1. This movie is amazing. The 98% rating on Rotten Tomatoes is not a fluke.
2. It will likely be my movie of the year, and one of the best action movies in a long time.
Thoughts?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
~~~~~
Great movie. People are talking about it being a "game-changer" in the action genre, but all it really does is execute a clean, old-school action flick plot and pacing. It's a Die Hard in an age of Live Free or Die Hards. There's honestly not much more to say about it. It's just... good.
Also, those MRAs who think that max "isn't the protagonist" are proper drunk.
Max is the point-of-view character, but Furiosa is the protagonist. It's an unusual structure, but you see it in, for instance, The Great Gatsby. And finding anything objectionable about it is, well, stupid. There's some gender stuff going on, to be sure, but the movie is too smart to fall into the lazy trap of a "women rule men drool!" message. Every character succeeds or fails based on their actions, not their sex.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Also, those MRAs who think that max "isn't the protagonist" are proper drunk.
The Men's Rights Activists making a ruckus about this film is to be honest bewildering to me (Eve Ensler consulted the wives' portrayal for accuracy, not to push a feminist agenda, although if accuracy is considered a feminist agenda, then then Menimisn may just need to admit a flawed perspective).
***
Although I think seeing the full impact of Mad Max will take time, comparing it to other movies/stories does help appreciate this movie's value. It's definitely one of the first movies in awhile that I felt a what I would call a proper emotional investment for the characters, which is especially great because the story is about 90% visual rather than dialogue.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
~~~~~
Was anyone else disproportionately bugged by all the skin the women show throughout the movie? I couldn't stop noticing it. Not for any prurient or prudish reason - my brain just kept nagging, "AHH SUNBURN".
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
The Men's Rights Activists making a ruckus about this film is to be honest bewildering to me (Eve Ensler consulted the wives' portrayal for accuracy, not to push a feminist agenda, although if accuracy is considered a feminist agenda, then then Menimisn may just need to admit a flawed perspective).
Wait, what is people upset about? Which group? I don't really consider myself a Men's rights activist, but I do agree with some of their points but what was wrong with the movie?
The Men's Rights Activists making a ruckus about this film is to be honest bewildering to me (Eve Ensler consulted the wives' portrayal for accuracy, not to push a feminist agenda, although if accuracy is considered a feminist agenda, then then Menimisn may just need to admit a flawed perspective).
Wait, what is people upset about? Which group? I don't really consider myself a Men's rights activist, but I do agree with some of their points but what was wrong with the movie?
I honestly am not sure, but I've heard from internet reviewers, friends, another person on this thread, and even strangers I overhead in real life that Mad Max: Fury Road is a universally acclaimed movie amongst everyone except people that claim to be Men's Right Activists. The closest I've gotten to an explanation is Eve Ensler, best known for The ****** Monologues, consulted on the film for accuracy for the female characters.If there's other reasons, then sure. The only reason I'm aware of Eve Ensler is because it was mentioned in passing when I watched the RedLetterMedia review of Fury Road.
By the way, Eve Ensler was involved in this project to consult the women who played the wives to help them understand living in sex slavery
Honestly, I loved this movie so much better than the original trilogy.
Mad Max 1 took entirely too long to set up. Once it got rolling, it was over within 15-20 minutes.
Mad Max 2 was inarguably the best of the original trilogy. The plot, the portrayal of Max, the desert wasteland, and the final battle were all great, and actually hinted at how Fury Road was going to play out, IMO. The writers for MMFR clearly took a lot of elements from this particular installation of the series simply because it was the best of them.
Mad Max 3 felt very much like the "Return of the Jedi" or "Temple of Doom" of the series. I think anyone who's seen it can understand what I mean by that.
This one, however, was pretty much all action with a dash of politics. They were very quickly able to show the hierarchy of the Citadel and why we should care about it. (Props to the casting director who chose the villain from Mad Max 1 to portray the villain in Fury Road.) The action sequences felt very "Twisted Metal", which is one of my favorite game series, so it gets my stamp of approval for that. The writers also very clearly took inspiration from the Fallout series and the Bonerlands (not changing that spelling) games. (They even made a shout-out to the original Fallout with "Barry" and "Larry"!) I thought their plan was a little far-fetched as far as how they overcame the situation (if you've seen it, you know what I mean - if you haven't, there are no spoilers here) but they didn't have much room to work with at that point, so I'm unsurprised. I also thought that the war musicians were an awesome and necessary touch for the war party.
