusual. For someone that is only 175 years old you would think he would less critical about EVERYTHING.

Never said I hated Fury Road. I think it is terrible that it is included in the BP noms. ####face.

hmmm...why would the forum censor the word "handsome"?

 

[Sabertooth]

It belongs in the best picture nom for some of its technical achievements like special efx, sound, music, direction just like gravity did. There are other things that make a great picture besides dialog. Does it deserve to win? Probably not but out definitely deserved a nom

Can't agree with that. Just because a movie looks great doesn't mean it is a great movie. There has to be substance underneath the style. And "Gravity" shouldn't have been nominated either.

Meh.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

It belongs in the best picture nom for some of its technical achievements like special efx, sound, music, direction just like gravity did. There are other things that make a great picture besides dialog. Does it deserve to win? Probably not but out definitely deserved a nom

Can't agree with that. Just because a movie looks great doesn't mean it is a great movie. There has to be substance underneath the style. And "Gravity" shouldn't have been nominated either.

Yeah, Gravity was pretty to look at, but otherwise is a piece of ####.

 

[Psychopav]

Great to see this film go all the way and get the Oscar nominations. Wonder if a sequal of sorts is in the works. They have hit a nerve with over 40 year old males wanting to see rock n roll in their cinema.

What's next, Guns n Roses reunites?

It won't be George Miller if there is another - confirmed he is directing no more Mad Max films.

Good move, imo.

He should drop the mic and walk off stage on this one.

 

[Sabertooth]

What should have been nominated that wasn't? Was Sicario nominated? That was ok. What is a great movie anymore? I think nominating so many picks weakened the field.

 

[packersfan]

What should have been nominated that wasn't?

Again I haven't seen it but Hateful Eight seems a likely possibility.

I would've gone Force Awakens over Mad Max a zillion times out of a zillion. I'm shocked it didn't get nominated with so many spots available.

 

[MaxThreshold]

Great to see this film go all the way and get the Oscar nominations. Wonder if a sequal of sorts is in the works. They have hit a nerve with over 40 year old males wanting to see rock n roll in their cinema.

What's next, Guns n Roses reunites?

It won't be George Miller if there is another - confirmed he is directing no more Mad Max films.

Good move, imo.

He should drop the mic and walk off stage on this one.

Miller confirms he is coming back. The original article misquoted him.

 

[KarmaPolice]

What should have been nominated that wasn't? Was Sicario nominated? That was ok. What is a great movie anymore? I think nominating so many picks weakened the field.

How does nominating more movies weaken the quality of movies?

It's obvious from this thread that people love different things and want different things out of movies. I think it was a great year. I just did my tops of the decade so far list and Ex Machina was in the top 10 already. I think Sicario, The Revenant, and Spotlight are better and would be in there too. Granted, I haven't watched these ones a couple times yet so things change, but my gut reaction is that we have 4 of the best movies I have seen in the last 5 years and I haven't all the stuff I want to yet.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Did Brooklyn, or The Big Short, or Room have incredible sound? I didn't see any of those, so I'm just asking. But my point is, a movie can be very strong in one area and weak in others and still be a best picture sort of movie. No issue at all with MMFR on there. It was an awesome, unique, thrill ride, with crazy sound/action/video and a pretty interesting (if basic) story, albeit one that wasn't spoonfed to you.

As someone who hasn't seen any of the other MM films, I guess it's possible that's why I liked this one so much. I wasn't at all bothered by what they "did" to Max -- I didn't care that he wasn't the central figure, and thought Furiosa was awesome, as were several of the other characters. If they re-released it in IMAX 3D tomorrow, I'd go see it.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

Did Brooklyn, or The Big Short, or Room have incredible sound? I didn't see any of those, so I'm just asking. But my point is, a movie can be very strong in one area and weak in others and still be a best picture sort of movie. No issue at all with MMFR on there. It was an awesome, unique, thrill ride, with crazy sound/action/video and a pretty interesting (if basic) story, albeit one that wasn't spoonfed to you.

