Despite what others might insist, there really are no hard and fast rules for creating any sequel or prequel in any of Hollywood’s already established intellectual properties.
Honestly, I think it’s safe to conclude that – especially in today’s climate – the biggest requirement is that the sequel or prequel be guaranteed to make money … especially when blockbusters are in so diminishing a supply. But it used to be that storytellers did have a few requirements, and I think the only one that every structurally mattered (so far as I gave a damn) is that if you’re going to make a sequel or a prequel then – minimally – it should add something of substance to the franchise. In other words, don’t just make a picture so that it makes money – a rather obvious cash grab – but give this place and its people and its particulars a chance to grow. Explain the universe a bit more. Widen and expand the mythology. Flesh out something fresh alongside reminding audiences why this unique world still has something to offer. It should stand on its own, as well, but – at its core – it has to deepen the mystique of the original respectfully, too. Otherwise, what’s the point?
Ahem.
Writer/director George Miller is on record for some time now stating that he had every intention of bringing Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga (2024) to audiences since he launched Mad Max: Fury Road (2015) … and, well, more power to him. While I’ve read that there were some behind-the-scenes issues that had to be worked out in order for this production to come to life, the respected auteur finally delivered on his promise in the usual big, brash, combustible style. The flick is here, and I think anyone who’s seen it would conclude that it unarguably looks, sounds, and feels like it’s meant to co-exist in the same universe. While the news is reporting that the project is decidedly underperforming despite its positive critical and casual praise, I’m going to take the time to point out why I think it’s failing to fire on all cylinders.
As usual, you can all feel free to disagree. I have no bones with readers who do. I’m here to represent my opinion alone, and I’m glad those of you who show up to read it still do.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“The origin story of renegade warrior Furiosa before her encounter and team-up with Mad Max.”
Honestly, I think it’s safe to conclude that – especially in today’s climate – the biggest requirement is that the sequel or prequel be guaranteed to make money … especially when blockbusters are in so diminishing a supply. But it used to be that storytellers did have a few requirements, and I think the only one that every structurally mattered (so far as I gave a damn) is that if you’re going to make a sequel or a prequel then – minimally – it should add something of substance to the franchise. In other words, don’t just make a picture so that it makes money – a rather obvious cash grab – but give this place and its people and its particulars a chance to grow. Explain the universe a bit more. Widen and expand the mythology. Flesh out something fresh alongside reminding audiences why this unique world still has something to offer. It should stand on its own, as well, but – at its core – it has to deepen the mystique of the original respectfully, too. Otherwise, what’s the point?
Ahem.
Writer/director George Miller is on record for some time now stating that he had every intention of bringing Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga (2024) to audiences since he launched Mad Max: Fury Road (2015) … and, well, more power to him. While I’ve read that there were some behind-the-scenes issues that had to be worked out in order for this production to come to life, the respected auteur finally delivered on his promise in the usual big, brash, combustible style. The flick is here, and I think anyone who’s seen it would conclude that it unarguably looks, sounds, and feels like it’s meant to co-exist in the same universe. While the news is reporting that the project is decidedly underperforming despite its positive critical and casual praise, I’m going to take the time to point out why I think it’s failing to fire on all cylinders.
As usual, you can all feel free to disagree. I have no bones with readers who do. I’m here to represent my opinion alone, and I’m glad those of you who show up to read it still do.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“The origin story of renegade warrior Furiosa before her encounter and team-up with Mad Max.”
Yes. That synopsis perfectly sums up the surprising simplicity with which Miller conceived and executed this surprisingly swelled bit of fluff that – quite frankly – never justified the need for its own existence cinematically.
And yes: that’s my two cents.
Like so many, I’ve been a fan of the Mad Max franchise since it began theatrically in 1979.
