Furiosa Is a Glorious Apocalyptic Epic From Mad Max Director George Miller
More philosophical and more Shakespearean than Fury Road, it's another ambitious action extravaganza.

The last time filmmaker George Miller dipped into the Mad Max universe, in 2015, he gave us Fury Road, a roaring, rumbling, rowdy epic of vehicular mayhem that wasn't just the best action movie of the 2010s but the best movie of that decade, period.
Yes, there are other contenders, but no other picture released during that span matched Fury Road's combination of ambition, originality, exuberance, and thematic heft. There was a silent-film purity to its story, which was essentially just a chase scene extended and elaborated to feature length. And there was a frantic intensity to its cascading setpieces: The non-stop action sequences and stuntwork seemed almost impossible, even as you watched them on screen, prompting other filmmakers to wonder just how the hell it was made. Two years after the movie came out, Steven Soderbergh looked back on the film with awe: "I don't understand how [George Miller] does that," he told The Playlist. "I really don't, and it's my job to understand it. I don't understand two things: I don't understand how they're not still shooting that film and I don't understand how hundreds of people aren't dead." George Miller, who was 70 when the movie came out, was obviously insane, and so was Fury Road.
If nothing else, it was the only movie of that decade—or any, for that matter—to prominently feature a blind guy suspended by wires from a speaker-packed semi-truck playing a guitar that was also a flamethrower. The guitar guy wasn't just an exercise in post-apocalyptic absurdity, either: In an interview with The New Yorker, Miller said he knew the character's entire backstory, how he ended up in his bizarre situation, and watching the movie you can sense this level of world-building in every maniac frame. There was a strange coherence to the movie's madness, a depth of detail that few films could ever match.
Nearly a decade later, Miller, now 79, is back with Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga. It's a direct prequel to Fury Road, built around the childhood backstory of the prior film's pivotal character, Imperator Furiosa. Miller's latest is nearly as ambitious as Fury Road, and if anything, the world-building is denser and richer, delving into the governance and social structures of the franchise's brutal Wasteland. But it works at a different pitch than its predecessor. The action, although still formidable, is less relentless, the narrative more sprawling and more operatic. It's more philosophical, more Shakespearean, at least in the sense that a movie featuring a 15-minute sequence in which a biker gang tries to overtake a semi-truck using makeshift hang-gliders can be Shakespearean. Even at its most feverish, Furiosa is a somber reflection on what has to happen to end up with a movie like Fury Road.
When we first meet young Furiosa, she's in the Green Place, a utopian society hidden from the hazards of the dusty wastes that surround it. But she's kidnapped and taken to a raider encampment led by Dementus (Chris Hemsworth), a boastful, voluble warlord who presides over several gangs of fractious unruly bikers. As Dementus, Hemsworth is a hoot, a preening, prideful, post-apocalyptic politician who aspires to vast power but can barely keep order amongst his thugs. He's a clever twist on the warlord characters the franchise has conjured up for decades, a reminder that power born of violence is often weak. Dementus also has a sentimental side, as evidenced by the teddy bear he keeps strapped to his cape, so it's no surprise that he keeps young Furiosa as a sort of daughter, sort of pet, locked up in a cage along with his dogs and his soothsayer, History Man.
History Man is just one of the movie's many, many weird and whimsical characters, along with wasteland freaks like Pissboy, the Octoboss, and the Organic Mechanic, plus some returning bizarros like Immortan Joe and Rictus Erectus. Most of these characters are repulsive in some way, but as with Guitar Guy, Miller treats them as fully formed characters. They're disgusting, horrible, creatures, barely-human products of a turgid environment but they all have a reason for being—even if it's just, as in Pissboy's case, to pour urine on burning vehicles. Don't ask me to explain. Part of the movie's genius, and Miller's, is that all of this makes perfect sense in context.
