Normally I have to agree with you, but I cant see Max as a protagonist in any way. He is not a catalyst, he doesn't drive the movie in any way (pun not intended) What is the cause of the whole trouble, Furiosa deciding to flee. Who sets up so many things, makes most of the plans, Furiosa. Even the last plan of going back to take the Citadel. Max proposes, Nux and the Vuvalini ladies support and add, but its Furiosa who DECIDES. I would put Max as the Mentor, teaching (or showing) Furiosa and the Wives what needs to be done to survive. What I loved was the character of the Wives. They are a wonderful representation of an old trope "The 5 man band". * Splendid is the Leader - she is the most headstrong, and vocal of them all. She holds them together. She also is the favorite of Joe. She is, I feel, the one who bullies the others into working together, and I think she is the one who convinced Furiosa that this was all a good idea. * Toast is the Black Sheep - she is snarky and full of attitude. She is the most violent of the Wives and is, i think, the most knowledgable about the warboys and their tactics. She calls out and identifies the identity of the following threats. * Dag is the "clever one". In this case she is the spiritual one, the most in tune with the motivations of the war boys. She is fairly insulting and foul mouthed, but gets along the best with the Vuvalini and takes up the "seed bearer" task. * Capable is the "stong one" - but in a more stereotypically female one. She is the most empathetic one - she abhors violence, and is the one to befriend Nux and use her empathy to turn him to their side. * Cheedo is the "chick". She starts out as the "weak" member of the Wives, the one most reliant on the others (and longing to go back to Joe. But I love that this aspect of her personality (probably known by the sons of Joe) is used against them when she pretends to be helpless and is "rescued" only to turn the tables. :) I was giggling to see this hoary old trope (seriously, its in just about every ensemble story, from Scooby-Do, to Buffy!) used in this manner :)

Furiosa is in the driver's seat of the plot. Mad Max gets caught up in the battle between Furiosa and HER nemesis, Immortan Joe. Yet the movie is told from Mad Max's pov -- not hers. Why? Because it's a reboot of a franchise with HIS name in the title. Because it's a post-apocalyptic franchise, Furiosa has to share the role of protagonist with the title character, Mad Max. I just don't see Furiosa as a Mentor. (Nor Vuvalini either) Mr. Max could use an ally or three. But he doesn't need a mentor; he's a seasoned, sun-baked survivor, a I-go-my-own-way loner who's not about to play protégé to any one's mentor. And how are the wives Attractors? Do they attract Max Max, the alleged protagonist, to the plot? No. He discovers them after he's already caught up in the chase. Is there a "B" love story between Mad Max and any of them. No. The wives are the stake characters. They're what the principals are fighting over. This is a movie that breaks rules. And gets away with it because it doesn't commit the only unforgiveable sin in movie making: it's not boring.

I'd say this is one of those cases where the Protagonist isn't the Main Character. (John August has a wonderful post about this) I think Furiosa is the Protagonist - she wants something (save the Wives), has a goal. And then Max as the Main Character - we see most of the story through his POV, he tells us the story. And he also fulfills another role in the story. A trickster maybe? At first he doesn't want to help Furiosa, he reluctantly helps but in the end becomes her biggest supporter. Trickster + Main Character? Could we have two tricksters? Nux also fits the role. I'm not sure, but maybe there's a handoff? Furiosa "lends" the role of Protagonist to Max for a while. Is that possible? Although taking the Citadel is done in order to achieve Furiosa's goal. But Max is the one that suggests and leads that mini-goal. It seems to me that Furiosa becomes a sidekick for a while. Immortan Joe and the Wild Boys - yes, I'd also consider them as Antagonist and minions. With the Bullet Farmer and the People Eater as... I don't know what word to use, but if we were talking about a videogame they would be level bosses / sub-bosses. But overall "Immortan Joe and his minions" sounds fine as antagonist. Attractor should be the one connected to the Protagonist's emotional growth, right? I understand why you chose the wives. I'm going to think a little more about that one. Mentor - the one connected to the intellectual growth. Vuvalini. But what's interesting is that it seems some characters step out of their roles for little moments. Max could help with Furiosa's emotional and intellectual growth, both at the moment she accepts Max's plan to take the Citadel. Re: protagonist. Although not as radical, the handling of the Protagonist reminds me about Psycho. That one was practically two stories, right? Marion Crane protagonist gets killed and then we have Norman Bates protagonist. Could we consider we have sort of two or maybe even three stories here? a)Max captured, wants to escape. (But at a certain moment gives up his goal to help Furiosa and the Wives) - Protagonist: Max. Antagonist: Immortan's. Attractor the girl Max remembers? b)Furiosa trying to take the Wives to the Green Land (But is forced to give up this goal and accepts Max's plan) - Protagonist: Furiosa, Antagonist: Immortan's. Max and Nux: Tricksters. Mentor: Vuvalini. c)Back to the Citadel - Protagoinst - Max. Antagonist: Immortan..... That got me thinking... maybe Immortan is the Protagonist, his goal is to keep his rule and legacy. I'll think about that a little more.