As someone who hasn't seen any of the other MM films, I guess it's possible that's why I liked this one so much. I wasn't at all bothered by what they "did" to Max -- I didn't care that he wasn't the central figure, and thought Furiosa was awesome, as were several of the other characters. If they re-released it in IMAX 3D tomorrow, I'd go see it.

Why would those movies need "incredible sound"? This is like saying "Ordinary People" should have had better stunts.

Bottom line is that if a movie doesn't have a great story and great characters and great acting then it can't be great overall. MMFR did look and sound great but there wasn't much behind it.

 

[The Future Champs]

When you have ten nominations there is room for movies that aren't perfect. Ten perfect movies never come out in the same year.

Increasing the nominations to 10 was an idiotic decision. A film like this one getting nominated is a good example why.

This X10 when they don't even use all the slots for best picture and leave off something like Sicario for Mad Max.

Gotta challenge this: Sicario was a huge disappointment. It completely went off the rails in the third act; the result was a hollow movie that left me wondering WTF that was all about.

 

[packersfan]

Did Brooklyn, or The Big Short, or Room have incredible sound? I didn't see any of those, so I'm just asking. But my point is, a movie can be very strong in one area and weak in others and still be a best picture sort of movie. No issue at all with MMFR on there. It was an awesome, unique, thrill ride, with crazy sound/action/video and a pretty interesting (if basic) story, albeit one that wasn't spoonfed to you.

As someone who hasn't seen any of the other MM films, I guess it's possible that's why I liked this one so much. I wasn't at all bothered by what they "did" to Max -- I didn't care that he wasn't the central figure, and thought Furiosa was awesome, as were several of the other characters. If they re-released it in IMAX 3D tomorrow, I'd go see it.

Why would those movies need "incredible sound"? This is like saying "Ordinary People" should have had better stunts.

Bottom line is that if a movie doesn't have a great story and great characters and great acting then it can't be great overall. MMFR did look and sound great but there wasn't much behind it.

Again, it's debatable whether it was even the best visual movie of the year. I can think of 2-3 films just off the top of my head that were better and in my opinion (yes subjective) much better.

 

[KarmaPolice]

When you have ten nominations there is room for movies that aren't perfect. Ten perfect movies never come out in the same year.

Increasing the nominations to 10 was an idiotic decision. A film like this one getting nominated is a good example why.

This X10 when they don't even use all the slots for best picture and leave off something like Sicario for Mad Max.

Gotta challenge this: Sicario was a huge disappointment. It completely went off the rails in the third act; the result was a hollow movie that left me wondering WTF that was all about.

I guess I assumed that was the point they were making. It felt pointless, hollow, and without end - just like the topic they were covering.

 

[The Future Champs]

When you have ten nominations there is room for movies that aren't perfect. Ten perfect movies never come out in the same year.

Increasing the nominations to 10 was an idiotic decision. A film like this one getting nominated is a good example why.

This X10 when they don't even use all the slots for best picture and leave off something like Sicario for Mad Max.

Gotta challenge this: Sicario was a huge disappointment. It completely went off the rails in the third act; the result was a hollow movie that left me wondering WTF that was all about.

I guess I assumed that was the point they were making. It felt pointless, hollow, and without end - just like the topic they were covering.

Eta: spoilers

Spoiler

I could have lived with this, but by that point I was expecting more, and they didn't deliver. I'll take a movie with a thin plot line that stays on track (like MMFR) over one that builds anticipation and collapses (like Sicario) any day. Consider: over half the movie was devoted to finding that tunnel and setting up Diaz to return to Mexico. They infiltrate the tunnel (awesome scene) and from that point on the movie is worthless. It was an accident that Silvio was there with a police car, available for Alejandro to hijack. And all that work to sneak Alejandro into Mexico? How tough can it be to get someone over the border going south? No other way than to take down a heavily guarded drug smuggling tunnel?

