The REAL Meaning Behind Mad Max Fury Road

What if Mad Max: Fury Road has nothing to do with feminism?

I’m serious.

Now don’t misunderstand, in no way am I saying that interpreting it as a feminist film is invalid (should that be your interpretation), but what if there’s another interpretation? One, I’d like to argue, which has potentially stronger ground in the film’s narrative and theme.

I think, and hear me out about this, that Mad Max: Fury Road is a film about the separation of church and state. Even further, that it’s a film that disregards the idea of religion and could be an atheist piece.

Now that’s not exactly a hard thing to extrapolate given the god king status of Immortan Joe and the dogmatic statements of the Warboys. Still, we have to look at it fully before we move on. The religious ideaology of his empire is nearly identical to that of Norse mythology, with Odin being the Allfather, and everyone in the upper echelons of Joe’s army calling him “Dad”. Then there are all the obvious references to Valhalla and dying a warrior’s death. We know this; we know it empirically.

But it’s not just Joe, now is it?

Think about the other two lords. If you look at them each in tandem with Joe, all three represent a criticism of church oligarchy. Joe represents the faults of ideology and dogma and we’ve discussed that but let’s look at the trinity as a whole.

The People Eater (leader of Gas Town) represents the problem of religion having wealth and the abuse thereof. It isn’t hard to see the parallels between his personal (and sexual) decadence and known accounts of similar decadence in certain churches I won’t name.

Then there’s the Bullet Farmer (who controls the weapons) representing the problem of religion as a military force. It’s a commentary on the idea that, because one is aligned with the right religious cause (in this case Joe), one is in the moral and divine right. This is true especially with the scene where he talks about being the scales of justice.

Now, all of this is relatively uncomplicated, if a bit wordy, but what if there are other characters in the film who are also depicted as being driven more by faith than logic?

I mean Furiosa and the Wives.

This is a problem I have with people calling the film feminist because, while yes Furiosa is a central character and this is the story of how she liberates the Wives, her plan is entirely flawed and carried on faith. If it was really a feminist film they wouldn’t have found out at the end of their journey that it was all for naught.

Think about it. When Max threatens the Wives at gunpoint, the favourite of Joe, Angharad, does the exact thing the warboys do: she chants a dogmatic statement about going to the Green Place and marches forward, heedless of the peril. Furiosa has told them a story from her childhood that she glorifies. Many atheists argue that is how religion is often perpetuated: a child is taught dogma and is convinced that it’s good without looking too hard at the facts, and indoctrinates others through their interpretation of it.

Never mind that the wives are literally giving birth to Joe’s children and could easily lead a revolution with said children without having to leave the comfort of home. After all, we do learn that Angharad was about to give birth to a healthy boy. She’d have weaned the boy and probably could have done a great deal to influence him to be honest and noble before Joe got his hands on the kid.

This all leads to the revelation that the Green Place does not exist, and that the faith of Furiosa and the Wives was ultimately misplaced. The revelation is shattering to Furiosa who’s lived her entire life and sacrificed everything for something that didn’t really exist.

Keep in mind the flaws in her original plan. She was going to steal the Wives (in broad bloody daylight) away from Immortan Joe and then lead them back to her original home. Furiousa embarks on this quest despite the fact that she knows it can be attacked (based on the fact that she was kidnapped) and Joe has the most powerful army in the area. So it really becomes a quest of faith for paradise. Then what do Furiosa, the Wives, and the Vuvalini of the Many Mothers decide to do when all is said and done? They take off for a different, new hope. This time more vague then the last.

At that moment one character appears in the film whom doesn’t have iconic dialogue. In fact, he barely speaks at all: his language is raw, short and blunt. Everyone else in the film has lines that are memetic, memorable, and each of those lines are, in one way or another, religious dogma. This one person only speaks the truth and questions the plan of going to the Green Place from the beginning. The guy who literally says: “Hope is a mistake. If you can’t fix what’s broken you’ll go insane.”

Max.

Max is the incarnation of truth in this film. Think about it. Apart from the shotgun bluff there’s very few lies that Max tells in the film. Everything he does is truth, even if it’s an admittance of what he can’t do (such as with the scene with Furiosa and the sniper rifle). It’s from Max that the solution comes. It’s to fight past Immortan Joe and take over the only place that really has any green.

Look at the final fight; it has to be Furiosa who destroys Joe. Max doesn’t need to do it, he has no religious faith. Furiosa has lived in fear of Joe; her character needs to kill the living god.

And then there’s the crash that blocks the remnants of his army. First you see the guitar, basically the symbol of the bard who rallied Joe’s army (and arguably one of the most energetic members of his army), and lastly the symbol of his church: the steering wheel with the skull on it. And then fade to black.

Lastly, who is it that rips off the sheet covering Immortan Joe’s dead body, revealing the truth to everyone who worships him as a god?

Max.

The problem with this theory comes from Max’s hallucinations which aren’t really happening, and that George Miller’s style is more that the main character shares the audience’s perspective in his films. The director’s style may not lend itself to this. In addition if you look at the original outline penned by Miller it lends more to a sweeping epic than as either an argument against religion or as one for feminism.

But that is why this is an interpretation. Film, like all great art, is open to interpretation. Interpretation isn’t truth, it’s subjective and we shouldn’t be subjected to just one interpretation. You can think that Fury Road is feminist, atheist, an insane dream Max is having based on past adventures, or a homage to the Road Runner and it is all valid interpretation.

Have your own unique interpretation? Share it with us below. As always, share and comment.