Why Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga Bombed At The Box Office

The long-awaited follow-up to George Miller's 2015 masterpiece, "Mad Max: Fury Road," the 2024 action spectacle "Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga" takes the story back in time to unpack the early days of Charlize Theron's Imperator Furiosa. Emerging star Anya Taylor-Joy supplants Theron in the title role, while the MCU's Thor, Chris Hemsworth, steps behind the goggles of a wasteland warlord named Dementus.

Following from the unexpected blockbuster success of "Fury Road," hopes surely were high that "Furiosa" would replicate its predecessor's nearly $400 million in ticket sales or even surpass it. Miller was back behind the camera, the action looked as good as ever, and it seemed like things were headed in the right direction for the franchise, but the film's opening weekend put a serious damper on all the excitement.

Across the movie's first three days of release, "Furiosa" could only cobble together about $25 million, earning just $32 million for the full Memorial Day weekend. That's the same weekend that earned "Top Gun: Maverick" a whopping $126 million just two years ago, and Disney's 2023 "Little Mermaid" live-action remake an impressive $95 million. So what happened? What led one of the most highly-anticipated movies of 2024 to bomb so hard?

It's certainly no secret that Hollywood is facing an existential crisis of sorts in 2024, four years after the COVID-19 pandemic forced the closure of cinemas around the world. True, ticket sales have rebounded from the first re-openings in 2021, with last year bringing in more than quadruple the anemic amounts collected in 2020. Yet, the roughly $34 billion earned across all markets in 2023 was still a steep drop from the nearly $43 billion that the industry amassed worldwide in 2019 before the pandemic. And 2024 isn't off to a good start.

Prior to "Furiosa" landing like a ton of bricks in late May, "The Fall Guy" – the Ryan Gosling-starring remake of the '80s TV series — was a huge dud. Overall, ticket sales aren't looking good for 2024 whether it's an established franchise or a high-profile film with a major star attached. The reality is, the moviegoing experience may simply never be what it once was. Or if it does ever return to pre-COVID levels, it could be a while as the industry adapts to myriad changes that have thrown everyone for a loop. 

For example, it doesn't help that audiences now prefer to wait and watch a movie via streaming, knowing they won't have to wait long following its theatrical release. Whether it's the increasing number of in-home streaming options, reluctance to go to a packed theater, or just a sluggish economy that puts a stranglehold on people's entertainment budget, the biggest barrier for "Furiosa" might be the poor performance of theaters in general.

Prequel movies have a long history in Hollywood, but the past 25 years have made them polarizing: With the release of the "Star Wars" prequels they became an especially touchy subject, especially for fans of science fiction. While some franchises — like "Star Trek," "Psycho," and even "The Big Bang Theory" – have produced some of the best prequels on television, making a big budget backstory for a popular sci-fi movie series has proven to be a bit more difficult.

A prequel to "Mad Max: Fury Road" may have also faced bigger uphill challenges than most. For starters, the series is arguably devoid of any serious continuity — at least, not the kind that stands up to serious scrunity. "Furiosa" even acknowledges this, suggesting that every story in the saga is merely a half-remembered folk tale of sorts. Nevertheless, audiences can't be blamed for being less interested in Furiosa's origins than eager to see where Furiosa went next after "Fury Road." That film left a tantalizing door open, with Furiosa taking control of the massive Citadel once ruled by the tyrannical Immortan Joe. 

Director and series creator George Miller has promised a more direct follow-up that might very well show us Furiosa in charge of the Citadel, but the focus on her backstory probably wasn't exactly what audiences wanted to see next.

Despite the outpouring of love for the character of Furiosa after "Mad Max: Fury Road" — including from those who saw the movie's empowering feminist message — the fact that the movie was a spin-of with no connection to the title character could be hurting the film's box office tallies. Sure, Max himself does make a brief appearance, but it's more of an Easter egg, simply acknowledging that the character is out there, rather than any kind of actual supporting role. 

Admittedly, Max wasn't always the center of the story in past films in the series, with even the original Mel Gibson-starring films not really focusing as much on the eponymous Max as you might remember. But gripes about a lack of Mad Max in a "Mad Max" film reached a fever pitch in 2015 when "Fury Road" hit theaters, as many complained that it was barely about Max at all. Some even argued that "Fury Road" was already a Furiosa movie in everything but name, upset that the series had put another character into the spotlight. 

Flash forward to 2024, and instead of a sequel, fans got a spin-off, with Max appearing in only a token cameo. Veering so far from the character of Max for an actual "Furiosa" spin-off may have been the final straw for many fans, who are less interested in the adventures of someone else.

