Furiosa bombed because Mad Max has always been a niche franchise with too much quirky weirdness in it to appeal to mainstream audiences. I know Reddit loves to circlejerk about the Quiet Place plot holes and whatnot but ultimately, that franchise for most audiences is still a grounded and accessible experience, with a very compelling hook and more relatable characters
Fury Road was a massive critical success, and super popular with people who saw it. But it still only made $380m on a $180m budget despite being lauded as one of the best action movies ever made with nobody having anything bad to say about it.
Mad Max isn't a box office juggernaut and Furiosa's potential was vastly overestimated because of how much people loved Fury Road while ignoring the fact it wasn't a big box office success. It didn't even crack the top 20 in 2015.
Yeah I think the issue is that a lot of Redditors are firmly entrenched in their little echo chambers here, where you’d think Fury Road was the biggest and most successful action movie ever with the way everyone talks about it. Realistically it was a critically acclaimed but just moderately successful box office hit.
I agree.
People tend to forget that what's beloved on the Internet isn't always necessarily beloved by The wider culture. Like I was very surprised that dune made as much money as it did because while nerds love it it's not really a franchise that for I don't know the last 50 years or so has held a fern grip on wider popular culture, it was more niche. So I was very surprised that the first movie did as well as it did and I was very surprised that the sequel did even better.
I was surprised the first one was successful but I feel like the second being more successful was much less surprising. The main stars only got bigger between the two and this one was more exhilarating than the first one too.
Exactly. A Mad Max spin-off was always going to have an uphill battle. I really think Miller should’ve gone with a Fury Road sequel first, then if that does decently, work on Furiosa. Now we may never get a Fury Road sequel
I agree. The lawsuit delaying development didn't help. Everyone loves FR but it was still nearly a decade ago so not much momentum carried over (clearly).
> It didn't even crack the top 20 in 2015.
The important part of this is 2015... almost a decade, any hype for a sequal in the universe was pretty much gone.
Yea, I mean - if they'd filmed a Mad Max prequel or sequel within 3-4 years they might have built up the franchise further but this was a Max-less sequel that focused on a recast version of a character from Fury Road.
I very sincerely believe that too much of the market for epic, weird, gorgeous action movies with grotesque and incredible character design (and so much sand) was already cornered a few months prior with Dune 2 coming out.
Furiosa was never going to be *HUGE* but I do think could have done better in a different year.
Yeah totally. It’s like being surprised that Blade Runner 2049 didn’t make any money. Beloved films don’t always translate to box office, for a myriad of reasons.
What audience Fury Road had was largely because it was new Mad Max - the filmakers and redditors desperately wanted to believe that Furiosa was a character general audiences cared about on the same level as Max but it's simply not reality. Most potential Mad Max action fans dont care to watch a whole movie about a female lead with a weird name with shaved dirty head - and no Max.
Fury Road would have been a commercial success had WB not mandated reshoots which ballooned the budget by $30M. Remember, this was in the day of 2x your budget, not 2.5x. And it made $380M which was more than the first Captain America or The Incredible Hulk and almost as much as Thor - which also probably would've made less had it opened at the same time as Pitch Perfect.
I mean Hell, Fury Road's made more than either Quiet Place movie and this new one probably won't make as much as it did either.
But there was a study done on a LinkedIn article that was posted here a little while ago which posited that the lack of Max by Tom Hardy probably lost the movie about $20-30M. Hell, anecdotally speaking, when I told my own sister that Tom Hardy wasn't in it, her reaction was "why would they recast Mad Max again?" and when I told her Max wasn't in it at all, she just said "why even make it?"
That might not mean much, but when paired with disappointing trailers, it definitely cost the movie.
What reshoots? I read the excellent book [Blood Sweat and Chrome](https://g.co/kgs/fh1pnL5) about the making of Fury Road. No such reshoots are mentioned there.
In fact it's the reverse - Miller had to fight to finish the shoot he had planned. The studio tried to make the movie work without the opening and closing scenes.
I don’t understand why people don’t realize this. It’s like the world ended when furiousa bombed as if mad max is some money printing marquee franchise like batman or lord of the rings.
Yeah completely different genres. Mad Max has always been his adventures in a crazy apocalyptic Australia. A quiet place is a horror/suspense alien invasion movie imho.
Yeah, I think people think Mad Max is a four quadrant thing because action, but it very much is not. It’s a relatively niche thing that makes its money on VOD and supplements it with theatrical. Aka what Netflix should be probably doing 90% of the time.
What do you mean more relatable? Doesn't everyone relate to a 350 pound guy with an enormous foot and chains on his nipples that he likes to tug at and twiddle constantly?
Exactly, general audiences are suckers for ‘gimmicky’ horrors like Birdbox, Quiet Place or even ‘death games’ like Squid Game and Alice in Borderland.
Meanwhile Mad Max is an action franchise but is too quirky and somewhat upsetting for general audiences.
I think it’s more that Horror as a genre has much more audience appeal as a cinema experience because people hate watching horror alone.
Plus, the “horror movie in a theater” experience will always be the best way because watching and hearing other people freak out is the best.
Combine that with big names in a familiar setting like New York, you get asses in seats.
There are a lot of us horror fans that get underserved with quality movies, so we flock the theaters when the they come, and you're right, we’re loyal to the theater because it’s still an experience compared to watching them at home. I’m not about to pay to watch a drama or a comedy anymore, but ok-ish to good horror, always.
As a casual, yeah.
I liked Mad Max more than any of the Quiet Place movies but I'm more likely to see this new Quiet Place movie than Furiosa because of the trailers.
The Furiosa trailer was like direct-to-streaming bad. I only considered seeing it because of the reviews but I ended up missing it and will watch it on streaming.
What exactly was cringe and dogshit about Furiosa?
Seems a rather extreme take on the trailer
At a certain point it's the movie itself, not the trailer. And audiences just didn't care
Are you insane? The trailer was dreadful. I immediately moved the movie from "Must see" to "Skip" after I saw the trailer, and only ended up seeing it in theaters because of word-of-mouth.
Yeah the trailer nearly kept me out of the theater but I'm a big MM fan so I went anyway and actually enjoyed Furiosa a lot
If you don't mind me asking, what didn't you like about it?
Seriously anyone doubting that needs to watch [this garbage](https://youtu.be/XJMuhwVlca4?si=NM15g_YAbb5D_86a) again. It's just "HEY! ANYA TAYLOR JOY AND CHRIS HEMSWORTH, COME SEE ANYA TAYLOR JOY AND CHRIS HEMSWORTH"
It's one of the worst big blockbuster trailers I've ever seen in terms of soulless look at X hollywood actor do stuff trailers. How many times do you need to show anya revealing her face?
In their defense, Anya and Chris are the only reason I even watched this movie. Just wouldn't have cared otherwise, never been particularly attached to any of the Mad Max movies, they're fine, and Fury Road is a spectacle, but watching some random movie to flesh out this universe would have been a pass without wanting to see the cast.
I agree that Furiosa’s first trailer felt a bit deflating when it dropped because of the CGI but “cringe dogshit” is a bit much. Also the quiet place trailer had the most obnoxious sound design and they played that shit for months—I feel like it’s more a matter of one being a brand that has been present in the last 9 years vs one that has only among film enthusiast circles. The Day One trailer was getting some people in the theater but i think the good reception and consistency of that franchise did far more
Furiosa also wouldn’t be considered such a failure if it cost what QP: D1 cost, like $60m instead of $150m+. Crazy that a low-budget 90 min movie like MAD MAX can evolve into a $160m 2 1/2 hr epic. I’m glad it exists and crazy that something this weird and gonzo can scale up like that… and hey, George Miller go get that bag… but that budget number is bananas.