The context, in this case, is a land ravaged by violence and greed. Like Miller's seminal Mad Max movie, 1982's The Road Warrior, Furiosa explains the apocalypse with brief montage depicting a kind of mega-crisis, in which the civilized world we know is felled by multiple catastrophes: political dysfunction, nuclear war, environmental despoilation, and so on. It doesn't matter what happened, really, so long as you understand that humans wrecked the beautiful, abundant earth.
Humans—but mostly men. As with Fury Road, there's a distinctive feminist undertone to Furiosa. The leaders of the three fortresses that serve as the Wasteland's system of authoritarian governance are all cruel men who surround themselves with other cruel men eager to escalate their brutality. If you think modern boys and men are struggling now, just wait until the apocalypse.
The peaceful Green Place where the movie's heroine grows up is, among other things, a place where women are safe from male predation. After Furiosa is taken, she's traded amongst warlords, and only achieves a measure of independence by shaving her head and pretending to be a boy. The Wasteland's brutal vision of gender relations makes today's dating apps look positively benign.
But Furiosa isn't so much a gender theory seminar as it is a glorious, vengeful epic of hope and hate, sorrow and anger, revenge and revitalization, anger and acceptance, told as only George Miller can. It might lack the raw force of Fury Road—it probably won't be the movie of the decade—but it's imbued with a profound and pensive sense of poetry.
One of the first lines of dialogue in the film is a question, posed to the audience: "As the world falls around us, how must we bear its cruelties?" Perhaps, like Furiosa, you seek long-delayed revenge against the man who destroyed your enviable and innocent childhood. Or perhaps you pick up a guitar that is also a flamethrower. For those of us still thankfully living in a pre-apocalyptic world, well, you can just sit back and thank the stars that a brilliant old man like George Miller is, somehow, still making Mad Max movies.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
"Put a chick in it and make her Gay! And I want it lame!"
Right?
Yeah, apparently not done with the “bait and switch” or “betrayal woke” tactic, where we make one season or one movie or even just the preview exceedingly normal or lore-faithful or true-to-form and then, while coasting on the success/good will, utterly shit on it.
When the original Furiosa movie came out, there was a lot of “They’re replacing Mad Max!” in response. It was met with “No, we’re not replacing him. He’s still in it and, look, we’re still pancaking burning monster trucks left and right.” Now, here we are… nevermind that Tom Hardy was the protagonist people came to see and Nicholas Hoult was the protagonist everyone was quoting for the next month. We’re getting a Shakespearean(? Mad Max, really?) sequel based on the character that no one remembers for anything except… uh… driving and… uh… having a mechanical arm.
It’s the same B.S. as the Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire movie where a mix of memberberries, tribute, and nostalgia carried the first film and now, because they’re pathological and can’t stop themselves, the producers have to make a Ghostbusters movie about an… uh… autistic teen girl who strikes up a totally-not-lesbian relationship with a ghost because her parents rightfully told her “No.” shitfest.
uh… autistic teen girl who strikes up a totally-not-lesbian relationship with a ghost because her parents rightfully told her “No.” shitfest.
I don't watch many movies made after 2015 because I find most terrible... but... are you serious?
totally-not-lesbian
I don't agree with their overall review (they liked it better than Afterlife). But Red Letter Media in their review uses the term "Passive-Progressive" @15:31 to describe the relationship... right after they get done discussing how anachronistic and awkward it is.
Will this be received like the girl Ghostbusters flick and when the US womens national soccer team lost to a team of under-15 boys?
Yeah, I liked this whole thing better when it was just limited to people like Stephen King, Tom Clancy, and John Grisham churning out endless piles of shit.
Now that everbody’s got a camera and the production and promotional costs include all sorts of California-based union and eco-regulatory inflation, it’s just getting utterly detestable that these guys get to shrug and say “Well, why not?” when the churn this crap out.
I heard Mitchell McDeere is rising from the ashes ...
Truck and motorcycles bumping along at ten mph pretending its a hundred. Yay.
