Help support TMP

"Mad Max 40k Warboys" Topic

15 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.

Back to the Post-Apocalypse Discussion Message Board

Back to the SF Gallery Message Board

Back to the Warhammer 40K Message Board

1,202 hits since 8 Nov 2017
©1994-2018 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP08 Nov 2017 3:07 p.m. PST



Main page


peterx Supporting Member of TMP08 Nov 2017 3:52 p.m. PST

Sweet baby Jeebus! I need some of those!

The H Man08 Nov 2017 4:57 p.m. PST

Too bad the film sucked (fury road). Mad Max in name only. Though it has its fans.

Nice to see some post apoc stuff. More please.

Twoball Cane08 Nov 2017 5:01 p.m. PST

Nice job on those !

witness ME! 💣⚔️⚙️⛏🔪🔩

The Shadow09 Nov 2017 8:11 a.m. PST

Is this a new faction for 40K?

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP09 Nov 2017 11:40 a.m. PST

Happy you like them guys!. (smile)


The H Man09 Nov 2017 2:22 p.m. PST

Diggas for new gorka morka?


May post under necromunda about that.

Lonkka1Actual10 Nov 2017 10:28 a.m. PST


Man, H man, you are wrong!

The H Man10 Nov 2017 10:12 p.m. PST

Thanks for giving a reason. As there is none.

A pop corn action film maybe. A good mad Max film it is not. A realistic post apocalyptic film it is not.

Why not a good mad max film?
No Mel (although bond survived a change in actor)
No Aussie out back. At least most was filmed in Africa, from what I heard.
Cgi. The others had none. The closest thing was a model Sydney, at least itwas real, and tthey won't let you blow up a city for a film, also some trickery to save killing people/vehicles. Other than that they were all real. Fury road failed at the first scene with a cgi lizard. Needless and piontless.
Far too may people. Loses the isolation feel. Even more than thunderdome.

Why not a realistic post apoc film?
A comic was apparently used as a story board. This shows in the painfully staged comic book poses and scene setups.
Too may people. Who feeds them?
Dust storm. Enough said.

There are more reasons, of course, but that should be enough.

I can understand some people like it as an action film, but not as a good mad Max or realistic post apoc film. Two things the mad Max trilogy were and the things I, for one, was hoping to see.

It's called the 4th film curse. Indy and JP also suffered. Rambo, for me, was OK, but still different. Back to the future may be the next?

For something better try Water world. A fun hollywood twist on the genre.

For a more realistic post apoc film salute of the juggers (aka blood of heros?) is far superior.

Fritadas29 Nov 2017 7:40 p.m. PST

First of all, sweet minis.

Secondly, OK H man, I'll respond to that.

1) Mel Gibson does not automatically make a movie better. Watch "What a Woman Wants."

2) It was filmed in Namibia, not Australia, because the Namib desert was the kind of wasteland that writer/director George Miller wanted to convey. It not being Australia helped Australian audiences (also others) feel the desolation and 'alienness' of the environment, which ties into

3) cgi and the lizard. The point of the lizard, as well as presenting the namib desert as post-apocalypse Australia, is to set the tone that this is a place where the ravages of war and radiation are a part of the environment. You may not like it, but it's not pointless. As to the other CGI, with the exception of the fire tornado and a few other shots, this movie is famous for using mostly practical effects.

4) The loss of that isolation feeling is fair, though I'll point out that in the first movie civilization hadn't collapsed yet. Also, both Thunderdome and this one are kind of about the germs of a rebuilt civilization – Miller himself says that all these movies are supposed to basically be the legends of a future culture.

5) I don't know what was more unrealistic about this movie than any of the cars in Road Warrior or Thunderdome

6) All storyboards are comics.

And finally, really? You think Water World is a better movie than Fury Road?