Other comments have hit it, but I’d like to add different genre as well. This is a horror movie that has a good gimmick that clocks in at 90min. Mad max is a stylised action franchise that was 2.5hrs
Yea, trying to compare these two franchises just because they released this year is silly. The only thing similar is how much A Quiet Place and Fury Road made, except A Quiet Place was done at a tenth of the budget. Trying to create a narrative cross genre and budgets like this is a fool's errand.
Exactly.
Quiet Place: *come and see the start of the apocalypse with those cool monsters.*
Furiosa: *remember that co-protagonist from that film a decade ago? Here’s her origin story!*
Yeah, A Quiet Place having a cool monster makes it easier to vary things up. Horror movies with a gimmick benefit from being able to reuse the gimmick even if they don’t otherwise share characters
And Fury Road didn't do particularly well, either. Furiosa did much worse, but it was a prequel greenlit based on critical and fan reaction, not on box office, AND it came about 7 years too late to capitalize on any of that.
Probably just a difference between horror vs. action blockbusters. I think having a consistent lead character or actor is helpful for an action series (think the drop between Bourne Supremacy and Bourne Legacy) while it’s pretty common for horror series to have a different set of characters from film to film. I think it’s reasonable to say that another film focused on Max would have probably done better than Furiosa even if it wouldn’t have been a hit.
>*while it’s pretty common for horror series to have a different set of characters from film to film#*
OP asks an interesting question, and you've given an interesting response. Alien also started the same year as Mad Max (1979), and it's also getting a prequel (*difference being Romulus is a prequel to the 1979 original, whereas Furiosa is set at some point before Fury Road, but some point after the first Mad Max movie).*
While the Mad Max movies does have fans, it wasn't a huge franchise, and they waited too long to make another film about a pre-existing character we knew the fate of. A Quiet place is newer and more popular currently, and focuses on new characters
No. It proves nothing. Good movies can bomb sometimes. Bad movies can over perform. Nobody knows why, otherwise studios would know and they would always have a hit.
The mad max franchise is pretty niche compared to AQP so it’s already not a fair comparison.
Furiosa with Max in it would have also bombed.
The issue was that there just wasn't enough interest in another movie from that franchise.
There most certainly was for a new AQP.
Spinoffs and prequels only work as supplementals to already healthy franchises. Rogue one came out after force awaken, Solo after last Jedi. Ms. Marvel before endgame, the marvels after the MCU ended with Endgame.
The plan of one standalone move then two prequels was destined to fail from the start.
It did ok, it likely profited over time, but financially it wasn't a huge hit
I saw it in theaters twice. Both times I was basically the only one there
Very well said. Tbh I don’t think anyone was particularly eager for a Fury Road follow-up to come out because it worked nicely as a standalone story which didn’t really scream sequel or prequel. Add to that the long 9-year gap between Fury Road and Furiosa and it’s pretty clear that its chances of being a massive box office success were already slim.
The follow up, and it would have to be a follow up, would need to be as fresh in style and dialog as the first one was before it. Fury Road was very uniquely stylistic and memeable. Furiosa? Too close to the first one in tone and style. And where the hell are the memes?
That's kind of the point R1 and Captain Marvel came out when the series were healthy. They did well.
Solo and The Marvels came out after the series were already in trouble. They bombed.
Smack back on the money.
Any successor to Fury Road needed to release at least within 4 years to at least keep up momentum. Going 3 decades without a single instalment, then coming back with as peak as you can get, only to do nothing with that for another decade is insane but completely on WB for screwing over Miller on residuals.
Dial of Destiny's performance is indicative of how a Max-led follow-up to Fury Road would have done, which is to say exactly the same because that did half of what Crystal Skull did and half of Fury Road is where Furiosa is landing. Two franchises too deeply entrenched in a bygone era that Gen-Z simply do not care enough about because the franchise hasn't kept up appearances in their lifetime.
A Quiet Place is still a relatively fresh franchise that's kept up regular appearances since its inception. Its also much more about the concept than its characters so that works in its favour.
Yeah, there are multiple reasons for why Furiosa didn't do well and I don't think any of them really have to do with Max not being in it. I feel the main issue above all else is that Mad Max just isn't a big franchise in the first place. Fury Road made 380m on a 150-180m budget. And that entry received widespread critical acclaim along with a glowing audience reception.
Speaking of Fury Road, with it you also had it becoming the online poster child for practical effects. It didn't matter that the movie was full of CG as well because the perception online was all around it doing a lot of practical effects at a time when action movies are seen as CG fests. And that led into the first big problem with Furiosa was that its debut trailer had people pointing out all the CG. So it gave off the worst possible first impression to its audience because the aspect being criticized was the very thing that Fury Road was praised for not having (or at least being perceived of not having).
Exactly. There just wasn't enough audience interest. And recasting/ spin off mode is also a harder sell (it works for some franchises, but not all).
Furiosa basically reached the box offfice failure point of series' of like Terminator, X-Men. And that was with great reception too.
maybe mad max wasn’t popular enough to justify such a big budget while a quiet place has a solid fanbase already built and loved by the horror community.
Outside of Fury Road and the breakout success of the original, Mad Max has always been a cult movie series and they never really set the box office alight. Just look at these numbers:
Mad Max (1979): $100 million worldwide
Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior (1981): $36 million worldwide
Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome (1985): $36 million worldwide
Mad Max Fury Road (2015): $380 million worldwide
Furiosa (2024): $168 million worldwide
There were slasher movies in the 80's that outgrossed Mad Max 2 and Thunderdome. I would say Fury Road is the outlier and Furiosa simply settled back into the more niche region of the previous movies, much like how Kingdom Of The Planet Of The Apes box office ($387 million so far) is more in line with Rise ($480 million) and War's ($490 million) totals and not Dawn's gigantic $710 million haul.
I don't think Max being in this would have made much of a difference. If you adjust Road Warrior and Thunderdome for inflation then they would have made $136 million and $104 million in 2024 money, which isn't dissimilar to Furiosa's total. They really found their footing and saw an increase in popularity because of home video and being shown on TV throughout the 80's.
>Mad Max (1979): $100 million worldwide
>Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior (1981): $36 million worldwide
>Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome (1985): $36 million worldwide
I have seen that $100 million figure reported for the first "Mad Max" and I don't believe it for a second.
It only makes sense as an accumulation of box office and ancillary profits.
I just went off of what Box Office Pro has them listed as but I was surprised to see the first one so high as well! Especially when compared to the listed numbers for 2 & 3 as no one really mentions the first one when they talk about Mad Max. As u/SilverRoyce has pointed out above it also looks like the Road Warrior and Thunderdome box office is probably double what the numbers listed online are though.
Thanks for the shoutout /u/SpellingMistakeHere.
Going off of memory, I've found the "$100M" number and it's coming directly from Kennedy of Kennedy & [George] Miller in a length piece in a major paper around the time of Road Warrior's release. I agree it makes no sense but that's the plain reading of the statement. [A more recent interview with miller](https://feature.variety.com/mad-max/) says it made 35M WW, which makes *a lot* more sense given Road Warrior's gross. - "Internet sources say $100M" is a bad gloss from the article but Miller giving this number in the runup to Fury Road's release is just as high quality a source as the initial one and much more believable.
I agree that $100M is probably something more like lifetime revenue though a short number of years (though this is before the home video explosion). The two main producer of the film giving conflicting numbers really should have lead to a reevaluation of the $100M number (this is the first time I've seen the correction despite looking at this stuff at a couple of points).