And Blount, who is central to the story for the first two acts, disappears completely. That's worse than having Max play a supporting character in his own movie, imo. Sure, she shows up again in the final scene, but Alejandro is still the central part of the story there.

It doesn't even work with the story arc. The first two acts have Blount as a righteous law officer, being exposed to the craziness that is just over the border and becoming aware of how that craziness is infiltrating the US (with the local cops on the payroll). Then the story arc hits the proverbial brick wall and falls with a thud.

If this is what the director wanted, the feeling of hollowness and inevitability, then he should have just rented NCFOM.

(That said, the sunset shot in Sicario, where the soldiers are adjusting their night vision goggles as they descend into the darkness, silhouetted against the fading light, is one of my favorites of all time.)

 

[KarmaPolice]

Don't want to talk too much about movie that this thread isn't about. I would actually encourage you to spoiler tag the last post. In response:

Spoiler

It absolutely does fit with the story. We THINK (just like she does) that she was picked for a reason, which is the furthest thing from the truth. They just needed an FBI signature to do what they wanted - no more, no less. She was discarded in the last act because it really was all about Del Toro's character getting the job done. I loved the move and it takes balls to do that to a character we have been following, and evidently it irritated you. You brought up NCFOM (another movie I loved) and I agree it did have that feel to it - NCFOM mixed with Traffic.

 

[The Future Champs]

Don't want to talk too much about movie that this thread isn't about. I would actually encourage you to spoiler tag the last post. In response:

Spoiler

It absolutely does fit with the story. We THINK (just like she does) that she was picked for a reason, which is the furthest thing from the truth. They just needed an FBI signature to do what they wanted - no more, no less. She was discarded in the last act because it really was all about Del Toro's character getting the job done. I loved the move and it takes balls to do that to a character we have been following, and evidently it irritated you. You brought up NCFOM (another movie I loved) and I agree it did have that feel to it - NCFOM mixed with Traffic.

I'll bump your top 50 thread.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Did Brooklyn, or The Big Short, or Room have incredible sound? I didn't see any of those, so I'm just asking. But my point is, a movie can be very strong in one area and weak in others and still be a best picture sort of movie. No issue at all with MMFR on there. It was an awesome, unique, thrill ride, with crazy sound/action/video and a pretty interesting (if basic) story, albeit one that wasn't spoonfed to you.

As someone who hasn't seen any of the other MM films, I guess it's possible that's why I liked this one so much. I wasn't at all bothered by what they "did" to Max -- I didn't care that he wasn't the central figure, and thought Furiosa was awesome, as were several of the other characters. If they re-released it in IMAX 3D tomorrow, I'd go see it.

Why would those movies need "incredible sound"? This is like saying "Ordinary People" should have had better stunts.

Bottom line is that if a movie doesn't have a great story and great characters and great acting then it can't be great overall. MMFR did look and sound great but there wasn't much behind it.

Well, KarmaPolice said earlier "Like I said before a best picture nom should have good directing, acting, sound, story, etc.. If a picture only does a couple of those, it should be nominated in those individual categories. "

I don't think that standard applies to all movies. Does every best picture nom have great directing? Does every best picture nom have great acting? Does every one have great sound? I would say no.

 

[KarmaPolice]

Did Brooklyn, or The Big Short, or Room have incredible sound? I didn't see any of those, so I'm just asking. But my point is, a movie can be very strong in one area and weak in others and still be a best picture sort of movie. No issue at all with MMFR on there. It was an awesome, unique, thrill ride, with crazy sound/action/video and a pretty interesting (if basic) story, albeit one that wasn't spoonfed to you.

As someone who hasn't seen any of the other MM films, I guess it's possible that's why I liked this one so much. I wasn't at all bothered by what they "did" to Max -- I didn't care that he wasn't the central figure, and thought Furiosa was awesome, as were several of the other characters. If they re-released it in IMAX 3D tomorrow, I'd go see it.