Personal logo The Beast Rampant Supporting Member of TMP29 Nov 2017 8:58 p.m. PST

2) It was filmed in Namibia, not Australia, because the Namib desert was the kind of wasteland that writer/director George Miller wanted to convey. It not being Australia helped Australian audiences (also others) feel the desolation and 'alienness' of the environment…

That, and reportedly the rainy season had been too kind to the Australian deserts, and didn't look sufficiently barren and lifeless this time around.

Mel Gibson does not automatically make a movie better.

I had a really hard time getting into it without Mel, but Hardy took things in a different direction, and IMO worked out just fine.

As to the other CGI, with the exception of the fire tornado and a few other shots, this movie is famous for using mostly practical effects.

Damn skippy. MM:FR probably had less CGI than the last Tyler Perry movie.

The H Man29 Nov 2017 9:46 p.m. PST

I did wonder if anyone would reply.

Thanks for the clarification. Still a big pity. I had looked forward to it so long. I wonder if not having Byron Kennedy around was the reason. At least he was there at the beginning of thunder dome (he died on a chopper crash location scouting from what I have read). Things suffer when a duo become a solo.

Yeah. Water world is nice and different. Fury road is basically another attempt at road warrior with more money and less reality.

As for story boards being comics. They are very different. And from what I have heard they did use a comic, though I struggle to find info.

Both comics and story boards use panels of pictures, yes. However story boards are almost always using panels of the same size and haveadditional Iinformation written next to each panel, like scene and time. Story boards may not be made of the entire film either just major action or effects heavy scenes. While comics place their emphases on dialog and sound effects. Story boards please theirs on timing and motion with usually no sound or dialog present. Also comic characters convey action and emotion with pose and details. Figures in storyboards are usually undetailed and rarely even look like the eventual character. So on…

Terry3730 Nov 2017 8:45 p.m. PST

My two cents. I am a BIG Mad Max fan, and like all four of the movies, the books, comics, you name it.

It's a toss up for my favorite between Road Warrior/Mad Max 2 and Fury Road. The cars and action in both were great and inspiring in my gaming pursuits.

I think Tom Hardy did a great job of taking over as Max. Mel Gibson would have been too old to fit the story.

I also do not see the terrain looking all that different from Road warrior, and Thunderdome – stark, barren and desert like.

But then that's why we have chocolate and vanilla ice cream – different tastes for different folks.


SeattleGamer Supporting Member of TMP01 Dec 2017 10:53 a.m. PST

I am going to agree with The H Man on Fury Road being a sucky movie. And I don't care where something is filmed, if it gets the job done.

Taking Mad Max & Road Warrior, I felt the isolation, the chaos, and a crumbled society trying to sort itself out. There was a definite plot, and the story progressed from Point A to Point B to Point C … and you learned more about the "world" as the story progressed.

With Fury Road, once they established there was someplace "better" to be, it was just one long chase. Lots of action, no story progression. They finally reach the end point, and it was all for nothing. So what do they do, they turn around and head back, and do it all over again.

Seemed totally contrived. A really lame idea to create a need for 90 minutes of car chase scenes. They went from Point A to Point B then back to Point A.

I am fine with action, but I want the story to progress, and there was almost no story to be told. Not one character I liked and thus cared if they lived or died.

I wasted two hours of my life that I won't get back. It wasn't even an "okay" level movie, kinda glad I saw it, won't ever need or want to see it again. It was a "waste of time" movie that I was sorry that I saw it.

Also … points to The H Man for listing Blood of Heroes as a much better post-apoc movie. One of my guilty pleasure movies. I take that one off the shelf and watch it from time to time, just to be reminded what a good post-apoc story is all about.

The H Man24 Jan 2018 11:23 p.m. PST


I am now concerned with crocodile dundee, as if the last film was not bad enough. Another fury road perhaps. What is it with making 4th films years after the last and them being bad.

Rambo seemed ok to me and I just saw Rocky balboa (6th?) and that seemed ok. However Stalone wrote, acted, produced directed? all? of those and had family/friends involved too. Perhaps that is why they all seem good.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.