One thing I didn't understand is the relationship between the Citadel and the guy with the stumps for feet. Did they both have a vested interest in Furiosa, or what?
Either way, I think this movie was awesome and I'm glad that I predicted this would be a good year for movies after the last two years fell short of my expectations (sans Guardians, but that's a given).
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
I actually was surprised. Female characters died. I don't know if because I watch too much anime or whatnot, but females are usually untouchable to the main character. You know the females on the good side never die, and the females on the bad side will either join the good guy, or be killed by the male bad guy (to show how evil he is). This movie was free of this, which pleased me. It made it look more realistic to me.
@Iso,
the Fat Foot dude was the leader of the gasoline town. He was allied to the Big Bad, in the same way that Blind Bullet Hat was. He was just recruited by the Big Bad to help pursue the good guys.
The writers also very clearly took inspiration from the Fallout series and the Bonerlands (not changing that spelling) games. (They even made a shout-out to the original Fallout with "Barry" and "Larry"!)
Fallout and Borderlands are inspired by Mad Max - Fallout even has jackets designed to look like Max's and has a ton of references to the Mad Max franchise.
It's interesting to see it come back around, but I should be clear that most post-apocalyptic games took their cue from Mad Max.
I was aware of this, for the record. I was only saying that it was obvious that the more modern interpretations of the post-apocalyptic wasteland (such as the ones seen in the Fallout installments and Bonerlands) were prevalent in this script when compared to the first three Mad Max movies.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
One thing I didn't understand is the relationship between the Citadel and the guy with the stumps for feet. Did they both have a vested interest in Furiosa, or what?
I think Stumpfoot and Bullet didn't care about Furiosa, but had to keep Joe happy since Joe controlled clean water. Which is more important than Stumpfoot's oil or Bullet's bullets.
Edit: And I hope those turn out to be their actual character names.
Great movie. People are talking about it being a "game-changer" in the action genre, but all it really does is execute a clean, old-school action flick plot and pacing. It's a Die Hard in an age of Live Free or Die Hards. There's honestly not much more to say about it. It's just... good.
Also, those MRAs who think that max "isn't the protagonist" are proper drunk.
Max is the point-of-view character, but Furiosa is the protagonist. It's an unusual structure, but you see it in, for instance, The Great Gatsby. And finding anything objectionable about it is, well, stupid. There's some gender stuff going on, to be sure, but the movie is too smart to fall into the lazy trap of a "women rule men drool!" message. Every character succeeds or fails based on their actions, not their sex.
I'm not convinced Max isn't the protagonist. What is your definition on that?
Well, Furiosa was actually listed first in the opening credits, and the movie was about Furiosa's journey to the "green place" and her attempt at rescuing the wives from the Citadel. Max was more or less an interloper, here. He's a protagonist, but I don't think he's the main character.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
I'm not convinced Max isn't the protagonist. What is your definition on that?
Well, you're right that it's a matter of definition more than anything else. I'd use the terms "protagonist" and "main character" in reverse to how Iso did: the protagonist is the driver of the plot; the main character is the narrator or viewpoint character. And in Mad Max, the plot conflict is between Furiosa and Immortan Joe. Furiosa is the one who has a goal she's working towards and with whom we are primarily supposed to sympathize; the movie ends when Furiosa wins (um, spoiler alert?). Max plays a supporting role in this plot. His initial goal is survival; his character development takes the form of him deciding to help Furiosa accomplish her goal.
I already mentioned Nick and Gatsby as an example of this structure. For another, there's Frodo and Sam in The Return of the King (not so much the other two). Frodo's the protagonist, but Sam is the viewpoint character. Actually, Tolkien really loved playing with this sort of thing: heroes like Aragorn and Gandalf and Thorin, though I wouldn't say are truly the protagonists of the books they appear in, more conventionally resemble protagonists, but they are almost always seen through the eyes of hobbits.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
So I just finally saw the film. The movie is definitely about Furiosa's journey while Max is the viewpoint character. I really enjoyed it, it was a great film because there really wasn't much fluff. The worldbuilding, outside of the opening, is done entirely by showing instead of telling. You don't need to be told the political situation because it's obvious.
B_S - I think the better example is The Hidden Fortress. The movie's main characters and primary driving force for the plot are not the two hapless peasants who get themselves swept up in the film.