Originally embodied by box office star Mel Gibson, Max told the story of a kinda/sorta fallen police officer up to and well after Armageddon turned all of our world to crap. In his souped-up Ford Falcon XB GT, the cop-turned-road-warrior found himself still taking stands on the side of justice (not necessarily ‘the law’), and his heroic antics made for an incredible trilogy ending with Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome in 1985. Miller had said on and off again that he intended to go back to the world he had fashioned so richly with leather and chrome; and he finally did so in 2015 with Fury Road, this time with Tom Hardy in the role of weathered savior on wheels. While I don’t believe that, financially, the project was as lucrative as were the earlier entries, I’d argue that its reception confirmed that there was still gas in the tank (as they say) for the franchise; and I wonder if it isn’t those sentiments that ultimately convinced Miller to follow-up with secondary character, perhaps hoping to give her the spotlight he felt she deserved. Opening box office for Furiosa’s solo outing suggests that audiences might not agree.
As an origins picture alone, I found myself questioning exactly why Miller felt this particular story was even remotely necessary. Functionally, the tale of the child’s abduction from the ‘Land of Abundance’ was already known – it’s the driving force behind her older self’s journey in Fury Road – and other than proving that it once did in fact exist (something never in doubt) absolutely nothing new is learned in these brief sequences. As an urchin, Furiosa is taken away by these gas-guzzling riders of the Apocalypse; and she spends the length of the film looking to get back (again, that’s the whole point of Fury Road) though she does amass some new talents along the way.
So was really taking a deep dive into the heroine’s past really even necessary?
For argument’s sake, let me turn for one moment to 2018’s oft-maligned Solo: A Star Wars Story, a Walt Disney production that tried to kinda/sorta much the same with the character of Han Solo, the beloved scoundrel of that galaxy far, far away. The story from Jonathan Kasdan, Lawrence Kasdan, and (creator) George Lucas truly got dragged by an awful lot in fandom for a variety of reasons, but the arguments did weakly coalesce around the theme that so many found it ultimately brought nothing new to the hero. Respectfully, I disagreed online, and I argued that the script at least gave viewers a chance to see how Han and Chewie met, how Han and Lando Calrissian met, and how our lovable smuggler came to be in possession of the Millennium Falcon. None of that even remotely suggests that audiences had to fall in love with these elements of the man’s past, but it’s inaccurate to say that these moments didn’t happen. In small ways, one might even argue that they gave a bit of flavor to precisely how and why Han evolved as a person; but – for better or for worse – watchers still rejected the picture perhaps because they didn’t want to see their idol demystified.
And yes: that’s my two cents.
Like so many, I’ve been a fan of the Mad Max franchise since it began theatrically in 1979.
Originally embodied by box office star Mel Gibson, Max told the story of a kinda/sorta fallen police officer up to and well after Armageddon turned all of our world to crap. In his souped-up Ford Falcon XB GT, the cop-turned-road-warrior found himself still taking stands on the side of justice (not necessarily ‘the law’), and his heroic antics made for an incredible trilogy ending with Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome in 1985. Miller had said on and off again that he intended to go back to the world he had fashioned so richly with leather and chrome; and he finally did so in 2015 with Fury Road, this time with Tom Hardy in the role of weathered savior on wheels. While I don’t believe that, financially, the project was as lucrative as were the earlier entries, I’d argue that its reception confirmed that there was still gas in the tank (as they say) for the franchise; and I wonder if it isn’t those sentiments that ultimately convinced Miller to follow-up with secondary character, perhaps hoping to give her the spotlight he felt she deserved. Opening box office for Furiosa’s solo outing suggests that audiences might not agree.
As an origins picture alone, I found myself questioning exactly why Miller felt this particular story was even remotely necessary. Functionally, the tale of the child’s abduction from the ‘Land of Abundance’ was already known – it’s the driving force behind her older self’s journey in Fury Road – and other than proving that it once did in fact exist (something never in doubt) absolutely nothing new is learned in these brief sequences. As an urchin, Furiosa is taken away by these gas-guzzling riders of the Apocalypse; and she spends the length of the film looking to get back (again, that’s the whole point of Fury Road) though she does amass some new talents along the way.
So was really taking a deep dive into the heroine’s past really even necessary?