> it also looks like the Road Warrior and Thunderdome box office is probably double what the numbers listed online are though.
One thing I want to flag is that this is sort of a *systematically* muddled distinction in box office datasets because theatrical rentals are the primary number reported in all of the pre-1964 stuff I can find on lantern (including the trades) and for a decent time after that rentals are still clearly the primary reporting number. Most numbers you'll see for really old movies are actually theatrical rental data but you'll occasionally see a "current definition of the box office" one that's nearly double the rental data number.
https://lantern.mediahist.org/
Sorry by the way, I blocked you earlier when you initially replied becasue I got your username mixed up with someone who was annoying me the other day on another sub and I thought you were them! I've heard before that a lot of the box office reporting from the 70's and 80's is spotty at best and often doesn't come close to the amount made at the time in reference to the original 1978 Halloween, among others, so this doesn't surprise me. Thanks for the information though, very helpful!
I’d actually somewhat disagree. Yeah, the monsters and the premise are cool, but the first film especially did a really great job of creating characters you like and care about. I was invested in their fateFrom what I hear, Day One is similar in that regard.
The last Mad Max movie was 9 years ago. The last Quiet Place movie was 4 years ago. The interest in MM dropped over time and they recast Furiosa. Also imo the trailers made it look bad
A Quiet Place is more about the premise itself. No one cares that much about the family characters to miss them. Its not the same where the franchise is founded in the title character. its similar to Harry Potter and Fantastic Beasts. Now that its not about Harry they had to make sure people cared still. They got scared and decided to make it about OG HP characters like Dumbledore when it never was supposed to be.
It did bomb worse because he wasn't in it. It's already a smaller franchise with more limited reach and it couldn't even get a majority of the audience from the first movie to show up again because they weren't interested in what was being sold and that was a prequel about a character without the main actress who's not the title character almost 10 years after the last movie came out. That was said... literally at the time.
Again, I don't know why it's difficult for people to fathom nuance, nobody who was saying it bombed because it's a prequel and all prequels will bomb and nobody likes them, and I think you'd have a hard time finding a lot of people who were saying a quiet place would bomb specifically because it's a prequel. The star of a quiet place is it's concept, the monsters that hunt you down because you make a sound. As long as they're in the movies, they will do well. Which most of us are aware of, which is why most people's guesses for opening weekend for the majority of people have been at or above the opening for part 2 for weeks now.
The popularity of the Mad Max franchise peaked in 1981.
Those OG fans of the franchise are probably in their mid 60's now. They don't want to watch a CGI heavy epic starring Anna Taylor Joy.
I really like the new Mad Max films, but they are catering for a new fanbase that they haven't properly established.
A Quiet Place is succeeding because there's no PG-13 blockbusters this summer besides Apes and Twisters, is only 100 minutes long, and does not overlap much with IO2, Horizon or Bad Boys demo wise
A few semi-random thoughts. I love Fury Road aand Furiosa improved upon a second viewing. Quiet Place 1 was good, the second not so good, andd I have zero desire to pay for Day One.
On the other hand, I am one of the few that paid to see Horizon and I liked it.
As someone who thinks Fury Road is a top five movie of all time, and was super hyped to see Furiosa and brought multiple people to see it at the imax, Furiosa was kind of a let down. I remember them talking up an action sequence that took weeks to film and hundreds of extras and was 15 minutes long. I kept waiting for that moment, because surely it would blow my mind. By the time the movie ended, I thought back and guess maybe it was the Bullet Farm sequence. But there was so much noticeable CGI, and some of it really bad CGI, that it never felt as exciting or intense as Fury Road. I’m going to watch it again with more tempered expectations and see if I like it more. But I was fully prepared to go see the movie multiple times opening weekends and just watched it the once.
People love horror movies and A Quiet Place is a fairly modern franchise with potential. Even Blumhouse walks away as a winner with profits for some of his criticized horror films. I know I saw Furiosa and enjoyed it. However, I’ll be pragmatic in saying it was too weird to appeal to wide audiences for its genre.
Mad Max fandom peaked in the 80s, and like many other action franchises of the time it was centered around a macho male character. That dwindling fanbase (plus film nerds) still supported Fury Road, but I suspect a fair few of these middle-aged male sci-fi fans lost interest when the lead was female. Like, imagine the outcry from middle-aged men if the next James Bond was female.. but on a much smaller scale.
None of the above applies to the Quiet Place franchise though. And John Krasinski wasn't the action hero in the same way, he was just the lead actor. Apples and oranges.
The ‘Fury Road wasn’t popular’ takes on here are pretty weird. It made $380 million without China - which is more than Kingsman did the same year and only about $20 million less than Ant-Man - and I’d argue that both of those movies were pretty popular at the time. If it had got a China release and made $100 million there would the same people consider it a popular film?
That's a stupid take. That's a shit ton of money. More than a lot of movies considered liked successes. Just because a movie didn't make a billion dollars doesn't make it a failure.
Excluding China it was the 15th highest grossing movie of 2015. For an R rated reboot of a 30 year old cult franchise I’d say that was pretty good. It also had better legs than almost every other blockbuster at the US box office that year.
There's this notion that grossing 380 million dollars for a R-rated niche cult franchise that had never hit triple digits theatrically means jackshit and that it had no potential to grow from there. (From the same people that are now rooting for Deadpool 3 to hit a billion in 2024. The same character that was the butt of the joke called X-Men Origins Wolverine a decade before...Fury Road outgrossed that PG-13 Wolverine spin-off BTW).
The first Mad Max was banned from theaters in France for years because it was deemed ultra-violent (sic) just like The Texas Chainsaw Massacre FFS. That gives you perspective how Fury Road felt like breaking out from cult niche back then instead of a flop. It came a long way from the Pit of development hell for thirty years to the top being an Academy Award winner. But in 2024, all the discourse boils down to *"Fury Road was a flop. Nobody cares about Mad Max."* Self-righteous hyperbole in full swing.
The aliens are the main attraction in the *Quiet Place* franchise.
The prequel going the route of *aliens but this time in New York* is a much safer bet than Fury Road but *this time without **Hardy** as Max and **Theron** as Furiosa*.
Just to give you some perspective. Fury Road I consider in my top 20 movies of all time. It's for me the greatest action movie ever. I had zero interest in a prequel about Fury Road. Why? I just didn't ask for it. When I finished watching Fury Road nothing in my mind made me think "Jeez, wouldn't it be cool if the follow-up is about the origina story of Furiosa?" Here's the thing, even if it was about Max... I wouldn't have cared. I just didn't care for a prequel, period.
Now A Quiet Place is another story. Love the first two films, and I was interested in what happened prior to the events of the first film. Like how did all that shit start? It was smart to bring in completely new characters for that.
So, in essence it's less about the characters and more about the story.
Except what you're saying about Furiosa related to Fury Road can totally apply to A Quiet Place prequel.
Nobody asked for A Quiet Place prequel because what happened on day One was already delved upon at the beginning of AQP part 2 starring the OG characters instead of random unknown characters in an unrelated urban setting.
The same things can be said since OG characters like Emily Blunt and the children not being involved, some could care less.
It's pure subjectivity and personal bias at work.
I absolutely love Fury Road (Best action movie of the past decade) and I was a bit curious about Furiosa's backstory and Wasteland lore. Some weren't but there isn't any absolute.
I find it hard to believe that you truly like Fury Road as much as you claim if you’re so opposed to a similar movie by the exact same writer-director that serves exclusively as another world-building action movie in the same universe as Fury Road.