B_S - I think the better example is The Hidden Fortress. The movie's main characters and primary driving force for the plot are not the two hapless peasants who get themselves swept up in the film.
Number of people who have seen or read The Lord of the Rings >>> number of people who have seen Hidden Fortress.
But for people who don't know, Hidden Fortress is Star Wars if it followed the droids the whole time and they were peasants instead of droids and they were in feudal Japan instead of space. And yes, it is a textbook example of this structure.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
One thing I didn't understand is the relationship between the Citadel and the guy with the stumps for feet. Did they both have a vested interest in Furiosa, or what?
I think Stumpfoot and Bullet didn't care about Furiosa, but had to keep Joe happy since Joe controlled clean water. Which is more important than Stumpfoot's oil or Bullet's bullets.
Edit: And I hope those turn out to be their actual character names.
They are credited as Bullet Farmer and People Eater.
***
I want to throw out there that I feel that Max is more than just an observer. He has an arc and plays an important role in the film.
Max moves from being haunted by the voices in his head to being guided by them, helping him grow to operating on more than just survival instinct. Also, if Max hadn't suggested to go back take the Citadel, Furiosa and every other character would have died on the Salts, and Max only does that after his character evolves.
I think that the comparison to Nick Carraway is accurate, but Max is still the main character, just as I would argue that Nick Carraway is the real main character of The Great Gatsby: the point of view character goes through their own character arc because of their observance and participation in the plot changes them.
B_S - I think the better example is The Hidden Fortress. The movie's main characters and primary driving force for the plot are not the two hapless peasants who get themselves swept up in the film.
Number of people who have seen or read The Lord of the Rings >>> number of people who have seen Hidden Fortress.
But for people who don't know, Hidden Fortress is Star Wars if it followed the droids the whole time and they were peasants instead of droids and they were in feudal Japan instead of space. And yes, it is a textbook example of this structure.
Well, yeah. But we should always be encouraging people to watch Kurosawa if they haven't. So many iconic movies borrow from things he pioneered. Clint Eastwood's big break was starring in a movie that directly ripped off Kurosawa (as did many Westerns at the time. It's interesting how easily a Samurai film translates into a western).
I think it deserves more credit than just 'crazy'. I would give that to something like Crank.
Both have similar pacing with brief respites between over-the-top mayhem, but Mad Max delivers characters that we can relate to instead of just abusing stereotypes between cheap thrills.
I figure the antifeminist complains are probably overblown. Still, as a dude, I'm not sure how to feel about the idea of this movie. To male viewers, is the movie good despite the feminist themes, because of them, or neither?
I've heard some people say it was good but not 98% Rotten Tomatoes good. Perhaps that's an action movie high. Maybe that's feminist appeal making it seem even better than it is. Often ideological appeal or lack thereof affects judgment of art in addition to technical quality.
If you come out of it without enjoying yourself I'll cover the cost of the movie.
I say that, mostly, because if your someone who enjoys action movies you're going to like this. It's well directed, well paced, has a seemingly never-ending number of positively insane action set pieces following a clear narrative structure.
The mra's just got their panties in a twist because Max, while the viewpoint character, doesn't have the strongest narrative arc and that Furiosa stole the movie.
The feminist themes in the movie, while present, mostly exist as rejecting action movie stereotypes about women. These are ladies, all across the age range, who are equal to men. This is a movie, without giving too much away, had more than one little old lady doing her own stunts in an action film. It was kickass.
As a dude, if I wasn't broke after travelling crosscountry, I would go see this again. It was great, really.
I've heard some people say it was good but not 98% Rotten Tomatoes good. Perhaps that's an action movie high. Maybe that's feminist appeal making it seem even better than it is. Often ideological appeal or lack thereof affects judgment of art in addition to technical quality.
It's definitely not 98% on Rotten Tomatoes because of its politics. Whatever feminist cheerleader strawmen the MRAs are imagining, they certainly don't make up 98% of major film reviewers. And the movie really is not heavy-handed about anything except explosions. Prometheus had a much more anvilicious feminist message, for example - and if you're thinking "Wait a minute, how was Prometheus feminist?", that's my point exactly.
