Mad Max: Fury Road Analysis

analysis
#21

I think it would be interesting to do as you suggest. I’d argue though that when faced with this visions, he doesn’t internalize and try to talk himself out of them or convince himself that what he’s seeing isn’t real. He runs from them, leaps away from them and as you pointed out, he blocks them with his hands. All actions.

I suppose it’s the finding the Green Place dried up as you suggest is the Action, it’s just that happens retroactively and thus doesn’t feel like a driver, at least not to me. The running out of water would be a strong driver but nothing on screen illustrates that very well, other than Max telling them that their supply won’t last. It’s all a bit jumbled for me at that point in the film. Still though, it’s an exhilarating ride and an amazing piece of cinema!

#22

I think its incomplete storytelling. We know that something bad happened in the past with a little girl but we never quite find out what it is. We the audience fill in the blanks with our own “little girl” and complete the argument.

I don’t think it’s a Tale by design. I think it’s designed to be a Complete Story, but leaves out key pieces of information here and there.

#23

So… we have: Changed, Stop, Do-er, Linear, Action, Optionlock, Success, Good.

Throughlines anyone?

#24

I agree that it’s not a tale-by-design.

I’m going to stick with Be-er, but we should proceed as though he’s a do-er.

OS: “Fortuna has stolen the wives.” Physics
RS: “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” Manipulation

#25

Where is the evidence of Be-ing? Anywhere? He “deals with his memories by running”. That’s a Do-er. He has no Concern of Truth, Falsehood, Suspicion or Evidence in any of those flashbacks. If anything he’s dealing with the Issue of I’ve already screwed up once before, I’m going to screw up again and Don’t get involved with others type of Issue. He’s not processing these Issues internally.

Max is a loner - fighting for survival on his own - he’s defined by that. He’s a Situation character.

Furiosa compels others to act by her sheer force of will. She’s a Fixed Attitude Influence Character - unwavering in her belief that it is better to stick your neck our for others rather than save your own skin.

Concerns? Try and argue all Four if you can …

#26

Do you think part of the storytelling/storyforming ended up on the cutting room floor via editing?

#27

I would be very surprised if any narrative stuff got cut, but George Miller has said that “5 small sequences” got cut out of the final release. So it’s possible.

He also shot 480 hours of footage, so it’s very plausible.

EDIT: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPZeRAqGdVo At about 10 minutes in, he does confirm “Very little narrative” got cut out.

#28

I doubt much ended up on the floor. It was pre-written in storyboard form as essentially one long chase. Then retro-written into a screenplay. I doubt much ended up on the floor.

#29

I think the real problem for the do-er/be-er argument is that there isn’t going to be enough meat in the movie to sort it out. That’s why I think it’s a tale.

#30

I wrote in another forum this:

“Furiosa is clearly the protagonist of the film, but people are mistaken
about Max. She drives the objective, over-all physical story, but Max
drives the emotional, personal one. At every turn, at the end of each
Act, Max makes a personal decision about what he is willing to do for
others that Furiosa observes and it has the effect of earning her
increasing trust. He goes from pure survival for himself, to agreeing
to share the war truck to escape, to facing antagonists alone while
Furiosa and the women escape (and he tells her if he doesn’t come back
soon enough to drive off without him). That relationship then in turn
allows Max to catalyze Furiosa to make the choice at the end of the
second Act to return to the citadel to fix things instead of fleeing
it. He in turn agrees to fight for them. Therefore Max is the main
character of the subjective story. Main characters are always the one
with the most change in their personal story and from whom eyes we see
the story. Furiosa is both the protagonist of the objective story, and
impact / influence character of the relationship story. And finally her
own story as the impact character is to seek out the Green Place and
learn it no longer exists, but also catalyze Max to change personally.
Max ironically becomes a blood donor to her like the blood bag he was
named, sacrificing to heal her because she is the leader that is needed
for the people at the citadel to reform and survive. He only does that
because of the relationship of mutual respect and trust they developed.
The death of Immortan Joe is the climax of the objective story, but Max
healing Furiosa is the climax of both their relationship story and his
personal subjective story.”

The relationship story is one of the most important aspects of this film. It was all about establishing trust and mutual respect between Max and Furiosa. One might say that’s the point of the feminism angle.

3 Likes
#31

Wow. I love that. Especially the bit about the relationship story. Thank you so much for sharing!

Chuck Wendig had a blog post about Protagonist and Main Character. As did novelist David Mack. I wonder where all these novelists are getting these crazy ideas?!

#32

I’m coming around to the idea that Max is a Do-er.

