The Gift

       At the urging of my brother, I decided to move up the film,’The Gift’, on my queue of movies to watch.  I’m so glad I did as this is one of those hidden gems that will go unnoticed by the public until it comes out on Blu-ray.  This is a B-movie genre film that rises above its’ station to deliver a well crafted and intelligently thought out thriller.  In this day and age of over the top action, briskly paced stories, and formulaic paint-by-numbers genre films, it’s nice to have a film that takes its’ time crafting a story where the viewer is taken in and doesn’t know where they will be transported.

Joel Edgerton is the writer and director, but also the lead antagonist, so my hats off to him for this personal project that he delivers with skill and vision.  The story centers around a married couple, Simon (Jason Bateman) and Robyn (Rebecca Hall) moving back to California and running into an old acquaintance, Gordo (Joel Edgerton) from Simon’s past. Gordo's social awkwardness to reconnect with Simon charms Robyn, but Simon is uncomfortable by this mysterious person from his childhood.  However, even Robyn becomes uneasy as random gifts start appearing on their doorsteps as well as Gordo himself, but Robyn’s sense of social protocol requires her to at least invite Gordo over for dinner.  The tension rises as Gordo’s interest intensifies, while never quite crossing any boundaries.  Sometimes you just know something is creepy without ever being able to put your finger on it.

For anyone who lived through the 1980’s, who would have thought that Jason Bateman would have become more well known than his sister, Justine (of Family Ties fame).   Not only has he become more famous, but he has demonstrated that he is a versatile and gifted actor who is able to do everything from comedy to dark thrillers (and anything in between).  If this were any other type of film, I would say that Jason had a shot at an Academy Award for his portrayal of this nuanced role.  I’m frustrated that I cannot write more about this film without giving away too much of the twists and turns, but I will say that this film takes you in directions you don’t expect.  And as I stated earlier, it is in no hurry to take you there.  As the story slowly and artfully unfolds, you begin to reassess your assumptions of who is the protagonist and who is the antagonist.  Do these terms really even apply?  Is the victim always the innocent and is the predator always in the wrong?  One thing I will reveal is that by the end of the film, I still don’t have the answer to those questions.

Joel Edgerton demonstrates the skill of a craftsman as he seeks to draw out the tension as long as possible as he slowly reveals his vision for what is actually going on.  The theme of a wife not really knowing the true nature of her husband is a well treaded plot device, but Edgerton is able to make it seem fresh as the horror of Robyn discovering what her husband is really capable of begins to dawn on her.  I would imagine it must be difficult for Edgerton to direct himself in this role as Gordo, but he captures the essence of someone who seems nice on the surface, but has an unidentifiable creepiness to him.  Still, as the story unfolds, even though the creepiness and the danger remain, we do begin to feel empathy if not sorrow for Gordo.  That takes skill from a story teller not to sacrifice core character traits in order to achieve a plot point.  Edgerton is able to take tension and make it build, while never letting it snap.  It’s excruciating, but that is part of the fun.

If you like thrillers in the vein of ‘Fatal Attraction’, then I highly recommend this film.  Not every film has to be a mega blockbuster to be worthy of being made and ‘The Gift’ illustrates that point.  I have to believe there is still a market for the art of story telling and character development.  From that sense, ‘The Gift’ is a gift for those who seek that out.  I recommend this as a date movie, but you might be taking a second look at the person you are with once you walk out of the theatre.