Kenny, I can certainly see the argument that Furiosa is the story's Protagonist. At the very least, ALL characters believe themselves to the Protagonist as, in fact, they ARE of their own story, so there's that. And yes, as you and I both point out, it's Furiosa's plan that serves as the spine of the plot. She's the one with a clear-cut goal in mind and actively pursuing it. However I think you can make the argument that Max is a Protagonist. The movie begins with him. He goes on a journey. He goes through a psychological transformation, evolving - at least in the context of this story - from lone wolf who doesn't trust ANYBODY to someone who becomes part of a 'team'. The fact he is in reactive mode for pretty much the first half of Act Two actually fits into the model of most Protagonist figures who go through a positive transformation: Disunity (Inactive) - Deconstruction (Reactive) - Reconstruction (Proactive) - Unity (Coactive). Again this speaks to the fluid nature of working with any sort of types in relation to characters who are organic by nature. And as I say, there's no right or wrong with any of these types of analyses. Besides it's always helpful to look at a story through the eyes of any character as a protagonist, if not THE Protagonist, in order to deepen our understanding of who they are, and certainly in crafting a story to enrich the characters we write. Love your take on the Wives. I'd never heard of "the 5 man band." Looked it up and found this:

The Five-Man Band is a group of characters whose members fall into archetypes which all complement one another. They are a very specific team with skills that contribute to the group in a way oddly analogous to the members of a rock band. It can sometimes literally be a musical group, but much more often is not. The group traditionally includes: The Leader — (lead singer) The leader of the group. Can be a mastermind, charismatic, levelheaded, headstrong, or some combination of the four. Often also The Hero. The Lancer — (lead guitar) Usually a contrast to The Leader. If the Leader is clean-cut and/or uptight, the Lancer is a grizzled Anti-Hero or Deadpan Snarker; if the Leader is driven and somewhat amoral, the Lancer is more relaxed and level-headed. The Smart Guy — (keyboardist) The physically weak, but intelligent or clever member. Often nerdy and awkwardly played for comic relief. Sometimes unconventionally young (early- to mid-teens). Sometimes a Trickster and a buddy of the Big Guy. The Big Guy — (drummer) The strongman of the team. May be dumb. Or mute. The Chick — (vocal effects, tambourine) A peacekeeping role to balance out the other members' aggression, bringing them to a nice or at least manageable medium. The Chick is often considered the heart of the group. This role is played by a woman or girl. Someone female. Otherwise, it is not a Five-Man Band. The five-man rock band phenomenon, four guys and a girl singer, is no longer as current as it once was. It was very hard to escape in the 60's and 70's. However, the group structure, as you will see in the examples, turns up in a lot of storytelling. Like a whole lot of storytelling.

Strikes me as more support for the five primary character archetypes: Leader: Protagonist Lancer: Nemesis Chick: Attractor Smart Guy: Mentor Big Guy: Trickster These archetypes reflect a quintet of narrative functions which we see in most stories, so it doesn't ever surprise me when we see them aggregated in a story. Thanks, Kenny. Great stuff from you as usual!