Why would those movies need "incredible sound"? This is like saying "Ordinary People" should have had better stunts.

Bottom line is that if a movie doesn't have a great story and great characters and great acting then it can't be great overall. MMFR did look and sound great but there wasn't much behind it.

Well, KarmaPolice said earlier "Like I said before a best picture nom should have good directing, acting, sound, story, etc.. If a picture only does a couple of those, it should be nominated in those individual categories. "

I don't think that standard applies to all movies. Does every best picture nom have great directing? Does every best picture nom have great acting? Does every one have great sound? I would say no.

Missing one? Sure. A movie that only has a couple of those doesn't belong in the best picture discussion, IMO.

I will admit my argument probably breaks down for quiet movies like Room that might only have a couple things too.

 

[Abrantes]

Surprised at all the backlash. I felt the story, characters and acting were all fine for what the movie was trying to do. I more than welcome Mad Max as a Best Picture candidate, because it was easily one of my favorite experiences at the movies in the past year, and because it breaks the stale mold of what should be considered for the award, even if it doesn't win. It's not about checking off a list of traits (or at least, it shouldn't be). It's about the movie as a whole.

 

[The General]

This is what they want. People talking about their made up list...

Gravity was brought up as a comparison to Fury Road. First time I watched Gravity in the theater I was pretty blown away, really entertained. Tried watching it a second time on HBO and didn't make it through.

Fury Road I have watched the movie a couple times and was still entertained.

Great movie. Love that they are putting up "non traditional" Academy Award type movies.

 

[shadyridr]

It belongs in the best picture nom for some of its technical achievements like special efx, sound, music, direction just like gravity did. There are other things that make a great picture besides dialog. Does it deserve to win? Probably not but out definitely deserved a nom

No.

IMO Best Picture should be an accumulation of all the other awards and categories. Like I said before a best picture nom should have good directing, acting, sound, story, etc.. If a picture only does a couple of those, it should be nominated in those individual categories. I said it before, but a movie like Ex Machina checked off far more of those categories than Mad Max.

except the fact the movie was boring as hell

 

[Porkchop Express]

Most enjoyable movie of the year for me, glad its getting some Oscar love.

 

[KarmaPolice]

It belongs in the best picture nom for some of its technical achievements like special efx, sound, music, direction just like gravity did. There are other things that make a great picture besides dialog. Does it deserve to win? Probably not but out definitely deserved a nom

No.

IMO Best Picture should be an accumulation of all the other awards and categories. Like I said before a best picture nom should have good directing, acting, sound, story, etc.. If a picture only does a couple of those, it should be nominated in those individual categories. I said it before, but a movie like Ex Machina checked off far more of those categories than Mad Max.

except the fact the movie was boring as hell

Ok.

 

[shadyridr]

Bottom line is when I saw mad max in the theater I was blown away the whole movie unlike any movie in a long time. Isn't that what movies are supposed to do? Entertain?

 

[shadyridr]

Its 97% on rotten tomatoes and people are shocked that those same people nominated it for an Oscar

 

[The General]

Bottom line is when I saw mad max in the theater I was blown away the whole movie unlike any movie in a long time. Isn't that what movies are supposed to do? Entertain?

Yup. At this point it just seems to be people saying it's not worthy of an academy nom. I can be a movie, tv snob for sure but I think this movie covered enough basis to be deserve critical acclaim and a box office hit.

With this expanded field thing they have done should be on the list for sure.

 

[shadyridr]

Did Brooklyn, or The Big Short, or Room have incredible sound? I didn't see any of those, so I'm just asking. But my point is, a movie can be very strong in one area and weak in others and still be a best picture sort of movie. No issue at all with MMFR on there. It was an awesome, unique, thrill ride, with crazy sound/action/video and a pretty interesting (if basic) story, albeit one that wasn't spoonfed to you.