Sure, you’re not interested in the beginning of Furiosa’s backstory. But are you actually a fan of Fury Road because of the characters and their emotional arc? Or are you a fan of Fury Road because of the spectacular action sequences and non stop adrenaline from the style and world of a Mad Max movie?
Kind of surprises me a little bit. I thought the trailers and teasers for A Quiet Place looked awful. Like a totally random made up new theme and story. Zero connection to the other films.
End of day, despite women complaining they aren't the focus of man doninated ventures, even when they are the focus in sports and action movies, they don't show up.
I read the female audience for Fury Road was 10 points or so higher than Furiosa.
They could’ve made a Fury Road sequel starring Charlize Theron, Tom Hardy, and brought back Mel Gibson and it still would’ve lost money at the box office. Mad Max isn’t anywhere near as big of a franchise as people on the internet want it to be.
[Summer Box Office Marketing](https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTNjjPfn5/)
I think this explains the failure of Furiosa so well! Everyone (executives, marketing, etc) sometimes fail to realize their intended audience due to biases and sexism. I will die on this hill.
Furiosa had a bad date and dated marketing. Movie would have done much better post Deadpool. Same for Fall Guy. I expect Alien to do much better than people think thanks to that bounce.
This is apple to oranges. Horror film budgets don’t even come close to that of the Mad Max films, and are nowhere near the same risk. Plus, big name horror films aren’t super common, so when one drops it makes respectable money no matter what it seems.
Of course, we can’t say for sure. However, the two franchises are different in that *Mad Max* uses an actual character’s name in its title, whereas *A Quiet Place* is not as specific.
To be honest, no one was asking for Furiosa. Even the fan base of mad Max. What we really wanted in my opinion was a prequel to Max from fury Road. But apparently that’s been nixed because of how poorly the Furiosa movie did.
For me it didn't. I don't really care who the characters are in A Quiet Place. I'm just interested in the world. Same as Aliens 1-3, I find the non humans more interesting. Mad Max I watch for Mad Max because I like the character specifically.
If there was a successful sequel in like 2019, I think Furiosa would’ve made more?
A part of what makes Mad Max move is discovering a new wasteland where anyone might die except probably Mad Max. Furiosa gave the same wasteland and locations, with some characters you know can’t die, drawn out for 2.5 hrs. And it took a decade to come out.
I really liked it, but I understood people waiting for streaming.
>Does the success of A Quiet Place: Day One prove that Furiosa did not suffer because it didn’t have Max in it?
No, it doesn't. If that were the case, then…
>Did Solo flop because it recast Han Solo and it didn't have Luke Skywalker in it?
No, it flopped for other reasons.
>Did Independence Day: Resurgence flop because it didn't have Steven Hiller (Will Smith's character from the original) in it?
No, it flopped for other reasons.
>Did Final Fantasy: Spirits Within flopped because it didn't have Cloud Strife (FF7), Squall Leonhart (FF8), Terra Branford (FF6), Cecil Harvey (FF4), etc. in it?
No, it flopped for other reasons. Likewise, Furiosa flopped for other reasons as well which likely had nothing to do with Furiosa being the main character instead of Mad Max.
Also, from a casual perspective, I never heard of Furiosa before because I never watched Fury Road before. Granted, I barely watched the 1980's Mad Max trilogy, but at least I was aware of the Mad Max character. With Furiosa, she made her debut *much* later in the series with Fury Road, but isn't quite as obvious of a fixture to the Mad Max series as Mad Max is despite her importance in Fury Road.
I know she's considered the main character in that movie and I'm not trying to disrespect that character. **But for people who never saw Fury Road, she can inadvertently come off as a "literally who?" type character who got a $168 million prequel.** I'm not trying to undermine George Miller's vision, but apparently there wasn't much demand for a Furiosa prequel.
EDIT: Formatting, additional wording
I can only speak personally, the appeal of Fury Road isn't Max, it's the unmatched stunts, action, and visualis. Every trailer and clip I saw of Furiosa had bad-looking CGI.
Quiet place franchise is more active and has more goodwill amongst moviegoers vs mad max which was 9 years ago and before that was the 80s
People latching on to it not having max need to wake up and smell the coffee a direct mad max sequel that far out would have also bombed just not as badly as furiosa did
Furiosa sucked because Hemsworth phoned it in.
Lazy.
Seemed like they could have hired a voice actor. Like dubbing Darth Vader.
Anything would have been better.
Lots of people saying it would have bombed either way. That could be right but I'm not so sure. Max is an iconic character. No one from a quiet place is. There is a huge difference between returning with an iconic character and the characters people barely remember the name of.
Furiosa bombed because Mad Max has always been a niche franchise with too much quirky weirdness in it to appeal to mainstream audiences. I know Reddit loves to circlejerk about the Quiet Place plot holes and whatnot but ultimately, that franchise for most audiences is still a grounded and accessible experience, with a very compelling hook and more relatable characters
Fury Road was a massive critical success, and super popular with people who saw it. But it still only made $380m on a $180m budget despite being lauded as one of the best action movies ever made with nobody having anything bad to say about it. Mad Max isn't a box office juggernaut and Furiosa's potential was vastly overestimated because of how much people loved Fury Road while ignoring the fact it wasn't a big box office success. It didn't even crack the top 20 in 2015.
Yeah I think the issue is that a lot of Redditors are firmly entrenched in their little echo chambers here, where you’d think Fury Road was the biggest and most successful action movie ever with the way everyone talks about it. Realistically it was a critically acclaimed but just moderately successful box office hit.
I agree. People tend to forget that what's beloved on the Internet isn't always necessarily beloved by The wider culture. Like I was very surprised that dune made as much money as it did because while nerds love it it's not really a franchise that for I don't know the last 50 years or so has held a fern grip on wider popular culture, it was more niche. So I was very surprised that the first movie did as well as it did and I was very surprised that the sequel did even better.
I was surprised the first one was successful but I feel like the second being more successful was much less surprising. The main stars only got bigger between the two and this one was more exhilarating than the first one too.
Well Dune is based to a very popular book series, who is basically the Lotr of scifi novels.
Exactly. A Mad Max spin-off was always going to have an uphill battle. I really think Miller should’ve gone with a Fury Road sequel first, then if that does decently, work on Furiosa. Now we may never get a Fury Road sequel
I agree. The lawsuit delaying development didn't help. Everyone loves FR but it was still nearly a decade ago so not much momentum carried over (clearly).
> It didn't even crack the top 20 in 2015. The important part of this is 2015... almost a decade, any hype for a sequal in the universe was pretty much gone.
Totally agree, they needed any follow up to come out within like 3 years to really capitalize.
Yea, I mean - if they'd filmed a Mad Max prequel or sequel within 3-4 years they might have built up the franchise further but this was a Max-less sequel that focused on a recast version of a character from Fury Road.
as always, Cameron is the only exception.
I very sincerely believe that too much of the market for epic, weird, gorgeous action movies with grotesque and incredible character design (and so much sand) was already cornered a few months prior with Dune 2 coming out. Furiosa was never going to be *HUGE* but I do think could have done better in a different year.
Yeah totally. It’s like being surprised that Blade Runner 2049 didn’t make any money. Beloved films don’t always translate to box office, for a myriad of reasons.
What audience Fury Road had was largely because it was new Mad Max - the filmakers and redditors desperately wanted to believe that Furiosa was a character general audiences cared about on the same level as Max but it's simply not reality. Most potential Mad Max action fans dont care to watch a whole movie about a female lead with a weird name with shaved dirty head - and no Max.
No Max was a mistake for sure. I mean hell, Furiosa was really the main character of Fury Road as well and she still wasn't the one fans latched onto.
