MovieChat Forums > Mad Max (1980) Discussion > the 1979 film is not a post- or pre-apoc...

the 1979 film is not a post- or pre-apocalypse fiction. It's just dystopian.


Regardless of the Road Warrior prologue that places the events of this film inside the whole End Times scenario, this film was neither intended nor it should be seen as an apocalyptic fiction. But it is dystopian, particularly in the 1970s cinema sense. The dystopia of Mad Max (1979) is reflected in the following:

-de-funded public safety measures that leave the people defenseless. But interestingly enough, health services seem to be fine and somewhat advanced, in a futuristic sense. There seems to be a severed limbs bank, or maybe even a market, where these are claimed, bought or traded. This is implied when that guy comes to collect the thug's hand attached to the Max's station vagon's rear bumper. Even badly burnt victims like Goose are kept alive in intensive care.

-over-bureaucratisation of law enforcement. Radio chatter that warns officers to do by the book, and those lawyers that come with release papers for Johnny the Boy do not convey a sense of apocalypse unraveling, but a typical 1970s dystopia with a dash of movies such as Dirty Harry and Bullit, where tough policemen cannot do their work due to either an overly lenient justice system, or corruption among the higher-ups.

-overall decay of moral values, with upstanding family men like Max being regarded as the last remaining "heroes" in the world gone wrong. This again is more a feature of advanced decadent societies than failing, apocalyptic ones.

Also, there is a general availability of various public services and commercial activities (gas stations, repair shops, pet stores, grocery stores, restaurants, trucking, emergency services, car dealerships etc.). Max's house is almost an idyllic one. Also, there's a vacationing couple quarreling about infidelity early on, making them look like an ordinary middle class family. In the same famous scene, there's a camper trailer that gets smashed. So people work, go on a vacation, have babies. People affected by the Road Warrior prologue are going to say, "yeah, but the society was just starting to collapse." But, I don't buy that, and seeing the world of Mad Max 1979 in that light would just make it seem incoherent.

It's simply a dystopian "a few years from now" world. I don't know what the situation was in Australia during the late 1970s, but if you look at the 1970s cinema in general, there was a sense of unease about the failing public sector infrastructure and services, coupled with the corresponding agglomeration of powerful corporate entities (e.g. Rollerball). So, I think that Mad Max reflected those fears. It's an increasingly morally defunct, over-bureaucratized, over-privatized world. Sure, these things can be a precursor to apocalypse, but no, Mad Max is not a post- or pre-apocalyptic fiction.

reply

That's an interesting take on it. I'll rewatch it with that in mind and see what I see.

reply

How do you explain the toxic zones seen in the film? Wouldn't those be best explained by a chemical or nuclear war? One thing I liked about The Road Warrior in particular is that it kept the nature of the civilizational collapse ambiguous, and one of the things I strongly disliked about Beyond Thunderdome is that it wasn't ambiguous enough and spoon-fed the audience. One of many things I can't stand about Mad Max III, to be honest.

reply

yes, of course.

reply

Better explained by environmental degradation. Another staple of 1970s dystopian fiction.

reply

Why would there be environmental degradation in the middle of the outback? We see no evidence of that. It appears that the story takes place in a semirural setting... not the Outback and not the city either. In the opening chase we see the first warning sign as they are heading towards the city. However, when Max enters the restricted area in search of Johnny the Boy, I saw no evidence he was travelling through an urban wasteland, did you? So it's a little confusing what the deal is. My original understand was that it was an economic and political collapse more than a war, however the toxic and restricted areas shown make that argument problematic.

reply

so you dont know and you did need it spoon feeding after all ?

reply

I share the same feeling, and this is why it's my least favorite (yes, I even prefer the third one). Not a bad movie, but I am a huge fan of the wasteland setting.

Me too I never really felt that it was pre/post-apocalyptic.

reply

I got the sense that Mad Max takes place during the 'apocalyptic' times in which law and order disintegrated and civilizations collapsed. The Road Warrior takes place some years later after the full on collapse.

reply

And precisely because of that it is my most favorite one. In order to have this high-octane car and bike culture of people driving at full throttle, you need to have some kind of civilisation in place, the one that will maintain the roads, transport supply fuel to the gas stations etc. The subsequent sequels in that respect are less believable for me.

reply

It's a lot closer to A Clockwork Orange (which had to be a major influence) than the rest of the Mad Max series.

reply

That's a really good take on things. I hadn't ever considered that, because I bought into the post-apocalyptic vibe of the entire rest of the series. But it makes sense. George Miller, when they made the original movie on such a shoestring budget, may not have intended it to be post-apocalyptic -- and in fact he probably didn't, of even if he did, didn't want to admit it, because the original film's tiny budget just didn't permit that to be portrayed effectively. Perhaps he was intending to suggest a near future where society was just deteriorated, but not destroyed, and so a man like Max can still get married, have a child, and try to live a normal life.

