All non-Nolan related film, tv, and streaming discussions.
Joined:
June 2010
Location: The White City
Cilogy wrote:LelekPL wrote:Maybe the 98% on Rotten Tomatoes raised my expectations too high. It's definitely in my top 5 of the year so far but I can't say it's a great film.
I feel like we need to have a collective intervention on what RT percentages mean. All that means is 98% of the critics counted
didn't dislike it. For example, your review and impression would be counted as a part of that 98%.
I can understand the pressure it places on people; like it's suggesting "most people liked it, so you should too". Though, at the end of the day, RT simply predicts the likelihood of you not hating a film, it doesn't predict quality.
If an RT percentage raises your expectations, you're interpreting it incorrectly.
Also, I'm better than you.
You're obviously rigt Cil, but the average rating on RT is still sky high and the metacritic score is glowing too (89). Course I think it deserves it, but.
-Vader
Joined:
April 2015
Location: MISSOURI
You are better than Cilogy, Vader
Joined:
June 2009
Location: La La Land
LelekPL wrote:I liked it, didn't love it - 7.5/10
It has some nice concepts and character designs. I was hoping for more tension, though and more practical effects. I was a little dissapointed with the action that started to bore me a little half-way through and I didn't expect so much CGI in the surrounding and the debris. At times it didn't even feel like they were on Earth. The action had some great stunts and some highly exaggerated ones that I just didn't care for. The cuts are quick but I'd prefer some more time to breath and soak in the cinematography. The music was fun, sometimes it really built up the tension, even though it doesn't have that one tune I would remember it for.
Immortal Joe had some nice designs, his soldiers looked menacing as heck. The opening was INCREDIBLE, filled with tension. The beginning of the chase after Furiosa was also great... but then it just kind of... stumbled through some long stretches.
Tom Hardy did his job efficiently, he had some nice moments. I still prefer Mel Gibson in the role but I can't say I disliked Tom (I had this moment of what would happen if Heath Ledger had played that role, though). Charlize is good and so is Hoult. Yet, these are no Oscar winning characters or performances. Everyone was just solid with, like I said earlier, some really cool character concepts thrown in the mix as well.
Maybe the 98% on Rotten Tomatoes raised my expectations too high. It's definitely in my top 5 of the year so far but I can't say it's a great film.
I think you're cookoo bananas in general, but specifically I'm getting annoyed with people bringing up Heath. Like, he wasn't anymore "signed up" for the part than he was for Foxcatcher. He'd been dead 4.5 years prior to the first day of shooting, and 7.5 by the time it was released. Like, I'd get people imagining him in the part if they shot this in the summer of 2008, but come on. He was Australia's biggest young star, obviously he was in contention for it at some stage. There's a pretty big chance he wouldn't have ended up doing it even if he had lived.
Joined:
August 2012
Location: The Wasteland
Ledger was not the physical actor that Hardy is, and Mad Max requires that quality.
Joined:
February 2010
Location: Houston, Texas
QueenofHearts wrote:You are better than Cilogy, Vader
Do you mind fucking off?
and not just for this post
Joined:
June 2010
Location: All-Hail Master Virgo, Censor of NolanFans
Baniac wrote:Ledger was not the physical actor that Hardy is, and Mad Max requires that quality.
Oh. My. God.
First of all this whole Ledger-Hardy thing is nonsense but what you said is even more nonsensical.
Joined:
February 2010
Location: Houston, Texas
physical actor ...
as opposed to, like, a spiritual actor?
Joined:
April 2015
Location: MISSOURI
Cilogy wrote:QueenofHearts wrote:You are better than Cilogy, Vader
Do you mind fucking off?
and not just for this post
Goodness Cilogy...such language
Joined:
February 2010
Location: Houston, Texas
QueenofHearts wrote:Cilogy wrote:QueenofHearts wrote:You are better than Cilogy, Vader
Do you mind fucking off?
and not just for this post
Goodness Cilogy...such language
are you one of my novelty accounts that somehow achieved artificial intelligence and has now gone rogue?
Joined:
April 2015
Location: MISSOURI
Goodness Cilogy...such language
are you one of my novelty accounts that somehow achieved artificial intelligence and has now gone rogue?
Perhaps..
Bout as rogue as the topic of Heath Ledger playing Mad Max has gone...
Cilogy- Im hugging you through my computer. Goodness! Crazy 8- I understand what you were saying about Ledger- I just think actors that have passed before their time will always get talked about . Whether he would have eventually been able to be MM or not, same way people talk about living actors and how they would have performed if they were given a part they tried about for. Its just one of those things, Love. Its obvious I adore Hardy, but I cant see anybody in this role but him. With his physicality of acting- from the use of his eyes to everything else..he's perfect. I think he owned this role, given the very little script they had to work with.