I give this film *** 1/2 stars

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4178092/?ref_=nv_sr_1

Fantastic Four

      I would like to start off by saying that, despite considering myself somewhat a purist when it comes to interpretations of superheroes in films, I do enjoy a good reboot of a character or franchise.  Characters that were created in the 1960’s must be brought up to date to remain relevant and a new take on a classic character is essential as one can’t keep telling the same story over and over and still be interesting.  Franchises like Bond, Superman, and Batman have all successfully rebooted their franchises and breathed new life into characters for a new generation.  That being said, Josh Trank is an impressive director and the cast that was assembled was solid and even provocative, so I approached the reboot of the disappointing 2005 Fantastic Four films with optimism.  My optimism was betrayed.  This film was a hot mess from top to bottom.  Its’ attempt at grounded realism failed and the result was a dark and ponderous film that had no concept of what makes superheroes magic.  Of course, one accepts change in characters and storyline with a reboot, but after it’s over, one should feel the essence of the character is captured.  When Daniel Craig uttered the phrase “My name is Bond; James Bond” at the end of ‘Casino Royale’ we totally accepted him as Bond despite the changes.  This was not the case with the Fantastic Four.  These were not the characters of the comic book nor even an effective re-imagining.

Josh Trank has already distanced himself from this film after opening day, tweeting that the studios took his film and messed it up.  Not sure that is completely true as the basic concept of the re-imaging was flawed, but I will continue.  The core casting was solid; Miles Teller and Michael B Jordan were both inspired casting choices as Reed Richards and Johnny Storm.  Jordan caused manufactured controversy as his character is blond haired and blue eyed in the comics and Jordan is African American.  This was not an issue while watching and he was actually one of the more faithful portrayals in the film.  As for everyone else, the casting director should be publicly humiliated.  Every great film needs a great super villain, and Tobey Kebbell as Dr Doom was embarrassingly pathetic.  Dr Doom is the genius blue-blooded monarch of the fictitious country of Latveria. He is Marvel’s greatest villain and is a man of enormous intellect, presence, and gravitas.  This film portrayed him as an unkempt, disenfranchised,underground hacker who just happened to be from Latveria.  He possessed no sense of regality or purpose other than being anti-authority and government (ironically, totally opposite of his iron fisted despot persona in the comics).  Kate Mara and Jamie Bell were uninspired choices for Sue Storm and The Thing.  The CGI was impressive for the Thing, but that is all I can say about it.  Thespian Reg E. Cathay as Dr. Franklin Richards must have thought he was in a Shakespeare production as he bellowed every line with over the top abandon.

So where does that leave us?  I had no problem with the altering of the original story by having the team gain their powers through inter-dimensional travel rather than a mere space trip.  I didn’t even have an issue with making them all teenagers instead of adults like in the comic book.  My issue is that not only did the gloom and pace suck all the life out of the story, but the magic fun that Marvel is able to capture in its’ films was completely absent.  Marvel has mastered the magic formula to create the excitement comic book geeks had as kids when reading their stories.  Movies in the hands of people who don’t understand this and that try to make what they think a comic book movie is fails miserably.  The most notable example is Joel Schumacher’s ‘Batman and Robin’ which should have ended a lot more careers than it did.  There is nothing fun or wondrous about the Fantastic Four and the character development and interplay was on par with a CW show rather than something worthy of the First Family of comics.

The story itself was silly and made all the worse as they cloaked it in a dark, tedious, and politically correct self-important atmosphere.  The team traveling to an alternate universe in secret (and while drunk mind you)to find resources to save our dying planet, strained credulity (is climate change in every Hollywood movie now?).  Supposedly the strange green glowing substance they found there gives them their powers, but Sue Storm wasn’t even with them, so I didn’t understand how she was affected to.  Victor Von Doom is left behind and when they return to the alternate dimension they find Doom an all powerful recluse who wants to remain there and rule…what? I’m not sure since he seemed to be the only inhabitant.  Equally confusing is why he appears to be crippled when he is mysteriously all-powerful and why, if he wants to stay in the alternate universe, he allows them to bring him back to Earth. Doom was a character of great power and cunning in the comics.  This Doom walked around like a character that belonged in the movie ‘Scanners’, randomly exploding peoples heads with undefined power and glowing green.  Whatever they call this character in this film, it was no way even a remote reimagining of Dr. Doom.  I don’t know what it was.  

