Comments on: Rumor: Is George Miller Going From ‘Mad Max: Fury Road’ To ‘Man Of Steel 2?’

By: Davey

Davey — Mon, 23 May 2016 02:32:22 +0000

Yeah, I actually thought about HAPPY FEET right after posting. I guess "original" should have been amended to "non-franchise," since HAPPY FEET was retroactively turned into a franchise film with the release of the sequel (for the record, I\’m a huge HAPPY FEET fan, and even a defender of the sequel, which was mostly trashed, but I thought was a pretty cool, pretty interesting, and pretty powerful film). And everyone already responded adequately to the Miller v. Snyder thing, so good job everybody. The problem isn\’t too much action, the problem is too much poorly executed action that doesn\’t move the story forward, and the original comment (and, to be fair, many of the original criticisms to which it\’s speaking) is a great example of mistaking form for function.

By: bijio

bijio — Mon, 23 May 2016 02:32:22 +0000

OH MY GOD. CAN YOU IMAGINE?!! I mean, I\’m of the mindset that nearly ANYBODY would be a FAR better choice than f–king SNYDER… But MILLER!!? BRING. It. ON.

By: Cde.

Cde. — Mon, 23 May 2016 02:32:22 +0000

Zach, Miller found an effective way to wrap character details, hints about backstory, and interesting and changing stakes into his barrage of action. Snyder didn\’t.

By: Chris138

Chris138 — Mon, 23 May 2016 02:32:22 +0000

@Davey – Happy Feet was actually original, but I agree that I\’d rather see Miller do something else that\’s not in the superhero genre. And Zach Snider, I don\’t think it\’s hypocritical to like Fury Road and not Man of Steel. MOS does have a lot of action, but it\’s (in my opinion) poorly done and looks about as good as a video game. It\’s boring to watch because the characters aren\’t interesting and the whole thing just looks drab. Fury Road stages its action much more coherently and with more stakes, all the while telling a story as the action continues to move forward. That\’s an awfully tricky thing to do, and I still don\’t really know how Miller pulls it off. Anyway, this is all subjective and I\’m sure those who don\’t like Fury Road would disagree with my assessment, but that\’s my two cents on the matter.

By: Dave

Dave — Mon, 23 May 2016 02:32:22 +0000

Miller can effectively tell story and develop character through action, while Snyder\’s action scenes mainly just satisfies bloodlust.

By: Zach Snider

Zach Snider — Mon, 23 May 2016 02:32:22 +0000

I want to make sure I have this right. Everyone complains that Snyder does too much action, style over substance, and doesn\’t focus on story enough, but everyone is excited about Miller doing it instead, because of Fury Road, a movie that is basically a 2 hour action scene where the title character only has 10 lines? Not that I didn\’t love FR, I just want to make sure I understand the hypocrisy correctly.

By: That Guy

That Guy — Mon, 23 May 2016 02:32:22 +0000

Sounds like the perfect nerd bait. Would be cool.

By: Davey

Davey — Mon, 23 May 2016 02:32:22 +0000

Miller would do extraordinary things with the property if he\’s given enough creative control, which it seems like he probably would be at Warners. Still, he\’s only realistically got a few films left in him and I\’d personally rather see his MAD MAX sequels–or something original, which hasn\’t happened since LORENZO\’S OIL.