For argument’s sake, let me turn for one moment to 2018’s oft-maligned Solo: A Star Wars Story, a Walt Disney production that tried to kinda/sorta much the same with the character of Han Solo, the beloved scoundrel of that galaxy far, far away. The story from Jonathan Kasdan, Lawrence Kasdan, and (creator) George Lucas truly got dragged by an awful lot in fandom for a variety of reasons, but the arguments did weakly coalesce around the theme that so many found it ultimately brought nothing new to the hero. Respectfully, I disagreed online, and I argued that the script at least gave viewers a chance to see how Han and Chewie met, how Han and Lando Calrissian met, and how our lovable smuggler came to be in possession of the Millennium Falcon. None of that even remotely suggests that audiences had to fall in love with these elements of the man’s past, but it’s inaccurate to say that these moments didn’t happen. In small ways, one might even argue that they gave a bit of flavor to precisely how and why Han evolved as a person; but – for better or for worse – watchers still rejected the picture perhaps because they didn’t want to see their idol demystified.
Now, Furiosa – as a big player in the Max universe – wasn’t really all that fabulous to begin with. Frankly, I see her function in Fury Road as little more than being a dynamic catalyst requiring Max to rise up and get back into top form in his quest for redemption (since that’s what he does every film in trying to demonstrate mankind isn’t as evil as its portrayed). She’s a sidekick – albeit an important one – but narratively nothing more than that. Perhaps Miller saw this and wanted to show greater justification for her ‘being’ in the Apocalypse, but – so far as I’m concerned – she fulfilled her purpose for being in that picture. Nothing more was necessary, and any further exploration anyone else felt obligatory might even suggest that an origins story would feel like little more than a vanity project … which is precisely how Furiosa felt to me.
None of this is to suggest that the film isn’t exquisitely made. Miller is definitely a one-of-a-kind genius when it comes to delivering about as unique an incarnation of the Apocalypse as is possible on film. The cars, the costumes, and the time and expense of stunt and effects work is damn magical in ways that show why this timeline is fabulous for theatrics in more ways than one. Furiosa – while bloated (the film, certainly not its star Anya-Taylor Joy who is as thin as a rain) – hums like only the Miller engine could; and its action sequences and pyrotechnics deserve to be seen (as advertisers insist) on the widest screen possible. But because the same could be said for all Miller’s other entries, does that alone validate the picture’s singular existence?
Readers, it pains me to admit that I was honestly bored with so much of this effort.
Joy was particularly miscast, never quite hitting a clear note in any scene she handled. The best she accomplishes here are an assortment of feverish glares at the many adversaries she encounters on her way; like Little Red Riding Hood, she’s been thrown to the wolves – men two or three times her size physically – and yet she never fails to best them intellectually or in hand-to-hand combat. When the women in earlier Max pictures – especially those with such ravishing underwear-model good looks – might’ve found themselves subject to some of the darker wishes of evil men, Furiosa is never in any jeopardy. She always thinks better, plots better, fights better, glares better, and survives better than any adversary … and, sorry, that’s just not believable. Max was constantly outmatched – even roughed up more than a time or two – and even left for dead, from what I can recall. While such disadvantages were generally used textually to give him the chance to rise again (as he always does), this petite yet scrappy woman suffers practically no setbacks. The same fate never seems even remotely possible with Furiosa, and that just doesn’t seem authentic.
None of this is to suggest that the film isn’t exquisitely made. Miller is definitely a one-of-a-kind genius when it comes to delivering about as unique an incarnation of the Apocalypse as is possible on film. The cars, the costumes, and the time and expense of stunt and effects work is damn magical in ways that show why this timeline is fabulous for theatrics in more ways than one. Furiosa – while bloated (the film, certainly not its star Anya-Taylor Joy who is as thin as a rain) – hums like only the Miller engine could; and its action sequences and pyrotechnics deserve to be seen (as advertisers insist) on the widest screen possible. But because the same could be said for all Miller’s other entries, does that alone validate the picture’s singular existence?
Readers, it pains me to admit that I was honestly bored with so much of this effort.