And do remember that Rotten Tomatoes is a review aggregator. Its numbers are an indication of the breadth of a movie's appeal, not its depth. So "good but not 98% good" is simply not a comment that makes sense. If 98% of reviewers give a movie slightly-above-average marks, it will get a 98%. If 50% of reviewers think a movie is the greatest film of all time and 50% don't, it will get a 50%. Think of Fury Road's score as saying, "You will have a 98% chance of enjoying this movie. As for how much you will enjoy it, no comment."
1. This movie is amazing. The 98% rating on Rotten Tomatoes is not a fluke.
2. It will likely be my movie of the year, and one of the best action movies in a long time.
Thoughts?
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
~~~~~
Also, those MRAs who think that max "isn't the protagonist" are proper drunk.
I'd rate the film as a 3.5 or 4 out of five.
Max is the point-of-view character, but Furiosa is the protagonist. It's an unusual structure, but you see it in, for instance, The Great Gatsby. And finding anything objectionable about it is, well, stupid. There's some gender stuff going on, to be sure, but the movie is too smart to fall into the lazy trap of a "women rule men drool!" message. Every character succeeds or fails based on their actions, not their sex.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
The Men's Rights Activists making a ruckus about this film is to be honest bewildering to me (Eve Ensler consulted the wives' portrayal for accuracy, not to push a feminist agenda, although if accuracy is considered a feminist agenda, then then Menimisn may just need to admit a flawed perspective).
***
Although I think seeing the full impact of Mad Max will take time, comparing it to other movies/stories does help appreciate this movie's value. It's definitely one of the first movies in awhile that I felt a what I would call a proper emotional investment for the characters, which is especially great because the story is about 90% visual rather than dialogue.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
~~~~~
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Wait, what is people upset about? Which group? I don't really consider myself a Men's rights activist, but I do agree with some of their points but what was wrong with the movie?
Just curious, what have you heard?
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
~~~~~
Mad Max 1 took entirely too long to set up. Once it got rolling, it was over within 15-20 minutes.
Mad Max 2 was inarguably the best of the original trilogy. The plot, the portrayal of Max, the desert wasteland, and the final battle were all great, and actually hinted at how Fury Road was going to play out, IMO. The writers for MMFR clearly took a lot of elements from this particular installation of the series simply because it was the best of them.
Mad Max 3 felt very much like the "Return of the Jedi" or "Temple of Doom" of the series. I think anyone who's seen it can understand what I mean by that.
This one, however, was pretty much all action with a dash of politics. They were very quickly able to show the hierarchy of the Citadel and why we should care about it. (Props to the casting director who chose the villain from Mad Max 1 to portray the villain in Fury Road.) The action sequences felt very "Twisted Metal", which is one of my favorite game series, so it gets my stamp of approval for that. The writers also very clearly took inspiration from the Fallout series and the Bonerlands (not changing that spelling) games. (They even made a shout-out to the original Fallout with "Barry" and "Larry"!) I thought their plan was a little far-fetched as far as how they overcame the situation (if you've seen it, you know what I mean - if you haven't, there are no spoilers here) but they didn't have much room to work with at that point, so I'm unsurprised. I also thought that the war musicians were an awesome and necessary touch for the war party.
One thing I didn't understand is the relationship between the Citadel and the guy with the stumps for feet. Did they both have a vested interest in Furiosa, or what?
Either way, I think this movie was awesome and I'm glad that I predicted this would be a good year for movies after the last two years fell short of my expectations (sans Guardians, but that's a given).
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
I hadn't heard anything.
I actually was surprised. Female characters died. I don't know if because I watch too much anime or whatnot, but females are usually untouchable to the main character. You know the females on the good side never die, and the females on the bad side will either join the good guy, or be killed by the male bad guy (to show how evil he is). This movie was free of this, which pleased me. It made it look more realistic to me.
@Iso,
It's interesting to see it come back around, but I should be clear that most post-apocalyptic games took their cue from Mad Max.
TerribleBad at Magic since 1998.A Vorthos Guide to Magic Story | Twitter | Tumblr
[Primer] Krenko | Azor | Kess | Zacama | Kumena | Sram | The Ur-Dragon | Edgar Markov | Daretti | Marath
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Edit: And I hope those turn out to be their actual character names.
Moderator Help Desk
Sales Thread
I'm not convinced Max isn't the protagonist. What is your definition on that?
Despite his name being in the title.