In the third act, the battle to save Earth in the alternate dimension lacked any sense of wonder and, indeed, approached levels of hokey and camp that I haven’t seen for quite awhile in superhero films.  Whether or not Trank is responsible for this mess, it is obvious that the final product is a result of people who have no concept of superheroes.  The Fantastic Four was Marvel’s flagship at one time and someone should be able to make a great movie from it.  This is not it.  It will be interesting to see where it goes from here, because sequels had already been planned and cross-overs with the X-Men were in the works.   I cannot imagine Sony going forward after this dismal outing.  My hope is that they sell the movie rights back to Marvel, who I have no doubt would be able to make a movie worth seeing.

Sometimes movies are so bad they ruin your day.  This was one.

I give this film 1/2 star

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1502712/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

Trainwreck

         If you like Amy Schumer, then you are going to like ‘Trainwreck’.  If you love Amy Schumer, then you are going to love ‘Trainwreck’.  This is a film by comedy guru Judd Apatow that is a showcase for Amy Schumer’s brand of comedy.  She came onto the comedy stand up scene a few years ago and made a name for herself with her uniquely Amy brand of humor.  Always brash, usually vulgar, sometimes over the top, but always with a hint of honesty and heart that people can relate to. Come to think of it, that is the profile of many Judd Apatow films, so I don’t know why it took so long for these two to get together.

As far back as she can remember, Amy learned that monogamy is not a practical lifestyle.  This was reinforced by her father (Collin Quinn doing a great Collin Quinn impression) who hammered this into her had after his divorce.  As Amy grew to adulthood, her relationships consisted mainly of one night stands and absolutely no second dates or sleep overs.  She landed a job as a writer at a men’s magazine and everything appeared to be going her way.  That is until one day, when she is assigned to write a story on Aaron Collins (the always delightful Bill Hader), a sports medicine doctor who also happens to be best friends with LeBron James.  I usually detest sports figures who try their hands at acting, especially when they play themselves.  This is an exception, as LeBron showed that he has some pretty impressive comic timing for a sports star.  He had some of the funniest lines and scenes in the movie and he was more than just a novelty appearance.  

Like most Rom Coms, ‘Trainwreck’ follows the usual formula of the montage of quirky fun-around-town activities that cause the heroine to fall for the man despite her resistance.  There is even the quirky best friend (SNLs Vanessa Bayer) to tell her how wacky she is.  All of that is formula (which I hate), but Judd Apatow and Amy Schumer are able to break the mold with the over the top Amy style crudeness and cynicism of her comedy.  Much like ‘Bridesmaids’ did years ago, Amy shows that women aren’t one dimensional when it comes to comedy and they can get shock laughs just as good (and often better) than their male counterparts.  I will claim as much guilt as the next guy as to rather getting a root canal than sitting through a romantic comedy, but Aptaow is able to bring enough edge to appeal to anyone looking for an R-rated comedy

Amy struggles to reconcile falling for the perfect guy with her belief that she will screw up any relationship she is in.  Her sister’s idyllic married life draws both admiration and revulsion from her.  She has fallen for her new boyfriend Aaron, but doesn’t see how it will work.  Aaron, for his part, loves Amy for all her quirks (although he does have an amusingly hard time coming to grips with how many men she has slept with).  If I have one criticism of the film is that it is a little long and the sudden sad turn during the third act stretches past the point of effectiveness. Apt is too experienced of a director to have let it plod along as long as it did.  Despite that criticism, it didn’t take away from the overall enjoyment of this showcase for Amy Schumer.

If she isn’t a household name by now, this film will be the start of a long and industrious career for Amy Schumer.  She will add her name to the ranks of comedians who have made the jump from stand-up to the Big Screen (with a small stop on television).  I loved the inclusion of all the bit parts with everyone from Jon Cena playing Amy’s sexually confused booty call, to Dave Atell as her street person/confident.  I highly recommend this film as I do all Judd Apatow films (Well, most of them) and encourage anyone thinking this is just a normal romantic comedy to take a chance and be prepared to laugh.