Joy was particularly miscast, never quite hitting a clear note in any scene she handled. The best she accomplishes here are an assortment of feverish glares at the many adversaries she encounters on her way; like Little Red Riding Hood, she’s been thrown to the wolves – men two or three times her size physically – and yet she never fails to best them intellectually or in hand-to-hand combat. When the women in earlier Max pictures – especially those with such ravishing underwear-model good looks – might’ve found themselves subject to some of the darker wishes of evil men, Furiosa is never in any jeopardy. She always thinks better, plots better, fights better, glares better, and survives better than any adversary … and, sorry, that’s just not believable. Max was constantly outmatched – even roughed up more than a time or two – and even left for dead, from what I can recall. While such disadvantages were generally used textually to give him the chance to rise again (as he always does), this petite yet scrappy woman suffers practically no setbacks. The same fate never seems even remotely possible with Furiosa, and that just doesn’t seem authentic.
Of course, I’m willing to concede that some of my misgivings could be owed to the ‘girl boss’ fatigue that fandom comes up against quite often these days. Generally, I could honestly care less about the gender of the heroes and how it’s used in films, but I do always require – as an audience member – that the moments be handled logically within the rules set forth by both the film universe and the galaxy at large. These are myths, and they’re all crafted with an artifice that’s meant to please an audience, so I’m apt to root for the underdog just as much as the next Tom, Dick, Harry, Marcia, Jan, or Cindy. Yet even I will stop short if and when I feel like too much is being asked of me in that delicate exchange between belief and required acceptance; and – on that point – Furiosa might prove to be a bridge too far with society.
At some point, men are required in every civilization, even those that have fallen. Be it as protectors, equals, or as the necessary seed to propagate its survival, men will always be here. This doesn’t mean you can’t root for the ladies, but – at some point – balance should be achieved. Whether you like that or not personally, professionally, or ideologically doesn’t matter. Darwin proves it as the foundation to our very shared existence.
Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga (2024) was produced by Warner Bros. and Kennedy Miller Mitchell. The film is presently playing on the silver screen in countries around the world. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I thought the sights-and-sounds to the completed pictures were phenomenal. As for the special features? As this one was viewed in theaters, there are no special features under consideration.
Alas … only mildly recommended.
Overwrought and overlong, I found a great deal of Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga disappointing because – as a stand-alone story – it never justified the need for its own existence. Instead, it piggybacked itself onto an existing saga by trying to shed a lot of unnecessary light on an otherwise clearly defined character that already existed sufficiently. It brought nothing new to this Apocalyptic world; and – despite some of the usual top-notch visions from Miller – it spun its own wheels for the better part of a bloated 150-minute running time.
In the interests of fairness, I’m beholden to no one for this review of Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga (2024) as I took in a screening at the local theater entirely on my own dime.
-- EZ
At some point, men are required in every civilization, even those that have fallen. Be it as protectors, equals, or as the necessary seed to propagate its survival, men will always be here. This doesn’t mean you can’t root for the ladies, but – at some point – balance should be achieved. Whether you like that or not personally, professionally, or ideologically doesn’t matter. Darwin proves it as the foundation to our very shared existence.
Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga (2024) was produced by Warner Bros. and Kennedy Miller Mitchell. The film is presently playing on the silver screen in countries around the world. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I thought the sights-and-sounds to the completed pictures were phenomenal. As for the special features? As this one was viewed in theaters, there are no special features under consideration.
Alas … only mildly recommended.
Overwrought and overlong, I found a great deal of Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga disappointing because – as a stand-alone story – it never justified the need for its own existence. Instead, it piggybacked itself onto an existing saga by trying to shed a lot of unnecessary light on an otherwise clearly defined character that already existed sufficiently. It brought nothing new to this Apocalyptic world; and – despite some of the usual top-notch visions from Miller – it spun its own wheels for the better part of a bloated 150-minute running time.
In the interests of fairness, I’m beholden to no one for this review of Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga (2024) as I took in a screening at the local theater entirely on my own dime.
-- EZ
Cheap-And-Lowdown Internal Searches By Hashtags
#AlylaBrowne
#AnyaTaylorJoy
#Apocalypse
#ChrisHemsworth
#ElsaPataky
#GeorgeMiller
#TomBurke
#AlylaBrowne
#AnyaTaylorJoy
#Apocalypse
#ChrisHemsworth
#ElsaPataky
#GeorgeMiller
#TomBurke
RSS Feed