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
I already mentioned Nick and Gatsby as an example of this structure. For another, there's Frodo and Sam in The Return of the King (not so much the other two). Frodo's the protagonist, but Sam is the viewpoint character. Actually, Tolkien really loved playing with this sort of thing: heroes like Aragorn and Gandalf and Thorin, though I wouldn't say are truly the protagonists of the books they appear in, more conventionally resemble protagonists, but they are almost always seen through the eyes of hobbits.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
B_S - I think the better example is The Hidden Fortress. The movie's main characters and primary driving force for the plot are not the two hapless peasants who get themselves swept up in the film.
TerribleBad at Magic since 1998.A Vorthos Guide to Magic Story | Twitter | Tumblr
[Primer] Krenko | Azor | Kess | Zacama | Kumena | Sram | The Ur-Dragon | Edgar Markov | Daretti | Marath
But for people who don't know, Hidden Fortress is Star Wars if it followed the droids the whole time and they were peasants instead of droids and they were in feudal Japan instead of space. And yes, it is a textbook example of this structure.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
They are credited as Bullet Farmer and People Eater.
***
I want to throw out there that I feel that Max is more than just an observer. He has an arc and plays an important role in the film.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
~~~~~
TerribleBad at Magic since 1998.A Vorthos Guide to Magic Story | Twitter | Tumblr
[Primer] Krenko | Azor | Kess | Zacama | Kumena | Sram | The Ur-Dragon | Edgar Markov | Daretti | Marath
It did so pretty well.
The Unidentified Fantastic Flying Girl.
EDH
Xenagos, the God of Stompy
The Gitrog Monster: Oppressive Value.
Marchesa, Marionette Master - Undying Robots
Yuriko, the Hydra Omnivore
I make dolls as a hobby.
Both have similar pacing with brief respites between over-the-top mayhem, but Mad Max delivers characters that we can relate to instead of just abusing stereotypes between cheap thrills.
Difference being. I recommend Mad Max to people.
Moderator Help Desk
Sales Thread
I've heard some people say it was good but not 98% Rotten Tomatoes good. Perhaps that's an action movie high. Maybe that's feminist appeal making it seem even better than it is. Often ideological appeal or lack thereof affects judgment of art in addition to technical quality.
Vintage: Dredge | Legacy: Burn, Goblins, Soldier | Standard: Mono-Red Aggro
Commander: Nicol Bolas, Sliver Overlord, Rafiq
Casual: Selesnya Saproling Smackdown, Izzet Labs, Rebel
Played since June 2004, mostly inactive June 2011 to March 2018
Other usernames include AlanFromRochester, homerthebeerbaron
MTG checklists from Alpha to Ravnica Allegiance - https://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/magic-fundamentals/other-magic-products/third-party-products/805324-checklists-for-everything-from-alpha-to-ravnica
Go watch it.
If you come out of it without enjoying yourself I'll cover the cost of the movie.
I say that, mostly, because if your someone who enjoys action movies you're going to like this. It's well directed, well paced, has a seemingly never-ending number of positively insane action set pieces following a clear narrative structure.
The mra's just got their panties in a twist because Max, while the viewpoint character, doesn't have the strongest narrative arc and that Furiosa stole the movie.
The feminist themes in the movie, while present, mostly exist as rejecting action movie stereotypes about women. These are ladies, all across the age range, who are equal to men. This is a movie, without giving too much away, had more than one little old lady doing her own stunts in an action film. It was kickass.
As a dude, if I wasn't broke after travelling crosscountry, I would go see this again. It was great, really.
It's definitely not 98% on Rotten Tomatoes because of its politics. Whatever feminist cheerleader strawmen the MRAs are imagining, they certainly don't make up 98% of major film reviewers. And the movie really is not heavy-handed about anything except explosions. Prometheus had a much more anvilicious feminist message, for example - and if you're thinking "Wait a minute, how was Prometheus feminist?", that's my point exactly.
And do remember that Rotten Tomatoes is a review aggregator. Its numbers are an indication of the breadth of a movie's appeal, not its depth. So "good but not 98% good" is simply not a comment that makes sense. If 98% of reviewers give a movie slightly-above-average marks, it will get a 98%. If 50% of reviewers think a movie is the greatest film of all time and 50% don't, it will get a 50%. Think of Fury Road's score as saying, "You will have a 98% chance of enjoying this movie. As for how much you will enjoy it, no comment."
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.