senseless story, poor world building and dumb characters for more than 2 hours,
skinny little girl breaks immersion like a sore thumb.
its a boring 4/10 stars
I disagree on all counts. Thought it was great.
Best thing I saw in cinema this year. Went to see it twice.
Not usually a fan of Chris Hemsworth either, but there was a lot going on with his character and for the first time in anything I've seen him in, he was the most interesting character of the film. And Praetorian Jack was quite a fascinating character as well.
Not as great as Fury Road, but top of the barrel nonetheless.
how much would you rate it out of 10 ?
shareI'm not a big fan of rating pictures on a numeric scale (not that I've never done that, mind you...). And here's why.
I'm old enough and have seen enough films to turn off after 15 min most new films from the last 5 years if - within these first 15 minutes - I' haven't seen an image or an idea (about the world, existence, human relationships, anything...) I've never seen before, something old shown under a new light, insight into our times, or a shot that is aesthetically pleasing and that communicates something purely cinematically (i.e., other than by dialogue or writing). If it doesn't happen within 15-20 minutes, it's a safe bet to assume it won't at all.
But then sometimes I come across the odd film that's average at best -really not that great- but that provides one of the abovementioned things I look for in cinema and thus makes parts of this film linger in my mind. And so there are films that I would in all fairness not rate above 5, but that have made a considerable impression on me and that I revisit often. And there are film that I acknowledge are 9 or 10 masterpieces, in their form and content, but that do not speak to me and I do not care for. And so I am loathe to rate films (or books, or art) on a numerical scale.
As far as 'Furiosa' goes, I found the film aesthetically extremely pleasing and well shot. I liked what it was about and "how" it was about what it was about, what it said about the late capitalism era we live in where EVERYTHING is for sale (not only water and fresh air, but also blood, human milk and the wombs of women), the crisis of leadership where we have to chose between decrepit old tyrants on life support in their ivory tower and charismatic populist clowns whose identity and creed change like the wind and who are unable to keep their flock together.
Now I like political readings of film even less than rating them, so I'm certainly not going to go so far as to point out that the former is named (Immortan) Joe and that the latter's name starts with a D (Dementus)... :)
Oh and by the way, anyone who's paid attention during Fury Road understands also that Furiosa herself, after she' taken control of the citadel, will most likely become just another tyrant. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
no offense but that sounds like sheep mentality,
sounds to me like you have grown into the ideal consumer, the "consume product and get excited for next product" kind of consumer.
None taken, friend. Here to exchange about cinema and discuss ideas.
It is interesting. Please say more.
Always seemed to me the "consumer mentality" was precisely that which rated films, books and art on a 1 to 10 scale (or any scale for that matter), the same as one rates restaurants or one's stay at an Airbnb, and who confuses opinions with sound arguments and articulate criticism.
As I wrote, I can't get excited for 80% of the recent years output and turn it off after 15 minutes, so not sure how I fit in your view of the "consume product and get excited for next product" uncritical spectator.
modern movies mostly always look good and there is always a good idea or pieces of a good idea behind every movie. If you like Furiosa because you like how it visually looks and the idea behind it, it means you will enjoy almost every movie which makes you my friend, an involuntary customer, guaranteed to "consume product and get excited for next product"
you need to have standards.
Agreed: one does have to have standards.
Unfortunately, we have the standards we can afford to have, not the ones we want or wish we had.
Meaning, one's standards are linked to ones aesthetic intelligence, culture, knowledge of arts and the history of forms, the number of films one has seen, etc.
Wanting to have standards is like wanting to become an engineer or a painter: it doesn't immediately make it so. It's something one has to work towards and learn about. It takes time and effort, and one is not immediately able to discern -without relying on others' opinion- between a "product" made by committee to provide the audience with exactly what it craves, and even a moderately great work of art.
Disagree: 'Furiosa' doesn't "look good" (the way an empty film with nothing of interest to say -like Denis Villeneuve's abominations or an 'Oppenheimer'- can. I was gonna say Barbie, but then Barbie is ugly as fuck, on top of everything else). It's well directed, shot and edited. Which is different.
Merely repeating that I'm "guaranteed to consume products and get excited for the next product", will not ever make it true, and I'll still reply that "I can't manage to get excited by 80% of the recent years output and turn it off after 15 minutes".
When it comes to cinema, what's an "involuntary customer"?
Someone who accidentally jump into their car, fortuitously park in front of a cinema, somehow stumble in front of the cashier, mean to ask about how the hell they ever got there but instead ask for two tickets, happen upon their wallet and shell out their cash, then are coerced to stay put for two hours in front of the screen? Can't say that unlikely a chain of event has ever happened to me, no. Has it ever to you, or anyone you know, I'm curious?
involuntary means done without will or conscious control, then an "involuntary customer" would be a customer who consumes without will or conscious control, like paying to see Furiosa twice
shareThanks for trying to explain, friend.
Still seems like an oxymoron to me. I can't quite fathom how one can go through the steps required to consume anything at all without involving conscious decision?
Do you mean being physically coerced into consuming? Or perhaps misled into consuming a different product than the one one had set one's mind to consume?
It's not just that I'm unable to grasp the link between going to see 'Furiosa' twice and being an "involuntary consumer", it's that I don't even understand what you mean by "involuntary consumer" or how it is possible to consume without exercising one's conscious volition. Do you think you can resolve the apparent inherent contradiction in the definition you provided and expand on what you meant?
That being said, I personally don't fancy myself a "consumer" of films at all, nor do i think of (good) films as products, but to each his own. :)
Also, would you care to share with us what your standards are, and what characterises the type of consumer you are (which I assume would be of the "voluntary" kind)?
Thank you!
I disagree on all accounts and feel that Furiosa was one of the more enjoyable films I’ve seen in a long while.
share