I give this film ** 1/2 stars

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3152624/?ref_=nv_sr_1

Ant-Man

       Say what you want about Marvel, but they know how to make a fun movie.  There are a lot of critics who love to blast Marvel as a blockbuster making machine that produces nothing but high budget, super hero schlock and from their perspective, they are correct.  However; one thing you can’t say about Marvel is that they are afraid to take risks.  The multi-movie story franchise was a Marvel innovation from the very beginning.  While most studios would have been content to crank out the exact same formula until the well runs dry, Marvel takes chances and, for some reason, the naysayers are salivating for Marvel to fail.  It hasn’t happened yet.  Critics predicted (hoped) that last year’s Guardians of the Galaxy, about an unknown ragtag group of aliens that the mainstream knew nothing about, would mark the end of the Marvel machine, but it turned out to be the highest grossing film of the year.  Likewise now, a film about a tertiary Marvel hero with ridiculous powers, shrinking, has bloggers searching for the chink in the Marvel armor.  After Friday’s box office results and a projected $80 million opening weekend, the headlines read “Ant-Man has second lowest opening weekend for Marvel”.  Really? In what other universe does an $80 million opening weekend constitute a failure?.  

‘Ant-Man’ is a much smaller (pun intended) movie than its’ blockbuster brethren and not a typical superhero movie.  I applaud Marvel for giving us something different, yet still weaving it seamlessly into the broader Marvel universe.  This is a much lighter and fun movie that goes for a younger demographic, but is still fun for all ages. Instead of a super-hero, we have a reformed cat burglar who is in no way looking to be a hero. His goal is not to save the world rather find a way to be with his daughter.  The movie had a feeling of a cross between ‘Honey, I Shrunk the Kids’ and ‘Iron Man’.  The difference is that special effects have exponentially improved since 1994 and some of the effects of the world from a miniature perspective are truly awe inspiring.  

Marvel has never been afraid to mess with the comics storyline orthodoxy.  Currently, even in the comics, the company is changing the story line of characters that have been around for over 50 years.  It has to be changed and rebooted to remain relevant.  I’m a purist as much as the next comic geek, but there comes a time when characters and stories need to be brought up to the current time.  In this case, the story centers on Scott Lang (Paul Rudd), a down-on-his-luck father, just out of prison and looking for a way to earn enough money to be able to see his daughter again and be a part of her life. During a bungled burglary attempt, he inadvertently steals a mysterious suit belonging to the reclusive inventor, Dr. Hank Pym (Michael Douglass, still showing that he can do an action film).  Hank was already in turmoil as his protege, Darren Cross (Corey Stoll) has cracked the secret to his shrinking technology and is seeking to weaponize it to make his fortune.  Desperate to stop this, Hank recognizes the burglary talents of Scott and recruits him to break into Cross’s labs and steal his prototype suit and destroy all the research located there.  

At its’ core, this is an exciting heist movie with a super hero twist, but it also has the heart of a family movie as well.  Hank Pym’s estranged daughter, Hope (Evangeline Lily) is now CEO of Cross industries and Hank’s attempts at reconciliation with her are some of the most touching moments in the movie.  Likewise, Scott’s desperation and the lengths he will go to be a part of his daughter’s life are equally touching and provides the driving force for the movie.  Despite all this, it is a fun and funny movie with Paul Rudd being an inspired choice for someone who brings both comedy and action to the role.  The special effects are truly awe inspiring and the pseudo-science involving controlling ants is fun if not a strain on credulity.

Despite the different tone, this is a Marvel movie and part of the greater Marvel universe, so many cameos and Easter eggs are scattered throughout.  One of the best fight scenes in the movie involves Ant-man breaking into the Avenger’s headquarters and fighting the Avenger he finds there.  Frequent Avenger references and two great post credit scenes assure us that Ant-man will be an integral part of the Marvel universe in the future.  As always, keep your eyes open for a cameo by the 92 year old Marvel comics founder, Stan Lee.