I still disagree that he is reacting to his visions by running, and want to point out that in his monologue at the beginning he refers to himself as reduced to one thing: instict. But, I’m beginning to think of these things as trait of Max and not parts of the argument being explored in this movie.

Nevertheless, since you asked where the evidence of his being is: when he sees the girl, his emotions kick in hard. “She” freaks him out and his knee-jerk reaction to raise his hand saves his life. “She” tells him to join the women and turn them back to the Citadel. But is this a be-er move (“he’s changing his nature” or “he’s contemplating a solution in do-ing”) or a do-er move? Hard to pin down for sure.

As a Do-er, I’d put him in Situation: Prisoner (and add at times this is refined to Situation: Universal Donor.)

From here, I think it’s a Lower Left Movie:
Obtaining: Get away with the wives
Future: Survive
Internal Desires: [No specific thing, but underneath: hope/dream/closure!]
Changing One’s Nature: Enemies --> Mutual Respect

#33

Agreed on the Concerns. For those just catching up:

OS in Activity – Save the wives, Concern: Obtaining
MC in Situation – loner, Concern: The Future (survival)
IC in Fixed Attitude – unflappable, Concern: Innermost Desires
RS in Psychology – enemies to mutual respect, Concern: Changing One’s Nature (the nature of their relationship)

Can we skip to Problem and Solution? It will be the same for both Main Character and Overall Story (since he is the Changed character) … And it’s abundantly clear …

#34

I haven’t seen the movie, yet, waiting for a local discount theater showing. However, reading the plotting, isn’t someone using him for a blood source? Could that be an indication of a being mc? I might have missed it, but I haven’t read this aspect discussed, yet.

#35

I think it’s dangerous to make general stabs based on summaries, especially if you aren’t going to give any indication of why something you’ve read leads you to a specific story point.

#36

Ok, warning taken. I guess I was thinking someone strapped to the hood of a car more of a be-er than a doer mc.

#37

It’s not a warning of any type; I just don’t understand the value in conjecturing. And I think it can do a disservice to people who are new to the theory and are looking for ways to gain understanding. They don’t recognize that certain methods are better than others yet.

Dramatica has a major advantage over other theories in that it can be tied to concrete things happening in a story. It is not “loose”, but unless ideas are taken fairly deep, it can be easy to fall prey to confirmation bias, or shrugging things off as “close enough.”

(Case in point, you’d think a story about Rapunzel would have her as a Situation character because of her hair.)

I don’t mind people trying things out to see how they fit. I did just that, in this very thread. But after a while it couldn’t hold up to scrutiny. But that only happened because I tried to see the idea through, and that’s what I’m really asking you to do.

#38

I wouldn’t want to confuse new users. I guess I don’t see things, but only bump into them. Thanks for taking the time to explain things to me.

#39

Would that be:

Problem: Hinder (Max doesn’t want to help them in the beginning) and
Solution: Help (they work as a team in the end, even if he leaves once the work is done)

For the OS: Hinder - the Citadel society by stealing the wives so Immortan Joe doesn’t have successors, but they leave the people. And then Help when they decide to return and help the people in the Citadel.

Or maybe Avoidance and Pursuit?

#40

I think its really clear that the Problem is Avoidance and the Solution is Pursuit, both in the Overall Story and the Main Character Throughline. Run run away, then, turn around and pursue pursue pursue. Problems solved in both Throughlines when you stop running away and start facing issues “head-on”.

Hinder I don’t think works as well because Max is not burdening them by not helping (which would be Hindering).

This is nice because it gives Furiousa a drive (or Problem) of Feeling (She’s the only who seems to care about people in this crazy f-ed up world) and it gives their Relationship a Problem of Temptation – much easier to beat the crap out of someone than to actually do what’s right and work from a place of Conscience – which is where their relationship grows to.

With that in mind, the final Storyform settings are:

Changed, Stop, Do-er, Linear, Action, Optionlock, Success, Good, Activity, Obtaining, Self-Interest, Avoidance

Which is a really really familiar storyform that has been done a million times - especially during the mid 20th century.It’s simple, easy to get, works and audiences who just want to watch trucks explode and motor bikes leap semi trailers and Cirque d Soleil bandits steal supermodels from moving vehicles will be able to rest easy knowing there is a semblance of a structure holding the whole thing together.

This isn’t Amelie. Nor is it Nightcrawler, Michael Clayton or Hamlet. But it works and it works well. Hopefully producers of similarly fantastic features will see to it that their work shares the same kind of care and attention that Mad Max: Fury Road affords its structure. If not, we’re all doomed to walk that wasteland of apocalyptic storytelling alone.