Racist weirdo that he is (and I still loved Apocalypto after all of that) the wikipedia says that he lost interest in 2000. I don't think that's Mel, although it looks like Mel circa 1996 or so. Maybe it's CGI Mel and they're doing the Terminator Genysis thing?

No, it's an Australian actor named Richard Carter. Although it might be an attempt to remind people of Mel.

Always seems like regular people in CGI cars drive like this, while CGI people in CGI cars drive like shit! What's with these people?

I am a little saddened that they didn't use a CGI people at the end of the sandstorm clip though. That must really hurt!

Because a lot of bloggers with motion sickness whine about 3d

3d is a shitty gimmick that adds nothing to the experience except eye stain

This movie seems like it would look pretty cool in 3D.

Because, believe it or not, not everybody lives near a theater that's 3D capable. Some people live in small communities with just a local movie house that can't show 3D movies, and they want to remind those people that they can see the movie in 2D as well (as opposed to not seeing it at all).

Every 3D thing I have seen looks like 2d planes that have some space between them - that looks unrealistic and takes you away from the movie.

The best looking 3D movie I have seen is the 3D version of Jurassic Park, it actually looks as if they made it that way in the first place, and doesn't have flat planes.

Honorable mentions: Gravity, Cave of Forgotten Dreams.

What if you only have 1 eye, scumbags?? Fuck you and your headache inducing, shit looking 3D.

Seconding ashtar. Also, it adds a lot of pointless "let's poke things at the camera" kind of cinematography.

Fuck 3D movies. Fuck them so hard. I've seen like 3 movies that way, each time telling myself "maybe THIS one will look cool in 3D" and it never fucking does. It just hurts my eyes, and makes images at the edge of the screen have a weird ghosting effect.

It's a dumb fucking gimmick that I just wish would die. I hate how every movie now has to have a sequence where shit flies at the camera, or a sequence where the camera zips along almost in first-person, cause, OHHH! 3D!!!

I remember watching the last Hobbit movie and seeing CG gold coins flying at the screen, and thinking "That was weird, why did they do-- oh yeah... this movie came out in 3D too. BAAAARRRF".

Heh. And that's what I have to say about that.

I've been pretty stingy with 3D, but I've had a great time with a few movies where I knew the critical consensus going in was that it was used well (Up and Dredd). My general rule is to not bother if the movie was post-converted rather than shot in 3D in the first place.

You 2D dorks sound like my grandma, whining because the our last remaining local video store doesn't stock VHS tapes.

If you're going to be a caveman and actually go watch a movie in the theaters, instead of pirating it and watching it on your 60" television like a normal human being, then you might as go all in and watch the stupid thing in the most absurdly decadent manner possible. Yeah, you may miss some of the artistic nuances of Mad Max putting his fist through a midget's face-bone, but so what?

I find wearing 3D glasses over my regular glasses mildly annoying.

It's actually been difficult for me to find movies in 3D, and I live in a very central part of a fairly large town. I'm just surrounded by independently owned movie theatres that either can't afford or won't make the necessary changes to incorporate 3D projection because the film they show don't really need it. I'm willing to bet that someone who lives in a very small rural area probably has a metroplex closer to them than I do. To me it's the difference between attending the Symphony and listening to Classical Music on your computer. Dredd was the last one I saw in 3D, and the fact that it was also a great movie about my second favorite comic book character helped, but I downloaded it in 2D and, well I was left with a good movie. 3D's gimmicky for sure, it always has been. But it's a fun ride.

@mag I think I was typing that while you responded. I totally didn't consider people who might wear glasses, which is a lot of people.

I just hate theaters cause they are filthy, at least my house has floors not coated with pop. 2d or 3d doesn't matter, clean does.

I avoid 3D movies because of the hilariously inflated ticket price add-on and because I'm not paying that much for glasses to not fit properly over my normal glasses and give me a headache.

@EvilHomer: I say the exact same thing to people who don't go to the movies on uppers and LSD.

YES, I agree with you about something. Just get some fucking cars and film the fucking thing out in the outback.

SolRo.

You literally just said that a movie famous for its extensive use of practical effects instead of CGI has too much CGI.

Jesus, it's like....at this point I'm in awe of your ability to be wrong in every conceivable field of human thought.

It's not a remake. It's made by the original director. There's definitely some CGI in the trailer but there are also some real stunts and car wrecks.

Looks cool.

I find that deeply offensive for some reason. Fuck you, buddy.

I don't hate Beyond Thunderdome, but watch the second one.

...financing a movie by an Australian director, starring a British man and a South African woman

but yeah, sure, AMERICA

And the original writer/director of the first 3 movies. But yeah...a remake.

From the director of Happy Feet, Happy Feet Two and Babe 2: Pig in the City comes "an apocalyptic story set in the furthest reaches of our planet, in a stark desert landscape where humanity is broken, and almost everyone is crazed fighting for the necessities of life."

Yeah I'll watch it.

I hate remake-culture as much if not more than the next guy, but this is MAD MAX we're talking about. MAD. MAX.

Remakes have been an integral part of movie making since the beginning.

The Great Train Robbery, which is arguably the first film to tell a story, was remade (shot-for-shot, with the exact same title) seven fucking months later:

http://staticmass.net/early-films-and-cinema/doing-it-first-th e-great-train-robbery/

Anyway, this shit looks good - look like it's not a 'gritty reboot', and doesn't seem to take itself seriously which I think is very much in the spirit of Mad Max.

It's not a remake. It's a sequel.

At least we only do movies. The French are on their 5th republic or something. Lame. Get some new ideas already, France.

The problem for me is that gratuitous use of full CG car doubles, even if it "looks" real (but your mind knows it's fake), is that you then think some of the incredible real stunts are fake too.

Is the sand tornado thing really needed? Because it made me doubt the authenticity of a lot of other shots.

I always thought the first one was kinda boring, like Evil Dead vs. Evil Dead 2. That coupled with the horrible Mel American dub, which is the only one I've seen. I should re-watch the original, but I think I preferred all the over-the-top action that came after.

It's a little slow, sure, but the scenes of the decaying police department, and what happens when a biker gang realizes that the cops have effectively abandoned outlying towns, their predictable escalation from pranks and bullying to outright rape and murder, are unsettlingly realistic and make it worth watching.
Plus, the Pursuit Special. GodDAMN that is a cool car.

That is a badass car. I think I might have been a little bit too young to get most of that plot stuff. I remember when we got Grindhouse at our theatre, I was one of the few people who stood up for Death Proof over Planet Terror. Nothing much action-wise happens for 80 or so minutes, but the payoff was outstanding.

I hear you- the original is definitely underappreciated- but it's easy for something to look "generic" when it more or less created a genre.

*****

Goddamnit.. thanks to poeTV I will now see "Furry" every time I see the title, and now "cheeto dust." ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

:D

I dunno.. assuming I have this correct and this is 15 years after the first Mad Max, it's like this Wal Mart bike that I bought purely for practical and financial reasons when I was 18. Now that I'm 32, that shit's tricked the fuck out. As far as the CGI goes, sandstorm's pretty obvious but the rest of it has this cartoonish feeling that Sin City's CGI had, which I really kinda like.