As someone who hasn't seen any of the other MM films, I guess it's possible that's why I liked this one so much. I wasn't at all bothered by what they "did" to Max -- I didn't care that he wasn't the central figure, and thought Furiosa was awesome, as were several of the other characters. If they re-released it in IMAX 3D tomorrow, I'd go see it.

Why would those movies need "incredible sound"? This is like saying "Ordinary People" should have had better stunts.

Bottom line is that if a movie doesn't have a great story and great characters and great acting then it can't be great overall. MMFR did look and sound great but there wasn't much behind it.

they didn't need incredible sound just like mad max didn't need incredible acting. The movie had incredible direction, efx , sound, score, was entertaining and the plot while simple was fine. The acting was inconsequential to the movie.

 

[The Future Champs]

Did Brooklyn, or The Big Short, or Room have incredible sound? I didn't see any of those, so I'm just asking. But my point is, a movie can be very strong in one area and weak in others and still be a best picture sort of movie. No issue at all with MMFR on there. It was an awesome, unique, thrill ride, with crazy sound/action/video and a pretty interesting (if basic) story, albeit one that wasn't spoonfed to you.

As someone who hasn't seen any of the other MM films, I guess it's possible that's why I liked this one so much. I wasn't at all bothered by what they "did" to Max -- I didn't care that he wasn't the central figure, and thought Furiosa was awesome, as were several of the other characters. If they re-released it in IMAX 3D tomorrow, I'd go see it.

Why would those movies need "incredible sound"? This is like saying "Ordinary People" should have had better stunts.

Bottom line is that if a movie doesn't have a great story and great characters and great acting then it can't be great overall. MMFR did look and sound great but there wasn't much behind it.

No, you've got that completely wrong. Sound is integral to all movies, stunts belong in action films, and lengthy character developments belong in dramas. Hth.

 

[The Future Champs]

It belongs in the best picture nom for some of its technical achievements like special efx, sound, music, direction just like gravity did. There are other things that make a great picture besides dialog. Does it deserve to win? Probably not but out definitely deserved a nom

No.

IMO Best Picture should be an accumulation of all the other awards and categories. Like I said before a best picture nom should have good directing, acting, sound, story, etc.. If a picture only does a couple of those, it should be nominated in those individual categories. I said it before, but a movie like Ex Machina checked off far more of those categories than Mad Max.

except the fact the movie was boring as hell

I thought Ex Machina was a superb movie. Beautiful filming, good plot (a little too predictable), great acting.

 

[KarmaPolice]

Bottom line is when I saw mad max in the theater I was blown away the whole movie unlike any movie in a long time. Isn't that what movies are supposed to do? Entertain?

Not really, no. That is not the purpose of all movies. There are some fantastic movies out there that didn't "entertain" me. Maybe it's just not a great word to use and I am getting hung up on it. Also, there are a ####load of movies that I find entertaining that have no business getting awards for best of anything.

Long story short, people watch movies for all sorts of reasons and enjoy them for all sorts of reasons.

 

[KarmaPolice]

Its 97% on rotten tomatoes and people are shocked that those same people nominated it for an Oscar

Shocked, no. I think I had seen it on enough best of year lists and nominated/winning other awards that I figured it might be one of ten. It will just be one of those things I don't get, especially with the usual stuffiness of the Academy. My hangups are more:

- The movies that weren't included in the nominations, especially since they didn't use all 10 slots.

- I am REALLY trying to understand why this movie above all the others in the similar genre in the past couple years is the one that gives everyone, critics especially, a boner. To me, this is slightly more stylized Death Race. Why is this that much better than stuff like Snowpiercer, Avengers, Guardians of the Galaxy, Mission Impossible, Fast and Furious, etc.? All movies I also had a little fun with but ultimately thought were average at best as well. Nobody was seriously talking about those movies getting best picture noms but all entertaining summer movies. Might just have to put this in the sphere of Wes Anderson movies - something I am just not going to get.

