Is Mad Max considered Sci-Fi?

Quote : Mad Max

Christian Taylor3 said:I’d honestly just suggest he smash through that whole "dogma" found in every single film encyclopedia, textbook, or academic archive out there, whatever else you want to call them: Mad Max is a cult post-apocalyptic, sci-fi masterpiece.

How?

He should just start his own religion, a sect, or some kind of movement: The Passion of Mad Max—Freeing Max Rockatansky from the genre shackles of science fiction. 🤷Zizek spouts all kinds of nonsense about movies, and somehow people eat it up every single time. As long as they keep buying it, they’ll call him anything from Sydney to New York City, and pay him handsomely for the privilege. The guy even manages to pull models (I think he actually married one). There’s your potential solution.

Just not here; this is starting to feel a little too much like trolling.

Wait, you're calling me a troll? Did you even bother reading your own damn post above? Look, if you don't agree with me, fine. Just stay out of the conversation then. Don't come at me with those stupidly cynical comments—and don't act like your buddy Mr. Smoogj.

Quote : Mad Max

mistyotter35 said:So, since he made the choice to frame it as an SF film, I suppose there isn't much point in having such an endless debate on this forum when the reasoning seems pretty straightforward to me.

Nah, he just pushed the whole plot a few years into the future. That's all.

Quote : Mad Max

northerncrane4 said:Actually, Hrvoje Turković isn't just some local state college grad—he's a trained philosopher and sociologist, holding a PhD in Philology from the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, as well as a Master of Arts from the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences at NYU. All of which apparently doesn't carry much weight with some guy named rustywalker42 on an internet forum.

I was thinking of you. ☕
Look, since you brought him up—why exactly would he be any more valuable than some professor at an Australian university who holds a PhD in Australian cinema? Seriously?

Quote : Mad Max

Walter Grant5 said:🤷

Miller just figured setting it in the future would make the whole thing hit harder.

What's up? 🤷

I'm not even gonna bother with the rest. You didn't even have the guts to answer a simple question, which was... If you stripped away that opening line, what would give the future away?You're just talking in circles and dodging a dead simple question.

Look, I already gave you my answer, but you’re clearly missing the point. Honestly, I’ve got plenty of unanswered questions myself—especially that one specific question you keep using to try and tear down my arguments. You could just as easily ask it yourself, but for some reason, you keep dodging it.

So, what makes it post-apocalyptic then? You haven't actually proven an apocalypse even happened. It feels like you're just trying to kick the movie out of the SF category by claiming it can't be "proven" as SF, only to shove it into the post-apocalyptic genre—which, newsflash, is still SF. And honestly, you can't prove it's post-apocalyptic any better than you can prove it's SF. Same logic, different day.

So you wanna toss your theory into a toilet, flush it, and then call the septic tank cleaners? Fine by me.

I already said this, not sure why everyone’s acting like they didn't hear me—that whole thing should be its own damn genre. Since when was a definition carved in stone? Every time a new movement hits the film scene, the old rules get trashed anyway. Don't get why people are being so cynical about it.

Look, I already told you—it’s a subgenre.

That's it? That's really all you've got to say about a quote from the screenwriter?

Quote : Mad Max

I already gave you my answer. You just aren't getting it.

No, you aren't. You keep rambling on about psychology, which has absolutely nothing to do with the movie.

Quote : Mad Max

nimblemarlin6 said:I can't even compare Mad Max to 1984. One's an adaptation of a novel, while Max was built from an original script. Huge difference.
Look, if we're just talking about the movies themselves? Mad Max is better than the '84 one. Period.

You missed my point entirely. I wasn't even asking you about the movie's quality. I was telling you... 1984. I used that movie as an example of societal evolution, since you brought up that context in the first place.

Quote : Mad Max

So you claim Mad Max is set in a dystopian future... then what else would you call it if not sci-fi?

It’s a dystopia. Why does it have to be sci-fi? Is a dystopia automatically sci-fi? Not necessarily.

Quote : Mad Max

You think the whole post-apocalyptic vibe in Mad Max is just window dressing? Like George Miller only wanted to make the movie because he’s got this weird obsession with customized rides and leather jackets?

Look, he gave you his reason above. It sounded more convincing that way. But I’m sticking to my guns—without that opening line, nobody would even realize we’re dealing with a sci-fi setting. Period.
Find someone who’s never even heard of that movie. Play it for them, skip the opening line, and they won't have a single clue they're watching a sci-fi flick. No reason to think it's set in the future at all.

Quote : Mad Max

Wait, so he didn't want to shoot a modern-day movie using actual car models and real police uniforms? Is that really how it works?

I don't get it. The movie used actual car and bike models. Real machines. What's the issue?

Quote : Mad Max

Could you even make a movie like that set in today's normal society? Like, maybe some small town out in rural Australia? Could you?

That's exactly what I'm talking about.

Quote : Mad Max

Who on earth was responsible for designing those vehicles and coming up with that whole new police structure? And seriously, who decided this was even set in the future?

Hold up, what are you even talking about? Those vehicles—specifically the cars—are just your standard mass-produced American rides, maybe with a couple of American models thrown in for good measure.

So, Miller intentionally decided to make a movie about the future, rather than just some basic flick about a cop getting revenge.

I told you why. It just made his storytelling feel more grounded.

Mad Max follows the action movie formula—gangs, car chases, vengeance—but it's all there to show how society is shifting. That's why it's SF. Just because you don't see robots, blasters, or spaceships doesn't mean it isn't.

But those social shifts? They aren't woven into the movie anywhere.

Look, for me, Mad Max is sacred—specifically those first two films. I don't even know what else to say about these movies that hasn't already been covered, but there’s definitely a sci-fi element to it since that world doesn't actually exist. But let's be clear: it isn't some The Matrix or Star Wars situation with lightsabers, and it's certainly not Star Trek with Jean-Luc Picard's lasers. It’s just a post-apocalyptic look at a possible—and honestly, pretty terrifying—future. Looking at the film itself, I don't see anything that couldn't realistically happen if things actually went that south.

Best,

Honestly, there are so many subgenres and weird genre mashups these days that trying to pin a movie down to one specific category is basically impossible. For me, Max has always been—and will always be—just a gritty, post-apocalyptic bloodbath on wheels with killer chase scenes. I don't really see enough heavy sci-fi elements to call it that, though I guess you could argue it fits under the sci-fi umbrella if you look at it through the lens of apocalyptic movies, which leads to road movies, which leads to sub-sub-subgenres...

Basically, social psychology is just sociology... and this movie is dealing heavily with sociological themes.

Which science is it...

And it’s a field that keeps evolving, because it studies how certain societies behave during specific eras and circumstances. This is a sociological study of what happens to society after civilization and the order we know today completely collapses. It doesn't have anything to do with the future or anything else... I mean, Star Wars takes place in the past, yet it's still sci-fi.

This is SF because it depicts a society that doesn't exist, based on scientific sociological assumptions about how such a group would function. And honestly, the guy claiming Mad Max isn't SF—who’s basically insulting established academics by using his own opinion as his main argument—how would he even know it's set in the future if you ignore that first sentence 🤦 and the fact that he refuses to classify it as SF 🙏🙏

You guys are totally missing the mark with this whole "future" argument. Even if the story took place right now with this kind of setup, it would still be SF; it couldn't be any more pure. It's SF simply because it deals with fiction—specifically, that such a society doesn't exist and didn't exist when the movie was filmed. Clearly, rustywalker42 thinks this kind of thing is just business as usual in Australia.

There’s really nothing left to say about this.