Paul, of course, I wouldn't and don't contend that stories NEED to have five character archetypes, that this is some sort of rule, as I don't believe in screenwriting rules. Hell, the script I'm prepping to write has one Protagonist and every other character in the story is a Trickster. Each of them will switch masks throughout the story, so they will take on the oppositional function of a Nemesis... or the wisdom function of a Mentor... or the heart function of an Attractor... even the partner function of a Co-Protagonist. I do think it's fair to say there is a recurring pattern of five archetypes in movies, but it's just one albeit a pretty common one. As to Mentor and Attractor in MM:FR? If we look at the story through Max's eyes as the Protagonist, here's my argument why I would look at Furiosa through the Mentor lens and the Wives through the Attractor lens. Mentors provide many functions. They can have extensive knowledge of the New World into which the Protagonist ventures. They can have superior skills in certain areas as compared to the Protagonist. Their level of insight can lead them conjuring up on their own or assisting in the formulation of plans. On all these fronts, Furiosa passes the Mentor 'test'. She knows the territory into which they head. She knows about the Green Place. She knows how to drive the hell out of a truck. She has information such as security codes, where weapons are hid, information about the Wives. She's a better shot than Max. She contributes to the decision-making process to return to the Citadel. And on and on and on. Is she a classic Mentor figure - white robe, staff, dispensing wisdom hither and yon? No. But she KNOWS stuff. A LOT of stuff. A lot of INDISPENSABLE stuff which helps the team - and eventually Max, once he commits to the task at hand - time and time again through their journey. As to the Wives as Attractor, this is not about romance. This is about what Joseph Campbell's thumbnail description of a hero: Someone who gives him/herself up to a larger cause. Here the cause is to bring the Wives to safety. At the start of the story, Max would have ZERO INTEREST in having anything to do with that. Indeed, once he frees himself from his literal shackles, he tries to take off from them, but the truck stops. Over time, however, we see him embrace the cause. Why? Because he is saddled with guilt about what happened to his wife (female) and daughter (female). Saving the Wives (females) is, I believe, a way for him to achieve some sense of redemption. The fact this choice he makes is tethered to the EMOTIONAL CONNECTION he has to his tragic past, and that connection gets PROJECTED onto the Wives, leads me to think of the Wives as Attractor figures. It is subtle, I'll grant you. He has no tender moments with the Wives. He doesn't say anything to suggest he understands why he's doing what he's doing on any underlying psychological basis. But the fact is he gives himself over to a cause other than himself, one that puts his very life in jeopardy. Again, not something he would EVER have thought of doing at the beginning of the story. It is not a RATIONAL choice. It is an EMOTIONAL one, even if not expressed in a terribly emotional way. Finally there's this: Why would Miller include ANY of the flashbacks about his wife and child if he didn't intend for them to play a role in Max's choices and transformation, such as it is? His experience of them is emotionally gut-wrenching. I can't swear to the placement of the flashbacks, but I'm almost certain that his decision to help them go back to the Citadel - and bring the Wives and the Vuvalini to safety - comes on the heels of one last flashback to the death of his wife and child. That's my take. I think for now I'll stick with it. That said, I can certainly see your points. And also as noted, there's no right or wrong in my view when doing this type of analysis. Character archetypes, like other writing devices, are tools. People use tools in different ways. It speaks to one of the beauties of Story that they work on so many different levels and in so many different ways to each individual reader, listener, or viewer. As always, Paul, thanks for your feedback!

Alejandro, your observations speak to the wonderful dynamism of what I call masks, how any character in any scene or in any relationship can don the mask of any archetype. This reflects real life, how each of us wears many masks during the course of every day. So, too, characters in stories. Moreover from a writing perspective, this enables us to create multidimensional characters, not just one note Protagonists who are ALWAYS acting like Protagonists, Mentors who are ALWAYS acting like Mentors. Sometimes a Protagonist has to act like a trickster to get something done. Sometimes a Mentor has to provide opposition to the Protagonist, donning a nemesis mask, in order to get the Protagonist's attention. And so forth. To your question can there be more than one Trickster. Absolutely! And more than one Protagonist... Nemesis... Attractor... Mentor. Hell, Max and the group confront literally HUNDREDS of Nemesis figures, every single one of the Bad Guys who attack them along the way. BTW, this just occurred to me: Is every single individual who attacks the crew a male? I don't think there are ANY female assailants. This reinforces the duality between the patriarchal dynamic of Immortan Joe's cult-like society he's created and the matriarchal dynamic at play between Furiosa, the Wives, eventually Vuvalini. So keep mulling over the story, Alejandro. See what emerges. We'll get into themes tomorrow and can discuss the whole patriarchal-matriarchal dynamic there. Thanks for your comments!