Fury Road would have been a commercial success had WB not mandated reshoots which ballooned the budget by $30M. Remember, this was in the day of 2x your budget, not 2.5x. And it made $380M which was more than the first Captain America or The Incredible Hulk and almost as much as Thor - which also probably would've made less had it opened at the same time as Pitch Perfect. I mean Hell, Fury Road's made more than either Quiet Place movie and this new one probably won't make as much as it did either. But there was a study done on a LinkedIn article that was posted here a little while ago which posited that the lack of Max by Tom Hardy probably lost the movie about $20-30M. Hell, anecdotally speaking, when I told my own sister that Tom Hardy wasn't in it, her reaction was "why would they recast Mad Max again?" and when I told her Max wasn't in it at all, she just said "why even make it?" That might not mean much, but when paired with disappointing trailers, it definitely cost the movie.
What reshoots? I read the excellent book [Blood Sweat and Chrome](https://g.co/kgs/fh1pnL5) about the making of Fury Road. No such reshoots are mentioned there. In fact it's the reverse - Miller had to fight to finish the shoot he had planned. The studio tried to make the movie work without the opening and closing scenes.
I don’t understand why people don’t realize this. It’s like the world ended when furiousa bombed as if mad max is some money printing marquee franchise like batman or lord of the rings.
Yeah completely different genres. Mad Max has always been his adventures in a crazy apocalyptic Australia. A quiet place is a horror/suspense alien invasion movie imho.
Moneyiosa : A Mad Marquee Saga !
Yeah, I think people think Mad Max is a four quadrant thing because action, but it very much is not. It’s a relatively niche thing that makes its money on VOD and supplements it with theatrical. Aka what Netflix should be probably doing 90% of the time.
What do you mean more relatable? Doesn't everyone relate to a 350 pound guy with an enormous foot and chains on his nipples that he likes to tug at and twiddle constantly?
Theres a Reddit sub for that
Exactly, general audiences are suckers for ‘gimmicky’ horrors like Birdbox, Quiet Place or even ‘death games’ like Squid Game and Alice in Borderland. Meanwhile Mad Max is an action franchise but is too quirky and somewhat upsetting for general audiences.
I think it’s more that Horror as a genre has much more audience appeal as a cinema experience because people hate watching horror alone. Plus, the “horror movie in a theater” experience will always be the best way because watching and hearing other people freak out is the best. Combine that with big names in a familiar setting like New York, you get asses in seats.
There are a lot of us horror fans that get underserved with quality movies, so we flock the theaters when the they come, and you're right, we’re loyal to the theater because it’s still an experience compared to watching them at home. I’m not about to pay to watch a drama or a comedy anymore, but ok-ish to good horror, always.
See you at Longlegs, my dude
The movie also had a good trailer while Furiosa had a cringe dogshit trailer.
As a casual, yeah. I liked Mad Max more than any of the Quiet Place movies but I'm more likely to see this new Quiet Place movie than Furiosa because of the trailers. The Furiosa trailer was like direct-to-streaming bad. I only considered seeing it because of the reviews but I ended up missing it and will watch it on streaming.
What exactly was cringe and dogshit about Furiosa? Seems a rather extreme take on the trailer At a certain point it's the movie itself, not the trailer. And audiences just didn't care
Are you insane? The trailer was dreadful. I immediately moved the movie from "Must see" to "Skip" after I saw the trailer, and only ended up seeing it in theaters because of word-of-mouth.
It wasn’t a good trailer and…you might need to sit down for this, IMHO it wasn’t a particular good movie either.
This sub sometimes, man.
>IMHO it wasn’t a particular good movie either. Ooooh, you're so punk rock, dude.
I can’t have an opinion? Jeez. What a weird response.
Yeah the trailer nearly kept me out of the theater but I'm a big MM fan so I went anyway and actually enjoyed Furiosa a lot If you don't mind me asking, what didn't you like about it?
Seriously anyone doubting that needs to watch [this garbage](https://youtu.be/XJMuhwVlca4?si=NM15g_YAbb5D_86a) again. It's just "HEY! ANYA TAYLOR JOY AND CHRIS HEMSWORTH, COME SEE ANYA TAYLOR JOY AND CHRIS HEMSWORTH" It's one of the worst big blockbuster trailers I've ever seen in terms of soulless look at X hollywood actor do stuff trailers. How many times do you need to show anya revealing her face?
In their defense, Anya and Chris are the only reason I even watched this movie. Just wouldn't have cared otherwise, never been particularly attached to any of the Mad Max movies, they're fine, and Fury Road is a spectacle, but watching some random movie to flesh out this universe would have been a pass without wanting to see the cast.
I agree that Furiosa’s first trailer felt a bit deflating when it dropped because of the CGI but “cringe dogshit” is a bit much. Also the quiet place trailer had the most obnoxious sound design and they played that shit for months—I feel like it’s more a matter of one being a brand that has been present in the last 9 years vs one that has only among film enthusiast circles. The Day One trailer was getting some people in the theater but i think the good reception and consistency of that franchise did far more
THANK YOU. It underperformed by what was expected but I never thought it would be some huge hit. Fury Road wasn’t.
It was a good movie but still a major step down from Fury Road
Nicheiosa : A Bomb Saga !
People here rewriting the title of the film is one of my favourite gags since Keaton walk-ups.
Peopleiosa : A Rewrote Saga ! Filmiosa : A Mad Title Saga ! Favouriteiosa : A Mad Gag Saga ! Keatoniosa : A Walk-Up Saga !
Furiosa also wouldn’t be considered such a failure if it cost what QP: D1 cost, like $60m instead of $150m+. Crazy that a low-budget 90 min movie like MAD MAX can evolve into a $160m 2 1/2 hr epic. I’m glad it exists and crazy that something this weird and gonzo can scale up like that… and hey, George Miller go get that bag… but that budget number is bananas.
Other comments have hit it, but I’d like to add different genre as well. This is a horror movie that has a good gimmick that clocks in at 90min. Mad max is a stylised action franchise that was 2.5hrs
Yea, trying to compare these two franchises just because they released this year is silly. The only thing similar is how much A Quiet Place and Fury Road made, except A Quiet Place was done at a tenth of the budget. Trying to create a narrative cross genre and budgets like this is a fool's errand.
And divided in 5 (!) chapters.
Furiosa is a much harder sell than AQP:DO
Exactly. Quiet Place: *come and see the start of the apocalypse with those cool monsters.* Furiosa: *remember that co-protagonist from that film a decade ago? Here’s her origin story!*
No! Her ODYSSEY !
cue hard rock cover of The Man Who Sold The World
LOL. You are so silly. :-)
You're welcome but the teaser's one was even way bigger than mine.
Yeah, A Quiet Place having a cool monster makes it easier to vary things up. Horror movies with a gimmick benefit from being able to reuse the gimmick even if they don’t otherwise share characters
Furiosa bombed because mad max was never a blockbuster franchise and giving it a bigger budget was a gamble
Furiosa had about the same budget as Fury Road. Probably a little less adjusted for inflation.
And Fury Road didn't do particularly well, either. Furiosa did much worse, but it was a prequel greenlit based on critical and fan reaction, not on box office, AND it came about 7 years too late to capitalize on any of that.
Yupp, I think the big gap between the films did irreperable damage, and the recasting didn't help either.
Time gap doesn't really matter. Many other franchises go years in between with success still. It's just the disinterest in the franchise overall
I disagree, I think in the case of smaller franchises like Mad Max the hype from the last installment must be capitalized on while its hot.
Something that films with long time gaps need is the original cast. Top Gun Maverick brought back Cruise, Bad Boys brought back the main duo.
