reiher@ucla-cs.UUCP (07/12/85)
"Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome" is the occasion for a very rare
type of disappointment for me: the inevitable realization that
not every film made by a great director is going to be a master-
piece. "Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome" is a good enough film, but
it is not nearly as good as "The Road Warrior" or George Miller's
segment of "The Twilight Zone". It's just a solid action film,
not really anything special, and that disappoints me more than a
full-blown artistic failure. The latter can be seen as overambi-
tion or merely a valiant effort that failed. A perfectly average
film, though, suggests that maybe the director doesn't have a lot
of juice in him, maybe he's shown us everything he has already.
(For a good example of this contrast, compare "1941" and "Indiana
Jones and the Temple of Doom". "1941" is definitely a failure,
but it's a failure because Spielberg tried something different
that just didn't work. "IJTOD" failed because Spielberg lazily
tried to copy precisely what he had done before rather than do
the real work of coming up with something new.)
"Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome", co-directed by Miller and
George Ogilvie, is set in the same world as "Mad Max" and "The
Road Warrior", but several years after the latter film. Mel Gib-
son, as Max, runs afoul of Auntie Entity, a powerful leader in
Bartertown, a fairly vile trading village she has built up from
nothing. Bartertown runs on energy controlled by Master-Blaster,
a dwarf genius (Master) who rides a huge, brawny hulk of a fellow
known as Blaster. Auntie Entity wants complete control of Bar-
tertown, and she intends to use Max to get it. After a variety
of plot twists, Max finds himself out in the desert where he
meets a tribe of lost children who are expecting a messiah. Max
involuntarily takes the role, leading to yet further complications.
If the above description sounds a bit diffuse, there you
have the major problem of "Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome". Unlike
"The Road Warrior", it doesn't have a clean plot line. Instead,
it has incidents strungs together rather uncomfortably. The ear-
ly part of the film is best. While not up to the previous films,
it is crisply directed and has a sense of purpose. The latter
half of the film is muddled and uncertain. We are given no sense
at all that Max has any plan worth speaking of when he returns to
Bartertown. We don't know what he wants to do, and he doesn't
seem to, either. Even the final chase scene, which has its mo-
ments, doesn't have the clarity of the chase in "The Road Warri-
or". In that film, the chase was so perfectly constructed that
every incident in it seemed both inevitably correct and crystal
clear. The chase in this film doesn't hang together, nor is
there the terrible sense of desperation present in "The Road War-
rior". Hence, it just isn't as exciting.
Mel Gibson also isn't as strong a presence as he was in ei-
ther of the first two films. In those films, he really was the
center of the story, the one who made things go. In this film,
he seems more acted upon than acting. Neither is there the iron
core previously present in the character. Part of this may be due
to the fact that he doesn't have as clear a villain to work against.
Tina Turner is quite good as Auntie Entity, but she isn't the pure
force of evil and destructiveness the earlier villains were. Miller,
who co-wrote the screenplay with Terry Hayes, doesn't make it clear
why Max should oppose her. Master-Blaster certainly seems more
unpleasant and dangerous. Max's opposition could be made to work,
but Miller, Hayes, and Ogilvie don't succeed. The supporting roles
are very well played, though the casting of Bruce Spence, the Gyro
Captain in "The Road Warrior", in a completely unrelated yet similar
part is more than a bit confusing.
I don't want to get too down on "Mad Max Beyond Thunder-
dome". It has some fine sequences, there is a point behind the
entire plot, and all involved deserve praise for attempting more
than a mere retread of "The Road Warrior". Particular praise
goes to Grace Walker, the production designer. The only reason I
can think of to see "Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome" again is to com-
pare the many subtle differences between the sets and costumes of
it and "The Road Warrior". Obviously, much thought has gone into
deciding just how artifacts and communities are going to degen-
erate as things run out and wear down, and the results are some-
times more interesting than the plot.
Co-direction is extremely uncommon in America and most of
Europe, but apparently happens a lot in Australia. Contrary to
rumor, George Miller and George Ogilvie both worked on the entire
picture, side by side throughout. Ogilvie's theatrical back-
ground shows up in some of the ensemble work with the children
and the citizens of Bartertown, but otherwise he seems to contri-
bute little. Either he watered down Miller or that gentleman is
running out of steam, for his incredible ability to sustain the
tension of an extended action sequence is notably missing from
this film. One cannot blame the failures of "Mad Max Beyond
Thunderdome" on Ogilvie, however, as Miller, who also served as
producer, could easily have made the film by himself, if he wished.
"Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome" is a good adventure film which
I enjoyed, but it just isn't a classic. If I hadn't seen "The
Road Warrior", I'd probably be perfectly satisfied with this
film. Unfortunately, I have seen "The Road Warrior", four times.
I consider it the best film of the eighties, so far, and have
every intention of seeing it again. On the other hand, I cannot
picture myself sitting through "Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome"
again. Much as I like the character and the setting, I think
Miller should retire him and try to find some entirely different.
--
Peter Reiher
reiher@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU
{...ihnp4,ucbvax,sdcrdcf}!ucla-cs!reiherterryl@tekcrl.UUCP (07/14/85)
Gee, I thought I was the only one who was disappointed with the new
"Mad Max". I really have to agree heavily that the lack of a clear plot
line was the big disappointment for me. "Road Warrior", and to a lesser
degree, the original "Mad Max" had very recognizable plot lines, even
if they were very simplistic. Also, another point is that the first two
movies told their respective stories with actions and people, whereas the
new movie did it mostly with fantastic sets. Now don't get me wrong, I
liked the sets and the photography, but it seems to me that they put too
much emphasis on the sets and not on the people or the story. Also, the ending
is directly stolen from the ending of "Road Warrior", but it just didn't have
the same sense of urgency or importance that the ending of "Road Warrior"
had. I'd also have to agree that Mel Gibson didn't have much of an opportunity
to do some acting here, as he did in the first two. Granted, he didn't have
much speaking parts in the first two, but I'd blame the director/screenwriter
for his lackadaisical performance here instead of blaming Mel himself. I
think Mel has proven that he can do some real good acting, judging by his
performance in the first two movies and his really first-rate performance in
"The Year of Living Dangerously".
All in all, if you're a "Mad Max" fan or a Mel Gibson fan, by all means
go see "Mad Max-Beyond Thunderdome", but don't expect too much.
Terry Laskodi
of
Tektronixjoel@peora.UUCP (Joel Upchurch) (07/15/85)
While I didn't like 'Beyond Thunderdome' as much as 'The Road
Warrior' that is apparently not a universal reaction. I was
watching Siskel and Ebert last night and they were very high
on the picture. They actually liked it better than 'The Road
Warrior'. They liked they way Miller brought some new ideas
to the picture instead of making a straight sequel.
That last chase sequence struck me as being too much like the
one in 'The Road Warrior'.
I was bothered by a couple of things in the picture:
1. Didn't the earlier pictures say that civilization
collapsed because of an energy shortage, with perhaps some
help by fighting over the remaining energy resources? This
movie says that it was because of Nuclear Warfare. I don't
remember any point being made of latent radioactivity in the
earlier pictures. The only thing I can think of is that there
were some isolated bombing during the spasms of civilization's
collapse and that Max has wandered into an area near one of
them.
2. The children that find Max in the desert are too young. I
would think that the collapse of civilization happened at
least 10 and maybe 20 years ago, but some of the children
Can't be older than 5 or 6. And unless I missed something,
all of them were born before the collapse. The Feral Kid of
the Road Warrior was older than them and I'm pretty sure he
was born not long the collapse.