Of all the Marvel films, I feel this is the most kid friendly, but don’t think this doesn’t have something for everyone.  This will not be a record breaking blockbuster, but it will do well and be another building block in the Marvel universe.  This is a perfect Saturday morning matinee to bring the kids and enjoy it thoroughly yourself.

I give this film *** stars

http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi3829444633?ref_=ttvi_vi_imdb_1

Terminator: Genysis

         So, ‘Terminator: Genysis' has been getting a lot of bad press.  I think critics are tired of the reboots and recycled ideas that Hollywood has been putting out.  While I don’t entirely disagree, I will say there is an enjoyment at seeing a fresh take on an old classic. ‘Terminator: Genysis’ attempts to update and modernize the ‘Terminator’ franchise and I have to confess, as a time-twisting, mind-bending piece of science fiction, it wasn’t half bad.  I can see why the critics thought it was over blown and over confusing, but for those who enjoy trying to follow and unravel the paradoxes of time travel and alternate time lines, this was an entertaining ride.

The story of Skynet sending back a Terminator to 1984 to prevent the birth of John Conner, the savior of mankind over the machines is well known for anyone who follows the franchise.  John Conner (Jason Clarke) sends back his trusted soldier, Kyle Reese (Jai Courtney) to foil the Terminator’s mission and save his mother Sara Conner (played respectably by ‘Game of Thrones actress, Emilia Clarke).  In a paradox of time, the soldier that is sent back becomes John Conner’s father.  This time, something different happens and when Kyle Reese arrives in 1984, he does not find a helpless Sara Conner, rather a hardened fighter who has been protected and trained by a Terminator her whole life.  Arnold’s obvious age difference is explained as the human tissue of the Terminator ages just like a human’s.  I will say I was quite impressed at the use of old (actually young) Arnold footage from the original movie that is superimposed in the current one.  The illusion of young Arnold fighting current Arnold was seamless.

SInce the timeline has been altered, the reboot has open license to take the story wherever they want. The action was fast and furious, but an engaging, albeit confusing, time twisting tale was woven in.  This was not just some poorly written action flick rather a well thought out revamp that hopes to continue and expand the franchise.  I thought the film was at its’ weakest when it tried to inject humor into the mix.  It seemed out of place, and candidly, just not funny as events spiraled out of control in the dark and dystopian world they were trying to create.  As I stated earlier, the special effects were stunning and the roller coaster ride was worthy of a Saturday matinee popcorn movie.

The insight as to the creation of Skynet was well done and modernized to reflect the fears arising from today’s dependency on technology.  Whether we realize or not, we are addicted to digital technology and the film lays out how that will be our downfall when the machines finally gain self awareness.  This was an artfully crafted story that taps into the fears of our current dependencies and extrapolates where it will take us.  A parable for the modern age which is the basis of all good science fiction.

When the original ‘Terminator’ came out, it was a low budget, almost campy, B-movie that somehow rose above its’ genre.  The special effects were nothing special, even by 1984 standards, but through a terrifying story at the dawning of the computer age that was just beginning to touch our collective consciousness and from the sheer star power of the future Govenator, Arnold Schwartzenegger, ‘The Terminator’ became more than a cult classic, it became a cultural phenomenon.  Terminator 2 captured the magic and went big budget, but it has not been able to repeat that X-factor that makes a movie stand the test of time.  I understand why studios try to reintroduce and reboot these classics, because they have a built in audience base from nostalgia alone.  I will say that was a respectable and enjoyable attempt.  No hard feelings here, but I doubt it will start the mega-franchise the studios were hoping for.

