As pointed out Wikipedia, like IMDB, can be edited by anyone. Case in point I just edited the Wikipedia entry myself to remove the plot description and mention of Fury Road being set between the first two movies.
The game is a little bit tricky because it's whole genesis came from Fury Road's development and Avalanche seem to be taking more credit for the game's outline than due. Miller began working with game developer Cory Barlog back in '08-09 on creating a Mad Max game that would help flesh out the universe Miller was recreating and revisiting with Fury Road. Once they had the story and general outline was in place Barlog himself took the project to Avalanche to develop the game but left after a couple of years for reasons unknown though it's speculated it was because of friction with the director of Avalanche who claimed Barlog never worked at the studio nor had any involvement with Mad Max.....Yet an Avalanche publicist refuted that claim saying Barlog was with the studio for a time working on Mad Max and Barlog himself recounted working with Miller on the game and having the opportunity to sit in the new BoB. Avalanche team members even visited the Fury Road set to photograph all the vehicles and record audio for the game.
Back to Fury Road. Again reboot or you could look at it as a sequel given you don't start trying to figure out or question why Max is younger, not sporting a Aussie accent and driving the BoB again. FYI it's not used for flashbacks either.
I'm somewhat relieved to know that there is a certain amount of debunking of the whole interquel scenario so I'll go with it.
I'm not comfortable with the idea of a reboot. I just don't think that is necessary and I'll be put off by the movie if it is. There are ways and means of explaining the re-emergence of the Interceptor though, at 4am (as I write this) I don't have the clarity of mind to think it through cogently.
If it is a sequel to Thunderdome, I could buy into it. Tom Hardy, as he is now, would be a convincing post Thuderdome Max. If I remember rightly, the Thunderdome novelization had Max somewhere in the region of 40 years of age. Mel Gibson was 29 at the time of Thunderdome. Tom Hardy is 36 now so a progression from Thunderdome to Fury Road in a timeline sense would work (for me at least)
Grrrr - all this speculation is agony and ecstasy!!
Sheesh, don't stress over myths. A few insiders have suggested that there is no specific chronological link in fury other than it builds on the lore of Max. That makes sense and makes the use of Tom Hardy and bits of the original clobber perfectly logical. They are all fireside stories, with characters who once met Max recounting their dimly remembered tales with embellishments to a new generation of eager listeners. Did the grownup feral kid make up the bit about the BOB crashing?. Maybe Max just bogged it but feral kid had to make his story on the sunshine coast more exciting to his kids. Same with detail in the Tell in Thunderdome. The position in time is probably irrelevant because all that is left is hazy memories of an encounter. Miller is a fan of Joseph Campbell and his hero of a thousand faces exploration of mythology. You guys are probably thinking too literally. The films are myths told long after the events by witnesses, storytelling to their kids or fellow tribe members about a type of lone wandering lukeskywalkerRoninMunchausenjesus they once met fighting and fixing the system. Where the tale fits with others about the same dude doesn't really matter. They are just tales of his awesomeness like "I met Ernest Hemingway once. He was stepping off a slippery boat with a 4metre sword-fish on his shoulder he had killed with a penknife and he shagged a sheila he just met on the beach without putting it down". It doesn't matter whether that occurred before he went pub brawling or when he went running with the bulls. It's just an embellished distant memory of a superdude with near magical abilities and legendary weapons(lightsabre/car/bottle).
CouplaDaisygo wrote:Sheesh, don't stress over myths. A few insiders have suggested that there is no specific chronological link in fury other than it builds on the lore of Max. That makes sense and makes the use of Tom Hardy and bits of the original clobber perfectly logical. They are all fireside stories, with characters who once met Max recounting their dimly remembered tales with embellishments to a new generation of eager listeners. Did the grownup feral kid make up the bit about the BOB crashing?. Maybe Max just bogged it but feral kid had to make his story on the sunshine coast more exciting to his kids. Same with detail in the Tell in Thunderdome. The position in time is probably irrelevant because all that is left is hazy memories of an encounter. Miller is a fan of Joseph Campbell and his hero of a thousand faces exploration of mythology. You guys are probably thinking too literally. The films are myths told long after the events by witnesses, storytelling to their kids or fellow tribe members about a type of lone wandering lukeskywalkerRoninMunchausenjesus they once met fighting and fixing the system. Where the tale fits with others about the same dude doesn't really matter. They are just tales of his awesomeness like "I met Ernest Hemingway once. He was stepping off a slippery boat with a 4metre sword-fish on his shoulder he had killed with a penknife and he shagged a sheila he just met on the beach without putting it down". It doesn't matter whether that occurred before he went pub brawling or when he went running with the bulls. It's just an embellished distant memory of a superdude with near magical abilities and legendary weapons(lightsabre/car/bottle).
Thats a great way to look at it, either way im just
Thankful we all have a new movie to talk about,
And hopefully more to come!
I really need to remember that because it throws out where ever fury road may or may not fall into the series, and enriches the Mad Max story by making him a legendary hero; Like old Norse or Greek heroes where there's a grey area if they were living or mythical people.
Bad cop wrote:Enough of this reboot business. I know several cast members have stated the film is a reboot, but as I have said numerous times I refuse to accept that (can you blame me). Even if it isn't officially a sequel, I just hope that the continuity carries out in a way that would allow for fans to accept as a sequel or intrequel.
It depends. It shouldn't contradict any point or issue related to the "previous" Mad Max movies to succeed as "vague sequel".
I just don't understand this obsession with how FR fits into the MM timeline, or if the Bob is in it, Max wears a leg brace etc... None of these factors have the slightest bearing on if it will be a good or successful movie.
Roadwarrior was a near complete departure from Mad Max, MFP pretty much gone, existing setting left behind, Max a very different character, the Interceptor redundant for most of the movie, but it was still great. Thunderdome radically changed things again in almost every aspect.
MWFV8 wrote:I just don't understand this obsession with how FR fits into the MM timeline, or if the Bob is in it, Max wears a leg brace etc... None of these factors have the slightest bearing on if it will be a good or successful movie.
Roadwarrior was a near complete departure from Mad Max, MFP pretty much gone, existing setting left behind, Max a very different character, the Interceptor redundant for most of the movie, but it was still great. Thunderdome radically changed things again in almost every aspect.
FR is a reboot with maybe two sequels? And all three are shot in real 3D? It's too early to talk about the film. We got just two pics of Tom Hardy and one with Hugh Keays-Byrne. Guys .... it's too early to talk about a movie we are awaiting since more than 10 years. oh my gush, I do hope, I'm still alive when this film comes out.
I could probably make it on my own, but I like you kids.
FYI it's not used for flashbacks either.
oh my gush, I do hope, I'm still alive when this film comes out.