I really wanted to dig into Nux's character as of everyone, his character is the one who goes through the biggest transformation. However it's late and I have to get to blogging, so I'll leave my thoughts on that until later. If any of you have a take on Nux's metamorphosis, please feel free to weigh in.

yes and no. I always considered this to be a "how to distinguish the good guys". Or even "how to distinguish between multiple people on the same side Look at Star Wars. Leader: Luke Skywalker Lancer: Han Solo Smart Guy: Ben Kenobi Big Guy: Chewie Chick: Leia. My friends and I love "troping" movies. We watch tv and movies and play "spot the trope" and comment on how well (or badly) the writers have used them... The counterpart is the "5-bad band" The Big Bad: Immortan Joe- the Leader with his army of mooks. Also the "final battle". The Dragon: The Gun Farmer - psycho, loose cannon, goes "alone" and is impatient with Immortan Joe. Evil Genius: The People Eater - the big guy from gas town. He has all the books, is keeping track of everything, also seemed to be the most "tactical" of them all The Brute: Rictus, Joe's son. He is huge, strong, does what he is told, and a little dim. Dark Chick: Nux :) he is the "fan-boy" of Immortan - one of the WarBoy - and also is the only one of the main "bad guys" to get redeemed and switches sides.

Oh Nux, you glorious creature. He is, at heart, a child soldier. All the WarBoys are. You see how they are completely indoctrinated, kept separate from anyone else. The live in the tunnels under the citadel and have their religious indoctrination, and apparently compete for the chance to get out and drive and die for Immortan Joe. Nux (and the other warboys) knows he is sick and dying. He doesn't want to be like the Canyon Dwellers and die for nothing. He, like any person really, wants to make a difference in the world. He's been indoctrinated to believe that dying in a blaze of glorious violence is the best way to do this. He isn't evil - in fact i dint think any of the war boys are "evil", but that they have had a twisted view of the world driven into their heads, and they are just trying to "do good". I love that at the start he thinks Max shares his worldview. Even though he had strung up Max as a bloodbag, he still refers to him as "bloodbag" in a positive way. He completely misses that Max is trying to escape - its just outside Nux's worldview. Why would anyone want to leave the Citadel and safety, water, and Immortan Joe. Its crazy. Nux has a very stereotypical plotline - get goal, 3x try fail, work out new goal, goes for it. He is tragic as he knows the only outcome is his death - his only plan is to choose the method of his death. And to him, still, dying for your family in a blaze of glory is best. He has "just" seen that his new family (the Wives and Vuvalini) are so much more worthy than his old family.

you know - now I'm starting to see your point in making Furiosa a "Mentor". She is the knowledgable one, she does seem to know the most about the world etc.. food for thought indeed.

Okay. I just saw the movie. What a rush of glorious steampunk overload. I'm just checking in to say the first posts and comments on MM:GR are amazing. I'd never heard of the five-man band trope, though it's similar to a seven-character trope I'm familiar with. Absolutely great discussions. Scott, thanks for choosing MM:FR for analysis. If I'd waited to see it on DVD I would've kicked myself silly with my brass-studded knee-highs. I'll chip in now that I've experienced the movie.

Yes, Nux is also a wonderful character. I think he could be the closest to a religious character in the film. Of course his faith and allegiance shift from Immortan Joe to Furiosa's party, but he pretty much stays as someone's sidekick during all the film. And his overall goal - having a purposeful death - is fulfilled in the end. My point is that yes, he goes through a big transformation but at the same time he is very consistent in his archetype. It feels as if his motivations change, but his way of doing things remains the same. And that helps him and the story.