I give this film ** 1/2 stars

http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi2621615897?ref_=ttvi_vi_imdb_7

Entourage

Vince (Adrian Grenier) and his entourage are back and, if you were a fan of the HBO show, then it’s more of what made Entourage a hit show.  It’s a male fantasy of fame, fortune, and excess while bringing your friends along for the ride.  I would compare this to Sex in the City for men in that it gives an insight into the male psyche even if it isn’t a realistic attainment for most.  The story picks up right where it left off with super-agent Ari (Jeremy Piven) becoming the head of a major studio and Vince deciding to make the jump form major movie star to his director debut.  If I have one complaint is that this movie just felt like another episode of Entourage.  No stakes were raised nor was anything new brought to the big screen. Other than upping the amount of celebrity cameos and exotic locales, nothing new was brought to the table. However; that doesn’t mean it’s not a lot of fun and if you enjoy living out a male fantasy then, well I would call it a nostalgic ride, but it just went off the air a few years ago.  How long does something have to be off the air before you get nostalgic.

Each of the members of Vince’s Entourage have their own sub-plots in this film, which play out in sit-com formulaic gags, but the true fun in this film revolves around Ari’s attempt to live a calmer and more normal life (no one plays manic intensity better than Jeremy Piven).  His ability to do that is tested when Vince goes over his production budget and the film’s Texan financier (Billy Bob Thorton) sends his buffoonish son Travis (played by dramatically changed Haley Joel Osment).   Travis takes an instant jealous dislike to Vince and starts threatening to shut the production down unless changes he demands are implemented.  Namely, cutting Drama (Kevin Dillon) from the film in an effort to cause a rift among Vince’s life long friends.  

It’s a fun plot, but not enough to fill up an entire film, so as I stated, sit-comesque sub-plots are introduced.  The weakest of which (but that doesn’t mean it’s not funny) is Drama getting caught in a sex tape scandal.  Turtle (a slimmed down Jerry Ferrara) also had a weak sub-plot which was basically a showcase for Ronda Rousey to try to make her cross over from mixed martial arts.  I think if the two had better chemistry it would have been more interesting, but Ronda didn’t embarrass herself and might have a future action career.  E (Kevin Connolly) oddly had the most engaging sub-plot where he wrestles with the birth of his child with his ex-wife Sloane (Emmanuelle Chriqui) and becoming what he always denied he would become; a shallow Hollywood player.  

The reason Entourage works is the same reason Sex in the City worked.  It’s not that the stories are that complex, but it’s characters we come to care about living a life we all wish we could.  What male hasn’t wished for enough fame and fortune to bring his friends along for the ride and to have them watch his back no matter what happens.  Ari, despite all his rants and berating, loves this crew and the star he discovered.  Piven does a great job at showing his reluctant affection and in turn, the Entourage is there when Ari needs them most. Sure the nudity is gratuitous and the excess and parties are a juvenile fantasy at best, but it’s a fun indulgence if you don’t mind watching a movie that does not try to have any redeeming social value.  

This could have very well have been shown last Sunday on HBO and I wouldn’t have known this was a movie.  That is my primary complaint.  If you feel like paying $10 for something that used to come as part of your HBO package then have at it.  It’s a fun time filled with lots of Hollywood life and cameos.  Go ahead and live the fantasy, but be prepared to come back to reality afterwards.

I give this film ** stars

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1674771/?ref_=nv_sr_1

Mad Max :Fury Road

       The eighties were the era of the cult indy films.  There were many classics that became instant guilty pleasures and lasted longer in our collective psyche than they should have.  Pulp movies like the Highlander and Robocop still are discussed and remembered fondly to this day and have spawned their own franchises beyond the movies.  However, the one that started it all (and Mel Gibson’s career pre-Lethal Weapon) was George Miller’s  ‘The Road Warrior’ (actually a sequel to 1979’s ‘Mad Max’, but that did not have the mainstream success of ‘The Road Warrior’).  When I heard that they were going to reboot Mad Max after almost 30 years, I felt an almost collective shoulder shrugging across the internet.  Reboots are the norm now and the various reboots of nostalgic movies have met with limited success (the respectable, yet forgettable Robocop reboot being a prime example).  However; then I saw the first trailer and the names attached to the project and my interest was piqued.  ‘Mad Max:Fury Road’ breaks the typical blockbuster formula and delivers an unapologetic R-rated orgy of destruction and mayhem while offering a confusingly beautiful visual opera of a post-apocalyptic future that continues the story of Max, the Road Warrior.