It's certainly accepted by most moviegoers that when a blockbuster film rakes in hundreds of millions of dollars, it's probably going to get a sequel in short order. So when the R-rated "Mad Max: Fury Road" ended its run just shy of $400 million, many probably expected a sequel to follow quickly, especially when Tom Hardy teased as many as three sequels not long after the 2015 movie was released. Unfortunately, numerous delays — the biggest caused by COVID-19 in 2020 and Hollywood work stoppages in 2023 — meant it was almost 10 years before a new "Mad Max" saga hit cinemas.

Though waiting can sometimes be good for building anticipation, the lengthy time between "Fury Road" and "Furiosa" wasn't quite long enough to garner pent-up excitement and may actually have been too long to maintain such fervent fan enthusiasm. After all, "Mad Max" isn't exactly Marvel, "Star Wars," or "The Fast and the Furious," and it's possible that only the franchise's biggest fans were lured back to theaters. Wider audiences who got hooked on "Fury Road" may simply have lost interest over time, and without Tom Hardy or Charlize Theron, it may have just felt like a knockoff — a wanna-be sequel that was too far removed from the previous movie to be worth making the trek to theaters for.

Even if we accept that an origin story set in the past wasn't the best option for a new "Mad Max" movie (and that's certainly up for a healthy debate), the jump backwards in time — combined with the nearly decade-long gap between the films — forced what is arguably the movie's biggest flaw: The lack of Academy Award winner Charlize Theron. The prequel nature of the story, combined with Theron now being almost in her 50s, meant that "Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga" had to ditch the very thing that made the character so memorable in "Mad Max: Fury Road."

While Theron's successor, Anya Taylor-Joy, does a solid job of replacing the "Fury Road" star, it was Theron who established the role and it was she who audiences were clamoring to see in a "Furiosa" spin-off. Her scene-stealing turn as the character established her as a bona fide action hero and even those who wanted more of Tom Hardy as Mad Max had to admit she was a dominant force to be reckoned with.

In 2015, in fact, reviews from outlets like The Verge named Theron as "one of the biggest reasons" to see "Fury Road," and without her, mass audiences and diehard fans alike may have been skeptical enough to sit it out. Hopefully, rave reviews from both audiences and critics will be able to convince fence-sitters that "Furiosa" is worth a trip to the cinema and the price of admission, which could help give the film legs.

Any other movie with such glowing reviews, labeled as similarly ambitious and impressive as the previous movie in its series, would probably be sending scores of fans to the theater. Nevertheless, "Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga" is leaving many sitting on the couch despite a solid release date and lack of competition. And that could have a lot to do with its predecessor, "Mad Max: Fury Road," and the overwhelming positive reception it received — and still holds — to this day. 

Seen now as one of the most flawless movies ever made, "Fury Road" was an instant classic that transcended both the science fiction and action genres. It was an elevation of both, and a cinematic achievement that few had predicted, even with director George Miller's past track record. As a result, "Furiosa" was always going to be released in the face of lofty expectations that it was unlikely to ever meet, both critically and financially. After all, "Fury Road" was something of a surprise smash hit, being a legacy sequel to a mostly-forgotten franchise (at least to mass audiences) that didn't even bring back its main star.

But after "Fury Road" became a barnburner, enjoying even more love than it was probably expecting, studios and analysts might have been overly bullish on "Furiosa." The movie landscape is very different nine years later, and the odds that Miller could match or exceed "Fury Road" were slim. It might have been wiser to keep expectations a bit more modest.

We'll concede that the prequel nature of "Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga" made the recasting of Charlize Theron a good decision — better than digitially de-aging the original star, a method that all too often misses the mark. But without Theron, and without Tom Hardy, the film loses both of the previous movie's stars and there's no sure-fire, bankable Hollywood name to carry the story in their place.

Director George Miller tries to compensate for the lack of star power by casting Aussie original and "Avengers" star Chris Hemsworth as the movie's villain, the wasteland warlord Dementus. But the reality is, Hemsworth has never really been a huge box office draw outside of the MCU, while Theron's replacement — Anya Taylor-Joy — has largely had success in smaller, more intimate dramas, and mostly on TV and streaming, like her head-turning role in Netflix's "The Queen's Gambit." While she did voice Princess Peach in "The Super Mario Bros. Movie," her only major live-action film roles have been small or supporting parts, such as in "The Menu," "The Northman," and the much-maligned "New Mutants."