But whether it was intended or not, whether it was a retcon or not, the premise really did allow for the post-apocalyptic follow on films. You can interpret that the first film is set in maybe the first year or two after The Event that ended civilization, and most people, and most institutions are still trying to hang on, to maintain order, even if it is already futile -- this is why Max has a boss, reports to work for regular shifts, enforces the law, etc. But by the time the events of The Road Warrior take place, society has fallen apart. Cops like Max have walked off the job (or the job just disappeared out from under them) taking their gear and their vehicles with them, because no one is maintaining order, and no one's left to stop them. It's become every man for himself. Maybe that wasn't intended, during filming in 1979, but the movie works as a jumping off point for that.

And boy did they ever jump off from that.

reply

"You can interpret that the first film is set in maybe the first year or two that ended civilization".

No, even in the The Road Warrior retcon, it's clear that the first film is set during World War Three, which makes it more believable as to how society is just about clinging on in the original.

"Their leaders talked and talked and talked. But nothing could stop the avalanche. Cities exploded. A firestorm of fear. Men began to feed on men. On the roads it was a white lined nightmare...."

Then we see footage of the first film.

Even The Road Warrior isn't post-nuclear. But whether RW is supposed to be during WWW3 or after the physical bloodshed, it doesn't matter because it's all set in the outback anyway. But there's no mention of a nuclear exchange until Thunderdome.

reply

No, even in the The Road Warrior retcon, it's clear that the first film is set during World War Three, which makes it more believable as to how society is just about clinging on in the original.

What particular scene from the first movie makes that explicitly clear? Be specific. Quote some segment of dialogue from the original film referring to the war. Indicate some background newsflash that provides that clear context. In the first film we see a functioning, if overstressed police force, we see hospitals, doctors, stores, auto repair shops, all the hallmarks of a functioning industrial society. We see none of that in the subsequent films. From The Road Warrior onward we see something more like the Fallout video game series: unmistakable post-apocalyptic barbarism (and Fallout was heavily inspired by the Mad Max series). Point to the specific scene, or line of dialogue from the original Mad Max film that makes it clear there has been a civilization-ending global conflict, as opposed to just a large-scale, dystopian general breakdown of order.

"Their leaders talked and talked and talked. But nothing could stop the avalanche. Cities exploded. A firestorm of fear. Men began to feed on men. On the roads it was a white lined nightmare...."

Yeah, that's a quote from film number two. After the original. Hence, part of a potential retcon, steering things onto a new and different course. It works fairly seamlessly, as I said in my original post. That doesn't mean it was intended from the beginning.

reply

What are you going on about? If you view Mad Max 1 as a standalone film, then it's set in a lawless, near future. No World War Three, no nuclear war or anything.

If you like the sequels as well, or at least The Road Warrior, then you go along with the retcon of the opening narration where it tells us the events took place while "two mighty warrior tribes went to war", not as you stated "after the event that ended civilisation".

reply

Good grief.

I am fine with going alone with the retcon. I am happy to go along with the retcon. I love the retcon. The Road Warrior is by far the best film in the series. I am merely agreeing with the OP that it possibly IS a retcon, which you seem to have some kind of major problem with.

reply

I've got no problem with it. You're the one who wrote out an essay as if you was freaking out when I simply said that even with the Mad Max 2 retcon (it is a retcon, no possible about it) the original is NOT set AFTER the event that destroyed civilisation. You seem to have a major problem with someone simply just correcting you.

George Miller has said that Mad Max 2 isn't post-nuclear, so 1 sure as hell isn't.

reply

The film series start was brilliant and there's nothing else like it.

The first film is basically "now" meaning a period we see as similar to our own.

The first film was filled with "signs" of what will lead to world destruction.

The biker gang are druggies and much the same as "prison rapists" and those are people who do whatever impulse they have just to do it. Some prison rapists don't consider themselves homosexual, rather they just rape to "do something" to people.

That means the prison rapist type had a total breakdown in any civilized idea. They are a type of animal that will do whatever it feels like at any time.

There's a saying in the medical field, "Every disease starts with an itch" which means it's first some very minor disturbance in the body. So, the biker gang was the itch in society.

In the second film, the decayed social values spread like wildfire, and the whole world was destroyed.

So, the first movie was saying that people with no moral values are a major problem, but it's not just locally, but a problem that could consume the world.

reply