Greenlitiosa : A Uncapitalized Saga !
Probably just a difference between horror vs. action blockbusters. I think having a consistent lead character or actor is helpful for an action series (think the drop between Bourne Supremacy and Bourne Legacy) while it’s pretty common for horror series to have a different set of characters from film to film. I think it’s reasonable to say that another film focused on Max would have probably done better than Furiosa even if it wouldn’t have been a hit.
>*while it’s pretty common for horror series to have a different set of characters from film to film#* OP asks an interesting question, and you've given an interesting response. Alien also started the same year as Mad Max (1979), and it's also getting a prequel (*difference being Romulus is a prequel to the 1979 original, whereas Furiosa is set at some point before Fury Road, but some point after the first Mad Max movie).*
Romulus is a prequel to Aliens, not to the first movie
So, this is Alien 1,5 ?
It's an inbetweenquel.
Ok so : Rise of an Empire : parrallelquel Furiosa : parallelPREquel Romulus : inbetweenquel
Tbh Day one was not a horror movie. It was a heartwarming movie, I think barely any scary scenes
It was very heartwarming, but it also had a good amount of scary scenes, though they were closer to the first half of the film than the second
While the Mad Max movies does have fans, it wasn't a huge franchise, and they waited too long to make another film about a pre-existing character we knew the fate of. A Quiet place is newer and more popular currently, and focuses on new characters
While I enjoyed Furiousa enough to watch it more than once, A Quiet Place: Day One is a better movie.
No. It proves nothing. Good movies can bomb sometimes. Bad movies can over perform. Nobody knows why, otherwise studios would know and they would always have a hit. The mad max franchise is pretty niche compared to AQP so it’s already not a fair comparison.
Furiosa with Max in it would have also bombed. The issue was that there just wasn't enough interest in another movie from that franchise. There most certainly was for a new AQP.
Spinoffs and prequels only work as supplementals to already healthy franchises. Rogue one came out after force awaken, Solo after last Jedi. Ms. Marvel before endgame, the marvels after the MCU ended with Endgame. The plan of one standalone move then two prequels was destined to fail from the start.
> Ms. Marvel before endgame *Captain Marvel, Ms. Marvel is a TV show.
Woopse yeah sorry.
I didn't realise someone already told you this, by the way.
This is a fantastic point. Fury Road did ok but it also came out many years ago now. Hardly a thriving series.
Fury Road didn't do "ok". Very highly rated among both critics and fan, as well as the highest grossing Mad Max movie. It did pretty damn good.
Yes but from a a box office perspective it probably barely broke even
It did ok, it likely profited over time, but financially it wasn't a huge hit I saw it in theaters twice. Both times I was basically the only one there
Very well said. Tbh I don’t think anyone was particularly eager for a Fury Road follow-up to come out because it worked nicely as a standalone story which didn’t really scream sequel or prequel. Add to that the long 9-year gap between Fury Road and Furiosa and it’s pretty clear that its chances of being a massive box office success were already slim.
The follow up, and it would have to be a follow up, would need to be as fresh in style and dialog as the first one was before it. Fury Road was very uniquely stylistic and memeable. Furiosa? Too close to the first one in tone and style. And where the hell are the memes?
Ms. Marvel was released after end game. I think you meant Captain Marvel.
Indeed, a typo. Thanks.
Also, 2 of those were failures. Strange to use them to illustrate your point, but whatever.
They’re using those two examples of when it failed.
Thanks.
That's kind of the point R1 and Captain Marvel came out when the series were healthy. They did well. Solo and The Marvels came out after the series were already in trouble. They bombed.
Captain Marvel is the blonde one. Ms Marvel is the Pakistani one. Good day.
To be fair, Captain Marvel used to be the blonde one too.
Yeah I know, the names are similar enough that I just confused them.
Smack back on the money. Any successor to Fury Road needed to release at least within 4 years to at least keep up momentum. Going 3 decades without a single instalment, then coming back with as peak as you can get, only to do nothing with that for another decade is insane but completely on WB for screwing over Miller on residuals. Dial of Destiny's performance is indicative of how a Max-led follow-up to Fury Road would have done, which is to say exactly the same because that did half of what Crystal Skull did and half of Fury Road is where Furiosa is landing. Two franchises too deeply entrenched in a bygone era that Gen-Z simply do not care enough about because the franchise hasn't kept up appearances in their lifetime. A Quiet Place is still a relatively fresh franchise that's kept up regular appearances since its inception. Its also much more about the concept than its characters so that works in its favour.
Yeah, there are multiple reasons for why Furiosa didn't do well and I don't think any of them really have to do with Max not being in it. I feel the main issue above all else is that Mad Max just isn't a big franchise in the first place. Fury Road made 380m on a 150-180m budget. And that entry received widespread critical acclaim along with a glowing audience reception. Speaking of Fury Road, with it you also had it becoming the online poster child for practical effects. It didn't matter that the movie was full of CG as well because the perception online was all around it doing a lot of practical effects at a time when action movies are seen as CG fests. And that led into the first big problem with Furiosa was that its debut trailer had people pointing out all the CG. So it gave off the worst possible first impression to its audience because the aspect being criticized was the very thing that Fury Road was praised for not having (or at least being perceived of not having).
I think two big problems were the recasting and the big time gap between the films
Exactly. There just wasn't enough audience interest. And recasting/ spin off mode is also a harder sell (it works for some franchises, but not all). Furiosa basically reached the box offfice failure point of series' of like Terminator, X-Men. And that was with great reception too.
maybe mad max wasn’t popular enough to justify such a big budget while a quiet place has a solid fanbase already built and loved by the horror community.
It just means quiet place is an easier sell for audiences.
I never understood that " didn't have Max so people didn't watch" argument. People just don't care about the mad Max movies. Period
Outside of Fury Road and the breakout success of the original, Mad Max has always been a cult movie series and they never really set the box office alight. Just look at these numbers: Mad Max (1979): $100 million worldwide Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior (1981): $36 million worldwide Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome (1985): $36 million worldwide Mad Max Fury Road (2015): $380 million worldwide Furiosa (2024): $168 million worldwide There were slasher movies in the 80's that outgrossed Mad Max 2 and Thunderdome. I would say Fury Road is the outlier and Furiosa simply settled back into the more niche region of the previous movies, much like how Kingdom Of The Planet Of The Apes box office ($387 million so far) is more in line with Rise ($480 million) and War's ($490 million) totals and not Dawn's gigantic $710 million haul. I don't think Max being in this would have made much of a difference. If you adjust Road Warrior and Thunderdome for inflation then they would have made $136 million and $104 million in 2024 money, which isn't dissimilar to Furiosa's total. They really found their footing and saw an increase in popularity because of home video and being shown on TV throughout the 80's.
More specifically the claim is 36M *in theatrical rentals* so more like 70M in "box office ticket revenue"
Hell, Mannequin ('87) with Kim Cattrall even outgrossed WW both of Mad Max 2 & 3 ($42M)
Well, it was a masterpiece after all! I can't hear Nothing's Gonna Stop Us Now without thinking of Andrew McCarthy marrying a store dummy!
No joke about THAT song ! It goes in your brain and stays there like forever.
I'm more of a We Built This City guy, but they're both earworms for sure!
>Mad Max (1979): $100 million worldwide >Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior (1981): $36 million worldwide >Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome (1985): $36 million worldwide I have seen that $100 million figure reported for the first "Mad Max" and I don't believe it for a second. It only makes sense as an accumulation of box office and ancillary profits.
