We Don't Need Another Hero

When we last saw Max Rockatansky he was staggering in the desert, abandoned by enemies no longer interested in his death, watching the plane full of children he saved soar off towards salvation.

All that with a busted head and no ride.

Flash forward 23 years. Director George Miller recently made public plans to not only revive the Mad Max franchise with a fourth film but also with a videogame that he will co-create with God of War II director Cory Barlog.

Now for the bad news.....

Miller also made it known that unlike the delayed "Mad Max 4: Fury Road" started in 2003, this production will not star Mel Gibson. He stated in an article with Level Up blogger and Newsweek.com general editor N'Gai Croal that "He's in his 50s now--it's too old.". This is the same article in which he also reveals that a lot of CG will be used in the film too.

Ahem.......what the F? Did Miller lose his mind along with his credibility? He claims to be using a story in which Max is decades older, a story that could be infinitely more interesting than those told in recent franchise revivals, so why not use Mel? Has Miller's time spent developing the joke of a Justice League movie and it's barely legal cast convinced him that a fresher and cheaper lead is the way to go?

What about that CG? Does a Mad Max film need the slick, $100 million soul-less Hollywood treatent? What the hell is wrong with a well-made, personal story with a character we know played by the original actor and a lot of real stuntmen doing real stunts? Did we learn nothing from the incredible Death Proof car-chase? It's the actor and the story, by the way, that we are putting our money down to see. Not George f-ing Miller.

Also George, while we are on the subject of your current plans, I could care less about how good the video game tie-in turns out if this is the movie that goes with it. This comes from an every day gamer and huge fan of the first three films. What people get mad at George Lucas for doing with the Star Wars prequels and special editions is nothing compared to what you and John Carpenter are doing to your film legacies.

If the current revival of several film franchises with their original stars (John Rambo, Rocky Balboa, Indy 4) and the success they've had doesn't convince you then I'm suspicious of your motives. Kurt Russell was nice enough to be much more honest than most expected and originaly blasted the recasting of his icon Snake Plisken for the Escape From New York remake (excuse me, re-imagining --vomit--) and I applauded him for it. These characters are a part of our collective film experience and were never meant to shared or interpreted like Hamlet, Macbeth or Willy Loman. Kurt Russell is Snake Pliskin, just like Sylvester Stallone is John Rambo and Rocky Balboa, Mel Gibson is Mad Max and Martin Riggs, and Harrison Ford is Solo, Indy and Deckard.

Unlike Batman, Jason Bourne or even James Bond, these characters are forever linked to one person, one (sometimes career-making) performance. They are the combined good fortune and creative will of an actor connecting with his character and the audience. In marketing departments, toy company drawing boards and lunch box companies they may only be commerce, but for that two hours in the dark they are flesh and blood.

So what is it then? Have Gibson's recent controversial moves put him out of favor with Miller or his producers? Does Miller intend on changing the story to suit a younger actor? Do I care? Not really. Without Gibson this isn't Mad Max, it may as well be a Megaforce sequel. It is cinema-non-grata.

Special note to Ridley Scott: recast or remake Blade Runner and I will find you.