Please spare me. Mad Max retreads are worse than Star Wars retreads. And the best movie of that decade did start with the word "Fury", but there was no "Road" after that.
Regarding "Fury" – Everything involving the tank, and the tank platoon maneuvering and fighting was excellent. If the characters and overall story had been better, that would have been a truly great movie.
Agreed, especially Jon Bernthal’s overacted, half-assed Barnes/Platoon character.
Shia LaBeouf was surprisingly good in it.
If they had stripped out the running to the Green Place bullshit and centered the conflict on the three towns themselves and breaking their hold on the surrounding area, it would have been great instead of merely good..
Is it?
Because, honestly, from the trailers - and the pic for this very article - it looks cheap and ridiculous.
So you're not impressed/intimidated by the 85 pound woman with the shaved head?
She might report me to HR or sic the legal system on me for no valid reason but otherwise, no
Yeah, but she's got quicks. Lookout!
>a reminder that power born of violence is often weak
Hahahahahahahaha!
Tell that to Khan, Hitler, Mao, any of the cartel or African warlords. Hoo boy.
>>wasn't just the best action movie of the 2010s but the best movie of that decade, period
is this true?
Better movies from that decade off the top of my head:
Fury (as noted above)
Apollo 11 (a documentary seen by no one, but great nonetheless)
Darkest Hour
Operation Finale (Capturing Eichman)
Lone survivor
American sniper
Are all those great movies - no, but they're better than the Mad Max reboot.
gracias. Fury is still spellbinding several times through
edit: that fucking tank game in the middle of the field ...
Yup, that scene was very well done.
Are all those great movies – no, but they’re better than the Mad Max reboot.
I don't see any dimension by which Rogue One didn't utterly pave over Fury Road in less than a year.
oh ya ... loved Rogue One ... Vader on the Rebel ship at the end is worth the whole thing
The movies you listed are good but are they action movies?
Suderman said:
"wasn't just the best action movie of the 2010s but the best movie of that decade, period."
"...all of this makes perfect sense in context." Er, no... it doesn't.
I'm not going to go into the "Put a chick in it and make her gay and make it lame" aspect of the movie. I'll just say I'm not going to watch it, like all the other shit that falls into that category.
What I will say is that it doesn't make sense to hoon around in hotted-up vehicles in a post-apocalyptic world that has either no gasoline or, at least, very limited quantities of it. The most popular Mad Max films are also the ones that make the least amount of sense. They were made to appeal to what we here in Australia call Petrolheads - people (mostly men) who love motor racing and want to see movies extolling the glories of it. They don't care if the plot doesn't make any sense - just look at the success of the Fast & Furious franchise if you want evidence.
The only Mad Max films that actually made sense were the original, which was about bikie gangs terrorizing rural communities (a common fear in the 70's), and Beyond Thunderdome, which was about people struggling to rebuild society after the apocalypse.
Beyond Thunderdome didn't address what would be a real issue - access to water - but, it did show a lot of other issues that would confront that kind of society. The depictions of power struggles, frontier justice and the use of barter all made a lot of sense in that context. Unlike The Road Warrior, whose theme seemed to be: We're running out of gasoline so, let's all race around the desert in hotted-up vehicles as much as we can!
Unfortunately, vapid action movies that involve a lot of racing make more money than grim post-apocalyptic films that deal with real issues involved in human interactions. So, we'll be stuck with plotless, pointless petrolhead movies for the foreseeable future - or, at least, until Hollywood goes broke from making too many shitty woke products that nobody wants.
The original Mad Max movie was the first R rated movie I was able to see at age 14 or so. Will always be my favorite. Road Warrior was Ok. The rest, nope just expensive noise.
I just don't get the whole obsession with post apocalyptic movies in general. What is the allure? They're like zombie movies or pandemic movies. No hope, just the slow desperate crawl toward further doom and gloom. Why would you want to survive in that kind of world? I can see if you're trying to stay alive for a family or community that is worth saving but why keep going as a lone person? What's the motivation?