This past week, SLU Film Club hosted a screening of “Mad Max: Fury Road” (Miller, 2015). At first glance, “Mad Max” appears to be an over-done blockbuster continuation of the “Mad Max” franchise—overcompensating for its underdeveloped narrative with nonstop action and violence. The truth is that the experience of watching “Mad Max” IS exactly as I just described it would be. That’s simply the charm of the franchise, and I would be lying if I said it didn’t work.

Before I explain further, here’s a short summary of “Fury Road’s” plot: Immortan Joe, the warlord dictator of the Citadel (one of the few places left in this post-apocalyptic universe with access to resources) sends one of his lieutenants, Furiosa (Charlize Theron), to trade produce for gas and ammunition. Joe sends Furiosa in the “War Rig,” a massive, armored tanker, in which she has secretly stowed five of Joe’s prized “breeders” with the intent to help them escape the Citadel and raise the next generation far from Joe’s tyranny. Joe realizes early on that Furiosa has subverted his orders and so gathers his army of “war-boys” to chase after the War Rig. In the mishaps that follow, Joe’s catching up to Furiosa, she and her passengers encounter Max (Tom Hardy) and the ill war-boy Nux, who they eventually partner up with to escape Joe’s wrath and deliver his prized wives to safety.

What’s most intriguing right off the bat is that “Fury Road” is essentially one singular giant car chase. It isn’t exactly a road-trip movie, but there’s certainly the element of a “quest” present. The plot is quite straightforward, and the characters are underdeveloped—I’m going to chalk that up to the fact that “Fury Road” is the fourth movie in the “Mad Max” franchise, and its producers therefore felt it unnecessary to explain both the causes of the apocalypse nor the origin stories of the characters, even in a minor capacity. For example, Max is consistently haunted by the ghosts of his past. The film frequently references them as individuals Max has failed to protect, and flashes back to images of them at various intervals. In that sense, “Fury Road” pisses me off—I’m a sucker for character development, and I almost selfishly wish there was more. At the same time, I acknowledge why the movie is still effective without it. But if you reference character backstory and refuse to elaborate at any point, you’re leading your audience to believe they’re integral to the narrative when they aren’t.

But I digress. Aside from my issues with it lacking adequate character and narrative development, “Fury Road” was generally very enjoyable. Yes, the mise-en-scene is exaggerated, excessive, and most likely extremely expensive, but I don’t think the film would be the same without it. “Fury Road” walks the fine line between ridiculous extravagance and gratuitous entertainment, and luckily, it leans towards the latter. It’s a good thing, too, because if this film were half-assed, it certainly wouldn’t work as well. For “Fury Road,” its captivation and appeal lie in its excessiveness. Be prepared to suspend your disbelief, and you’ll understand why it, in the words of the members of film club, “absolutely rips.”