Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New Mad Max Film

Posted by Hemos on from the but-what-about-master-blaster dept.

IceDiver writes "According to Google News Mel Gibson has signed up for a new Mad Max film "Fury Road". His salary? A whopping $25,000,000.00 Apparently the script has been in the works for 3 years and is highly polished. As a big fan of all 3 Mad Max films, I am looking forward to this one! "

7 of 510 comments (clear)

  1. profit ? by a7244270 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I wonder if they will make any money.

    According to the article they are going to spend about 180 mil to make MM4, and MM1,2,3 combined made less than 70 mil.

    But then again, these days is seems like all you need ia a hot chick and some special effects to rake it in - plot optional.

    1. Re:profit ? by kizarny · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Waterworld made money, over $70 million in its first domestic box office run, before overseas export, video release and licensing. It's a seldom stated film industry secret but... they all eventually make money.

  2. Let's see.... by Schnapple · · Score: 5, Insightful
    1. Original director from first film
    2. Big budget
    3. A script that's been in the works for years
    4. Beloved franchise
    5. Original actors where possible
    Sounds like it can't go wrong, right?

    Can you say The Phantom Menace?

    --

    Schnapple

  3. Highly Polished by sdo1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Highly Polished... yea, I know what that means. It means a committee has been hard at work f***ing up what was probably a pretty good script.

    A couple of recent script-by-committee disasters include "How the Grinch Stole Christmas", "Batman and Robin", and "The Scorpion King". Of course having one person in full control of the script isn't necessarily a good thing either as Mr. Lucas has so painfully pointed out.

    -S

    --
    --- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?
  4. Re:According to Google News? by tfreport · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This should be modded up. This was the first thing I thought about reading this article, there is no Google News in terms of reporting stories. Sure you can mention that they pointed you to the story but saying that something is acording to them is wrong.

    It has been said on Slashdot many times that Google should not be held responsible for what it links to (the whole Church of Scientology debate) but it then should also not credit for someone else's reporting. It is only the way it should be that you either always are responsible for links or you never are.

  5. Re:25 million? by delfstrom · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You must be a scientist type, then. An engineer would say 25.7M (Example, for ten megapascals an engineer writes 10 MPa, not 1.0E7 Pa)

  6. Re:Everyone's free to use sunscreen... by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How about $1Million? Would it REALLY fucking cramp Mel's style? Or Tom Cruise's?

    Why are you blaming the actors? What are they supposed to do, say "No thanks, that's too much money"?

    If Mel Gibson can attract enough people to the movie to make that much money, who should get the money?

    --
    Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.