 

[shadyridr]

I dunno because this movie was much better than the movies you listed. If you dont think it is than I understand why you don't think it should be nominated. Alot of people disagree

 

[KarmaPolice]

I dunno because this movie was much better than the movies you listed. If you dont think it is than I understand why you don't think it should be nominated. Alot of people disagree

Why is it that much better than the ones I listed?

 

[shadyridr]

I dunno because this movie was much better than the movies you listed. If you dont think it is than I understand why you don't think it should be nominated. Alot of people disagree

Why is it that much better than the ones I listed?

better action, awesome directing, great use of music, cinematography, and kept me entertained the entire movie. Edge of my seat for ninety minutes.

 

[Insein]

We did it, guys! 10 Oscar nominations, including best picture!

Terrible

Don't worry Avatar was once nominated so the award is mostly for show.

 

[Insein]

I think the big problem was the angle you start with the movie (Mad Max) and then where it was carried through with an angle of the Imperator and the Breeders but there was not a lot of work to get you bought into the girls other than they are attractive women fleeing a ugly dude that locked them up. You somewhat lost the connection to Max because of this being a reboot and any connection you did still have was lost when he was not really the central figure. Honestly, the guy that I ended up having the most connection with was Nux.

Not bad but not great either. Best picture nomination? Wow. Ok.

It wasn't a reboot. It was a sequel.

 

[Rohn Jambo]

This was Furiosa's film. Max is the central character of the world, of the series, but this was her film and her battle.

Between the brief intro monologue, the flashbacks, and Max's actions, I think he was developed appropriately. You know who he is. You don't know his whole backstory, but you can say the same about some new Star Wars characters. That doesn't make them bad, underdeveloped characters. Just my opinion.

You just think it's Furiosa's movie because she did most of the driving. Tom Hardy did a lot of the heavy lifting.

 

[Rohn Jambo]

Bottom line is when I saw mad max in the theater I was blown away the whole movie unlike any movie in a long time. Isn't that what movies are supposed to do? Entertain?

Yup. At this point it just seems to be people saying it's not worthy of an academy nom. I can be a movie, tv snob for sure but I think this movie covered enough basis to be deserve critical acclaim and a box office hit.

With this expanded field thing they have done should be on the list for sure.

Fury Road only did a little better than break even at the box office.

 

[belljr]

Looks great on my new projector!!!

 

[The General]

Bottom line is when I saw mad max in the theater I was blown away the whole movie unlike any movie in a long time. Isn't that what movies are supposed to do? Entertain?

Yup. At this point it just seems to be people saying it's not worthy of an academy nom. I can be a movie, tv snob for sure but I think this movie covered enough basis to be deserve critical acclaim and a box office hit.

With this expanded field thing they have done should be on the list for sure.

Fury Road only did a little better than break even at the box office.

Had to look that up, that was a surprise. 150 Mil to make.

Number 20 last year just behind San Andreas and weirdly enough one spot of ahead of The Rocky Horror Picture Show WTF.

 

[KarmaPolice]

I dunno because this movie was much better than the movies you listed. If you dont think it is than I understand why you don't think it should be nominated. Alot of people disagree

Why is it that much better than the ones I listed?

better action, awesome directing, great use of music, cinematography, and kept me entertained the entire movie. Edge of my seat for ninety minutes.

Fair enough - no surprise that it just comes down to what you like to look at on screen. To me the action in something like Mission Impossible looks a lot better, I even liked the look of Force Awakens more. IMO all the movies I listed, maybe besides Snowpiercer, had some laughs or something resembling a better story. Last year, Edge of Tomorrow was so much more entertaining to me than this one was. I think after about 30mins or so of Mad Max I realized I was just going to get the exact same chase for 60 more minutes, folded my arms, and wondered what everybody was slobbering over.