Her role as a young Furiosa, meanwhile, is the first time she's getting the chance to lead a major, big budget film. Sadly, if the studio was hoping that the movie would be a good a test of her action hero aspirations, she may not get a passing grade if they're only looking at dollars and cents.

Without the franchise's two biggest and most recent stars, a nearly decade-long wait, and a weaker box office landscape, "Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga" was facing plenty of challenges before it even went before cameras. Industry insiders knew it, too, with Shawn Robbin of Box Office Theory telling Variety that "prequels with recast characters are tough sells to casual audiences" and that the movie's failure only reaffirmed that belief.

With all of those factors considered, the studio may have been wiser — despite the previous success of "Fury Road" — to keep the budget relatively modest to ensure a big hit. That, unfortunately, was not the case, and the film's expenditure ballooned to nearly $170 million. While that's not too far off from what was spent on the previous movie, and inflation actually makes the number a bit lower by comparison, it's still a heck of a lot of money. That amount means "Furiosa" will likely need more than $350 million globally just to break even ... a total that feels increasingly unlikely as the days pass.

Of course, had the budget been lower — even, say, $125 million — "Furiosa" may have been seen as more of a potential hit even with its current tally.

"Mad Max" movies have never fully relied on hefty star power, and have been sold more on the strength of their breathtaking action, intricate world-building, and gritty stories. "Fury Road" was a visual onslaught, a balls-to-the-wall, nonstop thrill ride that captivated even the most skeptical critics. So why didn't "Furiosa: A Mad Max Story" land with a massive box office haul as many might have expected? 

We could blame the marketing. Trailers for the film didn't do enough in our eyes to set it apart from "Fury Road." With none of the same stars but several of the same characters, some fans watching the pre-release hype might not have been sold, especially as the early footage made it seem like the same rollercoaster ride as the previous entry. But critics and audiences — even the ones giving it glowing reviews — have remarked that it's not nearly as action-packed, being a somewhat slower, more dramatic story than the fast-paced "Fury Road." That may have led to some early disappointment, or at least a sense for some fans that it wasn't a must-watch in theaters.

More broadly, though, the excitement surrounding "Furiosa" seemed almost dim by comparison to the last movie. The buzz was through the roof in 2015, especially as a rare R-rated blockbuster, but in the years since, acclaimed adult genre movies have upped their game, with the likes of "Deadpool" and "Joker" making it harder for "Furiosa" to stand out.

The term "blockbuster fatigue" has been thrown around for decades, but lately, the notion that audiences are growing weary of over-the-top, big-budget action movies has become difficult to ignore. Sure, there have always been flops and box office bombs, but the kinds of movies that were once sure-fire bets for big opening weekends are now landing softly, and are sometimes downright duds, like "The Marvels," "Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny," and "The Flash," which all struggled upon their release.

Some might chalk this up to those movies getting only modest reviews, but even "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3" had issues; Despite the excitement of director James Gunn returning to the director's chair after a controversial firing — combined with strong reviews — the threequel couldn't come close to matching the opening weekend totals of "Vol. 2." For our money, that might be the strongest evidence from 2023 that theaters are simply finding it difficult to attract audiences to even the biggest movies.

With all of this in mind, the disappointment of "Furiosa," especially in comparison to its predecessor, "Fury Road," begins to make a bit more sense. It's possible that — as many fear — moviegoers are just not as excited about these kinds of movies as they were in the past.

When "Mad Max: Fury Road" arrived in 2015, earning an impressive $380 million at the worldwide box office — almost unheard of for an R-rated movie at the time — it's easy to think it would have led to a string of sequels. Director George Miller was all too happy to discuss that possibility, too, and within a few years he was tossing out tentative plans for spin-offs and sequels that seemed poised to keep the franchise alive for years to come. 

But thanks to a nine-year wait and the lackluster opening weekend for "Furiosa," it's fair to wonder whether those plans will ever come to fruition. Miller has talked about wanting to do a direct sequel to "Fury Road," tentatively titled "Mad Max: The Wasteland," which was said to already be in pre-production when "Furiosa" was being filmed. Meanwhile, a follow-up to "Furiosa" — a second prequel that continues the story of her early days — has also been teased by Miller. 

Even if a direct "Fury Road" follow-up were to happen with its original cast, the studio may be hesitant to return to the well at all if "Furiosa" doesn't fix its sagging box office totals. It's possible that good word of mouth could help propel "Furiosa" to become a hit over time. Big numbers on Blu-ray and heavy watch totals on streaming could also do a lot to boost the film. But at this point, unless something changes, the "Mad Max" franchise may be driving over a precipice.