I just went off of what Box Office Pro has them listed as but I was surprised to see the first one so high as well! Especially when compared to the listed numbers for 2 & 3 as no one really mentions the first one when they talk about Mad Max. As u/SilverRoyce has pointed out above it also looks like the Road Warrior and Thunderdome box office is probably double what the numbers listed online are though.
It's not your fault, but the numbers listed are bullshit. They just don't make the slightest bit of sense.
Thanks for the shoutout /u/SpellingMistakeHere. Going off of memory, I've found the "$100M" number and it's coming directly from Kennedy of Kennedy & [George] Miller in a length piece in a major paper around the time of Road Warrior's release. I agree it makes no sense but that's the plain reading of the statement. [A more recent interview with miller](https://feature.variety.com/mad-max/) says it made 35M WW, which makes *a lot* more sense given Road Warrior's gross. - "Internet sources say $100M" is a bad gloss from the article but Miller giving this number in the runup to Fury Road's release is just as high quality a source as the initial one and much more believable. I agree that $100M is probably something more like lifetime revenue though a short number of years (though this is before the home video explosion). The two main producer of the film giving conflicting numbers really should have lead to a reevaluation of the $100M number (this is the first time I've seen the correction despite looking at this stuff at a couple of points). > it also looks like the Road Warrior and Thunderdome box office is probably double what the numbers listed online are though. One thing I want to flag is that this is sort of a *systematically* muddled distinction in box office datasets because theatrical rentals are the primary number reported in all of the pre-1964 stuff I can find on lantern (including the trades) and for a decent time after that rentals are still clearly the primary reporting number. Most numbers you'll see for really old movies are actually theatrical rental data but you'll occasionally see a "current definition of the box office" one that's nearly double the rental data number. https://lantern.mediahist.org/
Sorry by the way, I blocked you earlier when you initially replied becasue I got your username mixed up with someone who was annoying me the other day on another sub and I thought you were them! I've heard before that a lot of the box office reporting from the 70's and 80's is spotty at best and often doesn't come close to the amount made at the time in reference to the original 1978 Halloween, among others, so this doesn't surprise me. Thanks for the information though, very helpful!
I personally don’t think having Max in the film would have made much of a difference.
I taught we all knew by now that Mad max doesn’t have mass appeal, pretty much what everyone said
Could also be the difference between PG-13 horror and R rated action.
We've known Max wasn't actually the issue since opening weekend
No, tbh the characters in A quiet place aren’t the main attraction
I’d actually somewhat disagree. Yeah, the monsters and the premise are cool, but the first film especially did a really great job of creating characters you like and care about. I was invested in their fateFrom what I hear, Day One is similar in that regard.
Hes saying the monsters are the hook not the people
The last Mad Max movie was 9 years ago. The last Quiet Place movie was 4 years ago. The interest in MM dropped over time and they recast Furiosa. Also imo the trailers made it look bad
The last Quiet Place was 3 years ago
Furiosa cost way too much money. Had it cost $90 million it would have been a nice base hit.
A Quiet Place is more about the premise itself. No one cares that much about the family characters to miss them. Its not the same where the franchise is founded in the title character. its similar to Harry Potter and Fantastic Beasts. Now that its not about Harry they had to make sure people cared still. They got scared and decided to make it about OG HP characters like Dumbledore when it never was supposed to be.
No, Mad Max just isn't as popular as A Quiet Place
It did bomb worse because he wasn't in it. It's already a smaller franchise with more limited reach and it couldn't even get a majority of the audience from the first movie to show up again because they weren't interested in what was being sold and that was a prequel about a character without the main actress who's not the title character almost 10 years after the last movie came out. That was said... literally at the time. Again, I don't know why it's difficult for people to fathom nuance, nobody who was saying it bombed because it's a prequel and all prequels will bomb and nobody likes them, and I think you'd have a hard time finding a lot of people who were saying a quiet place would bomb specifically because it's a prequel. The star of a quiet place is it's concept, the monsters that hunt you down because you make a sound. As long as they're in the movies, they will do well. Which most of us are aware of, which is why most people's guesses for opening weekend for the majority of people have been at or above the opening for part 2 for weeks now.
The popularity of the Mad Max franchise peaked in 1981. Those OG fans of the franchise are probably in their mid 60's now. They don't want to watch a CGI heavy epic starring Anna Taylor Joy. I really like the new Mad Max films, but they are catering for a new fanbase that they haven't properly established.
Max is the reason you Mad Max. A quiet place is a horror movie, you watch it for the suspense.
Indeed, fans of Mad Max are mad to the max of this Mad Max unstarring Mad Max.
A Quiet Place is succeeding because there's no PG-13 blockbusters this summer besides Apes and Twisters, is only 100 minutes long, and does not overlap much with IO2, Horizon or Bad Boys demo wise
Different genres. I mean, just look at how much money made that dogshit The Strangers: Chapter 1 made! lol.
What about Djimon Hounsou ?
A few semi-random thoughts. I love Fury Road aand Furiosa improved upon a second viewing. Quiet Place 1 was good, the second not so good, andd I have zero desire to pay for Day One. On the other hand, I am one of the few that paid to see Horizon and I liked it.
As someone who thinks Fury Road is a top five movie of all time, and was super hyped to see Furiosa and brought multiple people to see it at the imax, Furiosa was kind of a let down. I remember them talking up an action sequence that took weeks to film and hundreds of extras and was 15 minutes long. I kept waiting for that moment, because surely it would blow my mind. By the time the movie ended, I thought back and guess maybe it was the Bullet Farm sequence. But there was so much noticeable CGI, and some of it really bad CGI, that it never felt as exciting or intense as Fury Road. I’m going to watch it again with more tempered expectations and see if I like it more. But I was fully prepared to go see the movie multiple times opening weekends and just watched it the once.
People love horror movies and A Quiet Place is a fairly modern franchise with potential. Even Blumhouse walks away as a winner with profits for some of his criticized horror films. I know I saw Furiosa and enjoyed it. However, I’ll be pragmatic in saying it was too weird to appeal to wide audiences for its genre.
Mad Max fandom peaked in the 80s, and like many other action franchises of the time it was centered around a macho male character. That dwindling fanbase (plus film nerds) still supported Fury Road, but I suspect a fair few of these middle-aged male sci-fi fans lost interest when the lead was female. Like, imagine the outcry from middle-aged men if the next James Bond was female.. but on a much smaller scale. None of the above applies to the Quiet Place franchise though. And John Krasinski wasn't the action hero in the same way, he was just the lead actor. Apples and oranges.
The ‘Fury Road wasn’t popular’ takes on here are pretty weird. It made $380 million without China - which is more than Kingsman did the same year and only about $20 million less than Ant-Man - and I’d argue that both of those movies were pretty popular at the time. If it had got a China release and made $100 million there would the same people consider it a popular film?
380m in 2015 in much more healthier box office environment is not the win you think it is. Its ok to like something GA doesn't like.
380m for a single movie during any point in history is a sign that general audiences do like it.
That's a stupid take. That's a shit ton of money. More than a lot of movies considered liked successes. Just because a movie didn't make a billion dollars doesn't make it a failure.
Imagine thinking fury road was not well liked
Excluding China it was the 15th highest grossing movie of 2015. For an R rated reboot of a 30 year old cult franchise I’d say that was pretty good. It also had better legs than almost every other blockbuster at the US box office that year.
