Being destroyed by Mad Max Fury Road
After MMFR this *beep* should be cancelled. It looks so 80s? Pfft... Mad Max used practical effects and gave us the real 80s feel. This looks like an Asylum movie.
shareSilence, troll.
share
MovieChat Forums > Kung Fury (2015) Discussion > Being destroyed by Mad Max Fury Road
Kung Fury suck ass compared to Mad Max.
share[deleted]
shareKung Fury had a 600,000 budget derived from Kickstart donations. Mad Max Road Fury had $150,000,000 budget.
GTFO now.
Just for the records i think they used $250k of the $630k they collected, they had the extended goal on kickstarter for 1 million which would result in them making a full length movie (info has been posted and is on their kickstarter site).
Ignorance is only a bliss if you haven't reached awareness.
My imdb posts are getting altered.
Nope, they used the whole budget. The original goal was just 250k.
The new home of Welcome to Planet Bob: http://kingofbob.blogspot.ca/
This looks like an Asylum movie.So amazing then? Sounds like you just don't get it.
I...drink...your...MILKSHAKE!
I DRINK IT UP!!! share
They're both great for different reasons. No comparison needed
shareThis 👆
Esta es mi firma
It's crazy that they're even being talked about in the same breath whether it's liked or not, and it's a testament to these guys who made an indie art 80's comedy thing. I mean I think it's just as good for totally different reasons, and shows that you maybe don't even want to go through Hollywood to make films anymore. Future of films lol.
sharePiss off, there's no need to compare a small budget indie short flick being distributed for free online to a big budget art-action film being released in theaters world wide, I loved both for their own reasons...
"Ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight?"
Well, that's a nonequivalent comparison . For one, you're comparing : two different genres; second, a full length film against a 30 min short; third, different plots; fourth, different aesthetics and overall appearance; fifth, total divergent intentions behind the making.
shareI think if bigger budget is allocated for Kung Fury, then they might have used practical effects and real set instead.
shareUh no. It involves video game effects, you can't use real effects for most of it. That is why it is incredibly stupid. I mean, it was funny, but that doesn't make a movie a "10
..that is saying it is better then almost EVERY film ever made which is stupidity and just not true.
The voting some people do on here has become laughable.
(I have seen 1,900 movies...I can think of about 900 movies that, of the top of my head, that are better than this. Probably more like 1,600.) So to be fair to all the better movies, I can't give something stupid like this a "10". WTF is wrong with people.
(I have seen 1,900 movies...I can think of about 900 movies that, of the top of my head, that are better than this. Probably more like 1,600.)
And you expect people to be impressed by you sitting in front a screen for what may count to days or even weeks? Watching truck loads of films doesn't make you special friend, and sure, you can claim that the majority of people on this site more or less (including myself) do the same, but you don't see them prancing around with pseudo-authority on tastes. share
The voting some people do on here has become laughable.
(I have seen 1,900 movies...I can think of about 900 movies that, of the top of my head, that are better than this. Probably more like 1,600.) So to be fair to all the better movies, I can't give something stupid like this a "10". WTF is wrong with people.
Voting is a personal thing. I rate simply by how much I've enjoyed a film. If you have seen 1,900 and have been lucky enough to enjoy 1,600 more than this, I envy you.
It was a 7 or 8 for me.
Congrats to the OP for managing to get this stupid thread going! share
You can use real location with those 600 thousands. It's just lazyness.
shareI wonder what level of idiot you would have too be too compare a indie minor budget short too a massive budget mainstream movie release?
To make a great film you need three things - the script, the script and the script -Alfred Hitchcock
@CichildAsh I don't know. What level of idiot respond to an idiot?
shareAgreed. This was funnier than Mad Max, but about 5,000 times dumber.
Mad Max: Fury Road : 9/10
Kung Fury: 4/10
MMFR also had a 150 million dollar budget (Compared with the 600K this film had) and MMFR had experienced people making it while Kung Fury had a couple of guys who had never done a movie before, at least from what I can tell. If you're going to compare Kung Fury to MMFR then you really are a lost cause because they are two very different films with different budgets, goals, crew experience and talent. MMFR got Tom Hardy, Kung Fury got Hasselhoff, does that explain the difference?
share[deleted]
Can you prove they only used 250K? I mean I know that wasn't their goal but typically getting more money means you can spend more on what's on the screen, and what I saw definitely had the look of something with a bit more money to spend than they expected so I'm just curious if that assertion is based on proof, or just an assumption because their original goal was 250K
share[deleted]