MovieChat Forums > Mad Max (1980) Discussion > Saw This Expecting Something Else...

Saw This Expecting Something Else...


Saw this first run in the theaters when it was released in 1979 & me & my friends went to see it as kids. The thing is we went to see this based off of the poster, because we thought that it was some kind of robot/cyborg movie. You know maybe it's programmed to kill or short circuits & goes beserk, hence the "Mad" part.

In the original poster, they gave him red eyes under that helmet of his & he does resemble a robot, especially with the metal helmet & sleeve on his arm, the red eyes poking underneath with the futuristic space car so laugh at me if you must but that's what we thought this was.

When it didn't pan out that way, we were like "wtf?" but believe it or not we showed a maturity beyond our years & wound up liking this as is/was. Guess the bikers satisfied us somewhat so we chilled. When the "Road Warrior" came out I was astonished to learn that it was a continuation off of this as I realized "Mad Max" even though I liked it wasn't the best & I was like "they made another one?" But that they did & the rest is history.

Would love to know if anyone else went to see this with the belief that this was something else than it turned out to be?

reply

Nah, I saw the Road Warrior/Beyond Thunderdome first, so I knew what part 1 was all about before I watched it, although I was surprised at how different it was from the sequels. Part 1 actually still had somewhat of a civilized world still going despite the rampant chaos going on.

reply

I just watched this again the other day, and was thinking about how watching The Road Warrior and Thunderdome first made this one a little more difficult to connect to for me. This one is more dystopian, and the rest are really post apocalyptic.

reply

Yeah, although I love Mel and all three of his Mad Max movies, I hate the fact that the continuity is just pretty much nil in them. I'm a stickler for continuity, I really am and it pisses me off when things get changed and the "rules" set forth in the original installments of franchises are not followed in the subsequent installments. I feel like Annie Wilkes in the movie theater when she stands up and flips out because of the bad continuity of the weekly serial show she was watching LOL 😆😆

reply

The continuity wasn’t all THAT bad. From “Mad Max” to “The Road Warrior” the continuity was there, it made sense. There was actually a little prologue at the beginning of “TRW” that explains what happened, which I’m surprised you all forgot. While it’s not overkill on details it does do quite a nice job of tidying up much of the story, even to the uninitiated. Meaning even those who had never seen “Mad Max” before.

The world went to hell from the end of “Mad Max” where the last scene of the movie was him driving off into the night out on the open road after having lost everything, so no explanation needed. Again in the prologue in “TRW” it did fill you in on everything.

Let’s face it, with the ending of “Mad Max” which was ambiguous at best, it was a open ended ending where you had a blank check to do anything you wanted in the next movie. With Max driving down the road into the night you pretty much can go anywhere from there & not have to worry about explaining much if anyone ever did think about a sequel to it which they probably didn’t then.

reply

Yeah, no, it didn't. The prologue, spoken by the Feral Kid character, told us about what led up to, and what happened in part 1, not what happened since part 1. It was a complete retcon of part 1 (same exact thing happened in Evil Dead 2, they retconned the story from The Evil Dead 1). Mad Max was a dystopian story, not a post apocalyptic story, just like sslssg said. Part 1 was about societal decay of the near future, not about wars and the lack of oil. Also in part 1, out of the three people that Max supposedly "lost" (wife, kid, and partner), the only one that was confirmed lost was his kid. His partner Goose and his wife were still alive in part 1. When the two doctors were discussing his wife, one was telling the other the list of things that was wrong with her. The other doctor asks if she is salvageable to which doctor number one replies yes, we got all her signs back last night. Tell her husband she's going to be alright. So there was never any confirmation that she passed and there was never any confirmation that his partner Goose passed. The son was confirmed a DOA. And no matter how many different websites quote that he lost his family and his partner, that did not happen in part 1 other than his son. Again, the prologue in part 2 spoken by the Feral Kid character, was telling us what led up to and what happened in part 1, not what happened since part one. Total retcon.

ETA: This reply was to your original comment before your extensive edit.

reply

Sorry for that, I like to be precise. But yes you’re right I forgot that it was the Feral Kid that spoke the prologue. Goose was toast, he was’n’t coming back from that, so it’s safe to say that you can write him off. Yeah I remembered he was alive then but lets’ not quibble about semantics, he was a goner. The details about Joanna I don’t know if I caught when I saw the movie all those years ago but for Max it may not have mattered much.

The only thing humorous was that in “MM” he spoke without an accent & since then he had one in the subsequent movies.

You’re wrong in the fact that it “does” say what happened since part 1 with the collapse of society where “men feed on each other”. So not it wasn’t a total recon as you state. It told you what led him up to this & some of what happened “since” then. But we can agree to disagree.

reply

Yeah, no, it said nothing of what happened since part 1. ZERO. It was a complete retcon. You can believe whatever you want to believe, that's your right, and it's your opinion. But that will never change the FACT that the prologue in part 2 is a total retcon of part 1. Goose and his wife were still alive in part 1. His son was not. Max went on a revenge spree to avenge what was done to his family and his partner.

The only thing humorous was that in “MM” he spoke without an accent & since then he had one in the subsequent movies.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 This will be my final reply to you since you clearly are not familiar enough with these movies for me to bother to discuss further with you....
The reason why Max Rockatansky spoke without an Australian accent is because the entire American theatrical movie release was dubbed with American voice actors. The home video releases give you an option to have the Americanized theatrical dub or the original Australian dub where Mel Gibson does indeed speak with an Australian accent throughout the entire movie. So that's that.

reply

Do me a favor & don't then. No great loss, trust me.

reply

I hear you. The original poster did make it seem like it was going to be a science fiction film.

reply