About Nux: From: http://filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/in-praise-of-nux-mad-max-fury-road-nicholas-hoult.php

...he’s self-aware cannon fodder, trading his life for a false paradise seems to afford him at least some sense of purpose and calm. He trades a cold, distant god for a a warm, sensitive person who lies next to him and puts her finger to his lips. Few movies are able to force a villain to the side good so thoroughly, but Fury Road does it by tearing Hoult’s character apart and using a human connection to build him back up. ...Nux is the heart and tortured soul of the story.

The crucial moment of his transformation is done mostly through visuals.

spot on Alejandro!

Yep, unless you have a seriously kick-ass home cinema, you probably would have missed out on so much. This was a visual feast, a bacchanalian celebration of explosions and dust. :) Looking forward to hearing more!

One notable thing about the film is that the characters are very tightly focused. Everybody gets to want something, and everybody's something is clear and defined. Nux wants to impress Immortan Joe. Slit wants to promote himself to driver. Immortan Joe wants his prize breeders back, as part of his obsession with physical perfection. And that's just the villains; Slit's an incredibly minor character, but he still wants something. Immortan Joe's the most interesting of the villains in terms of his wants, because what he wants tempers his actions. When Splendid throws herself in front of Joe's gun, Joe doesn't shoot. You can see that as a studio note easily: "Shouldn't he shoot her? Wouldn't that show more clearly how evil he is?" But Immortan Joe isn't any less evil for refraining from killing Splendid. He's better defined for it -- not just a brute, but a monster with desire and purpose.

Hm. Really interesting this 5 band angle. Going to ingest this re the five primary character archetypes I've been exploring in movies for over a decade. Especially intriguing if you look at them as representations of narrative dynamics: Protagonist = Forward movement toward goal Nemesis = Opposition Attractor = Ally / emotional support Mentor = Ally / wisdom support Trickster = Ally & Enemy / Chaos and surprise / tests There just seems to be a holistic thing to those five dynamics, which is one reason why I think we see them in so many movies.

Nice analysis, Kenny. Nux's transformation ties into the whole Patriarchy / Matriarchy dynamic. At first, via his indoctrination, he is swept up into his blind allegiance to Immortan Joe. The Father icon. Then as he becomes a part of the Group - and especially via his emotional connection with Capable - he switches allegiance, and ultimately sacrifices himself for the Wives and Vuvalini. There's also something going on in that his adoration of Immortan Joe is from a distance whereas his bond with the women comes as a result of intimacy with them. Such a well-rounded and compelling character. And when you think about it, his genesis as a character probably arose from a plot requirement: How to get Max to intersect with Furiosa and the Wives? Strap him to a vehicle driven by someone chasing the women. Instead of just having that someone as a bit player, why not go into the character and see what emerges? What we get is one of the most interesting characters in the story.

All right, Judy! This is one of the main reasons I started this bi-weekly series: Get people to watch current movies! So thanks for authenticating the series! Glad you enjoyed the script and look forward to your observations.

Alejandro, I think your association with Nux as a religious character is an interesting one. When we think of these young men (and sometimes women) who strap bombs to their bodies and kill innocents in the Middle East with the aspiration of attaining some special place in the afterlife, that's essentially what Nux and the other WarBoys are about. Immortan Joe = Their God / Father Figure. They 'believe' in him. They believe in dying for him, they will go to Valhalla. In effect, he goes through a kind of conversion experience, doesn't he? So an apt point of comparison. Good one, Alejandro!

Yeah, this hits on the point I made earlier about an allegiance to Immortan Joe deriving from a distant relationship compared to an allegiance to the Women specifically via his intimate relationship with Capable. Nice catch, Alejandro.

David, this is such a great point. Actually two points. First, how each primary and some secondary characters have specific goals. As you say, this gives their character a focus shaping their choices and actions. The second point about Immortan Joe and Splendid reflects how the best Nemesis figures have some relatable / human qualities. As opposed to a thinly drawn caricature, this is a more nuanced approach. As you say, still evil, but more complex. Thanks for that!