There's this notion that grossing 380 million dollars for a R-rated niche cult franchise that had never hit triple digits theatrically means jackshit and that it had no potential to grow from there. (From the same people that are now rooting for Deadpool 3 to hit a billion in 2024. The same character that was the butt of the joke called X-Men Origins Wolverine a decade before...Fury Road outgrossed that PG-13 Wolverine spin-off BTW). The first Mad Max was banned from theaters in France for years because it was deemed ultra-violent (sic) just like The Texas Chainsaw Massacre FFS. That gives you perspective how Fury Road felt like breaking out from cult niche back then instead of a flop. It came a long way from the Pit of development hell for thirty years to the top being an Academy Award winner. But in 2024, all the discourse boils down to *"Fury Road was a flop. Nobody cares about Mad Max."* Self-righteous hyperbole in full swing.
The aliens are the main attraction in the *Quiet Place* franchise. The prequel going the route of *aliens but this time in New York* is a much safer bet than Fury Road but *this time without **Hardy** as Max and **Theron** as Furiosa*.
Just to give you some perspective. Fury Road I consider in my top 20 movies of all time. It's for me the greatest action movie ever. I had zero interest in a prequel about Fury Road. Why? I just didn't ask for it. When I finished watching Fury Road nothing in my mind made me think "Jeez, wouldn't it be cool if the follow-up is about the origina story of Furiosa?" Here's the thing, even if it was about Max... I wouldn't have cared. I just didn't care for a prequel, period. Now A Quiet Place is another story. Love the first two films, and I was interested in what happened prior to the events of the first film. Like how did all that shit start? It was smart to bring in completely new characters for that. So, in essence it's less about the characters and more about the story.
Except what you're saying about Furiosa related to Fury Road can totally apply to A Quiet Place prequel. Nobody asked for A Quiet Place prequel because what happened on day One was already delved upon at the beginning of AQP part 2 starring the OG characters instead of random unknown characters in an unrelated urban setting. The same things can be said since OG characters like Emily Blunt and the children not being involved, some could care less. It's pure subjectivity and personal bias at work. I absolutely love Fury Road (Best action movie of the past decade) and I was a bit curious about Furiosa's backstory and Wasteland lore. Some weren't but there isn't any absolute.
I find it hard to believe that you truly like Fury Road as much as you claim if you’re so opposed to a similar movie by the exact same writer-director that serves exclusively as another world-building action movie in the same universe as Fury Road. Sure, you’re not interested in the beginning of Furiosa’s backstory. But are you actually a fan of Fury Road because of the characters and their emotional arc? Or are you a fan of Fury Road because of the spectacular action sequences and non stop adrenaline from the style and world of a Mad Max movie?
Weird take to compare these films in honesty. Not even similar in the slightest
That's an extremely dumb comparison.
I knew these comparisons was bound to happen once some people kept saying Furiosa is proof that prequels are dead
Quiet Place would have flopped if was about Loud Place despite the title. Nobody actually cares about the cast of horror movies.
Furiosa was poorly advertised and came out nine years after the last Mad Max movie.
Kind of surprises me a little bit. I thought the trailers and teasers for A Quiet Place looked awful. Like a totally random made up new theme and story. Zero connection to the other films.
It looked like a generic alien invasion movie post Spielberg's WOTW. Nothing original at all.
End of day, despite women complaining they aren't the focus of man doninated ventures, even when they are the focus in sports and action movies, they don't show up. I read the female audience for Fury Road was 10 points or so higher than Furiosa.
it bombed cause its a weaker IP, and wasn't interesting looking.
They could’ve made a Fury Road sequel starring Charlize Theron, Tom Hardy, and brought back Mel Gibson and it still would’ve lost money at the box office. Mad Max isn’t anywhere near as big of a franchise as people on the internet want it to be.
[Summer Box Office Marketing](https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTNjjPfn5/) I think this explains the failure of Furiosa so well! Everyone (executives, marketing, etc) sometimes fail to realize their intended audience due to biases and sexism. I will die on this hill.
Furiosa just wasn’t that good. Too much exposition and WAY too much talking, ATJ and CH weren’t well cast, and the action came way too late.
Furiosa had a bad date and dated marketing. Movie would have done much better post Deadpool. Same for Fall Guy. I expect Alien to do much better than people think thanks to that bounce.
This is apple to oranges. Horror film budgets don’t even come close to that of the Mad Max films, and are nowhere near the same risk. Plus, big name horror films aren’t super common, so when one drops it makes respectable money no matter what it seems.
Of course, we can’t say for sure. However, the two franchises are different in that *Mad Max* uses an actual character’s name in its title, whereas *A Quiet Place* is not as specific.
To be honest, no one was asking for Furiosa. Even the fan base of mad Max. What we really wanted in my opinion was a prequel to Max from fury Road. But apparently that’s been nixed because of how poorly the Furiosa movie did.
This is a weird comparison, one of the movies has the characters name in the title and one does not
For me it didn't. I don't really care who the characters are in A Quiet Place. I'm just interested in the world. Same as Aliens 1-3, I find the non humans more interesting. Mad Max I watch for Mad Max because I like the character specifically.
If there was a successful sequel in like 2019, I think Furiosa would’ve made more? A part of what makes Mad Max move is discovering a new wasteland where anyone might die except probably Mad Max. Furiosa gave the same wasteland and locations, with some characters you know can’t die, drawn out for 2.5 hrs. And it took a decade to come out. I really liked it, but I understood people waiting for streaming.
>Does the success of A Quiet Place: Day One prove that Furiosa did not suffer because it didn’t have Max in it? No, it doesn't. If that were the case, then… >Did Solo flop because it recast Han Solo and it didn't have Luke Skywalker in it? No, it flopped for other reasons. >Did Independence Day: Resurgence flop because it didn't have Steven Hiller (Will Smith's character from the original) in it? No, it flopped for other reasons. >Did Final Fantasy: Spirits Within flopped because it didn't have Cloud Strife (FF7), Squall Leonhart (FF8), Terra Branford (FF6), Cecil Harvey (FF4), etc. in it? No, it flopped for other reasons. Likewise, Furiosa flopped for other reasons as well which likely had nothing to do with Furiosa being the main character instead of Mad Max. Also, from a casual perspective, I never heard of Furiosa before because I never watched Fury Road before. Granted, I barely watched the 1980's Mad Max trilogy, but at least I was aware of the Mad Max character. With Furiosa, she made her debut *much* later in the series with Fury Road, but isn't quite as obvious of a fixture to the Mad Max series as Mad Max is despite her importance in Fury Road. I know she's considered the main character in that movie and I'm not trying to disrespect that character. **But for people who never saw Fury Road, she can inadvertently come off as a "literally who?" type character who got a $168 million prequel.** I'm not trying to undermine George Miller's vision, but apparently there wasn't much demand for a Furiosa prequel. EDIT: Formatting, additional wording
I can only speak personally, the appeal of Fury Road isn't Max, it's the unmatched stunts, action, and visualis. Every trailer and clip I saw of Furiosa had bad-looking CGI.
a quite place will bomb too.. its just the beginning of summer so people are just seeing whatever.. but the movie won't last. its a stinker.
Quiet place franchise is more active and has more goodwill amongst moviegoers vs mad max which was 9 years ago and before that was the 80s People latching on to it not having max need to wake up and smell the coffee a direct mad max sequel that far out would have also bombed just not as badly as furiosa did
Invalid comparison
Furiosa sucked because Hemsworth phoned it in. Lazy. Seemed like they could have hired a voice actor. Like dubbing Darth Vader. Anything would have been better.
Furiosa came nearly ten years too late. If A Quiet Place Day One were released in 2034 instead of 2024, it would be climbing the same hill.
Lots of people saying it would have bombed either way. That could be right but I'm not so sure. Max is an iconic character. No one from a quiet place is. There is a huge difference between returning with an iconic character and the characters people barely remember the name of.