Believe it or not, an argument could be made that Max (played this time around by the flawless Tom Hardy) wasn’t even the main character of this film, rather he was just along for the ride.  The film focuses on Imperator Furiosa (Charlize Theron), a high ranking warrior in one of the last surviving despotic enclaves of humanity, who seeks to smuggle the harem of a ruthless dictator named Immortan Joe to freedom. I doubt too many other actresses could make a ragged, crippled, head shaven character appear seductive, but Chalize pulls it off.  Her gaze is hypnotic with steely determination to deliver oppressed women from the masculine evil, embodied in Immortan Joe, that she feels destroyed the world.  She seeks to transport the harem to the ‘Green Place’ she was taken from as a child.  Immortan Joe marshals his force of white men (literally white colored men, not a political race statement) to track down Furiosa and bring back his harem.  That’s the plot in a nutshell.  Nothing complex.

What is complex is the incredible visual feast that George Miller creates. The dialogue is minimalist almost to the point where speech surprises us when it is heard.  Miller also destroys the cinematic myth of the lone wolf hero.  In life, lone wolves are quickly squashed by the collectives and Max is dispatched early in the film.  As Max himself states, he has been reduced to a single instinct; Survival. His escape from Immortan Joe and teaming up with Furiosa’s band is an act of self preservation rather than any heroic act of nobility.  As Immortan Joe sets out in pursuit, a 2 hour opera of death and destruction commences with only minor interludes.  It does have moments of tedium in the non-stop carnage, but the visuals are so stunning at times, the monotony of violence is forgiven.

One could also make an argument that this is a feminist film.  Chalize’s Furiosa is the central character.  She is a woman and while that is embraced by her, it is not her overriding defining characteristic.  I haven’t seen a character this strongly explored since Ripley from the ‘Aliens’ franchise. Furiosa is strong and determined to deliver innocents from the evil of male oppression, but she takes the world as it is and pushes no other agenda than the freeing of innocents.  Her gaze and resolve are unwavering and she is the true hero of the film while Max struggles to keep up in order to find his own ride to freedom.

Nicholas Hoult plays Nux, one of Immortan Joe’s warriors who seeks to prove himself worthy before death.  He provides welcome insight into the seemingly generic white warriors in pursuit of Furiosa.  Nux and his fellow warriors have been convinced by the megalomaniacal Immortan Joe that the key to happiness is in dying for their leader and waking up in Valhalla (warrior heaven).  How else can one explain the absurd lengths in which these warriors flail themselves to almost certain destruction in their attacks?  Having grown jaded by a lifetime of action movies, I still found myself breathless by the scope of the action sequences.  Far outpacing anything seen in the previous Mad Max movies, the action rises to a level of abstraction and, as I stated earlier, confusingly beautiful.  

This film is something we see less and less in the modern blockbusters.  Studios these days try to appeal to the largest audience possible in order to maximize the box office dollar.  They strive for some edge, but nothing that would alienate the family’s 8 or 80 yr olds. ‘Mad Max: Fury Road’ is action and mayhem  in undiluted hard ‘R’ rated scope and glory.  Characters as odd as anything found in a Fellini or Burton film and with no agenda to appeal to Puritan mass audience sensibilities.  Dialogue takes a backseat to the stunningly beautiful and grotesque vision of a post apocalyptic landscape.  A worthy compliment to the Mad Max franchise even if Max is merely along for the ride.  A film not for everyone, but definitely an impressive piece of artistic achievement. This trailer gives an accurate insight into the flavor of the film.

*** 1/2 stars

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1392190/?ref_=nv_sr_1