MCN Blogs

By DP30 david@thehotbuttonl.com

George Miller… Max Is Back (trailer… and also, a 2011 DP/30 with Dr. Miller)

6 Responses to “George Miller… Max Is Back (trailer… and also, a 2011 DP/30 with Dr. Miller)”

  1. Bulldog68 says:

    The remakes of of our favorite movies have been so underwhelming but the trailer looks really well done. Hope the movie delivers. The landscape looks beautifully shot and seems to be true character of the movie.

  2. amblinman says:

    The difference with this remake is the original filmmaker is involved. George Miller is a genius and I wish he had been more prolific in his career. He deserved Spielberg/Cameron levels of success and acclaim.

    Of course good or bad this film will probably be ignored by the American public as it has no Transformers or superheroes in it.

  3. The Pope says:

    I have hopes for this film. I really enjoyed the first two films as a teenager but… while I know they’re selling to the action/Mad Max audience I get the feeling from the trailer that there is little to nothing else there. Theron looks incredible. Hardy is always a charismatic draw. But I beleive if there was a big emotional/thematic hook they would have placed it in the trailer. But what we get is 2.44 of repeated imagery. Great imagery, but it is on repeat.

    Like I said, I have hopes for this film. I really do.

  4. leahnz says:

    er why does nobody have an astraaain accent mate? i don’t get it, when does this take place, can’t be after silly Thunderdome so after Mad Max and before II or after II but before he spins the wheel and makes a deal with tina turner? or is it just reboot city? (does Miller explain this in the vid, i can watch it now — i was kind of hoping this one would be the feral kid grown up, taking over max’s mantle rather than a redo of max himself, which seems bizarre)

    hard to tell just from a trailer but it looks too overblown and operatic, why do the older grey-haired dudes tend to come down with RSS (Ridley Scott Syndrome) and go all ott and melodrama bombastic instead of lean and mean like a fighting machine

  5. Chris says:

    “The difference with this remake is the original filmmaker is involved.”

    Then how do you explain Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, Star Wars eps I – III, Blues Brothers 2000, Rocky V, The Godfather Part III, etc etc?

    Plus this ain’t a remake, definitely more of a sequel.

    Still, this trailer is wild. I hope the movie is good.

  6. doug r says:

    I heard tell it’s set between the end of 1 and the start of 2.

Leave a Reply

The Hot Blog


Quote Unquotesee all »

“We now have a situation where audiences very often prefer commercial trash to Bergman’s Persona or Bresson’s L’Argent. Professionals find themselves shrugging, and predicting that serious, significant works will have no success with the general public. What is the explanation? Decline of taste or impoverishment of repertoire? Neither and both. It is simply that cinema now exists, and is evolving, under new conditions. That total, enthralling impression which once overwhelmed the audiences of the 1930s was explained by the universal delight of those who were witnessing and rejoicing over the birth of a new art form, which furthermore had recently acquired sound. By the very fact of its existence this new art, which displayed a new kind of wholeness, a new kind of image, and revealed hitherto unexplored areas of reality, could not but astound its audiences and turn them into passionate enthusiasts.

Less than twenty years now separate us from the twenty-first century. In the course of its existence, through its peaks and troughs, cinema has travelled a long and tortuous path. The relationship that has grown up between artistic films and the commercial cinema is not an easy one, and the gulf between the two becomes wider every day. Nonetheless, films are being made all the time that are undoubtedly landmarks in the history of cinema. Audiences have become more discerning in their attitude to films. Cinema as such long ago ceased to amaze them as a new and original phenomenon; and at the same time it is expected to answer a far wider range of individual needs. Audiences have developed their likes and dislikes. That means that the filmmaker in turn has an audience that is constant, his own circle. Divergence of taste on the part of audiences can be extreme, and this is in no way regrettable or alarming; the fact that people have their own aesthetic criteria indicates a growth of self-awareness.

Directors are going deeper into the areas which concern them. There are faithful audiences and favorite directors, so that there is no question of thinking in terms of unqualified success with the public—that is, if one is talking about cinema not as commercial entertainment but as art. Indeed, mass popularity suggests what is known as mass culture, and not art.”
~ Andrei Tarkovsky, “Sculpting In Time”

“People seem to be watching [fewer] movies, which I think is a mistake on people’s parts, and they seem to be making more of them, which I think is okay. Some of these movies are very good. When you look at the quality of Sundance movies right now, they are a lot better than they were when I was a kid. I do think that there have been improvements artistically, but it’s tough. We’ve got a system that’s built for less movies in terms of how many curatorial standard-bearers we have in the states. It’s time for us to expand our ideas of where we find our great films in America, but that said, it’s a real hustle. I’m so happy that Factory 25 exists. If it didn’t exist, there would be so many movies that wouldn’t ever get distributed because Matt Grady is the only person who has seen the commercial potential in them. He’s preserving a very special moment in independent film history that the commercial system is not going to be preserving. He’s figuring out how to make enough money on it to save these films and get them onto people’s shelves.”
~ Homemakers‘ Colin Healey On Indie Distribution