Not near as outstanding as it is just plain solid, ‘Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga’ suffers the not entirely uncommon bad beat of sequels in the past – what came before it was SO damn good, to try and top it is a near impossible task.
Here’s what I do know after seeing ‘Furiosa’…the Wasteland is always the perfect place to visit for a roaring action fix AND you just can’t go wrong with George Miller at the helm. I mean, c’mon…this is a Mad Max movie that, save for a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it cameo, doesn’t even HAVE Mad Max in it, yet it’s still relatively satisfying. That takes some serious edge, and no doubt about it, Miller, even approaching the age of 80, is one of the sharpest there is.
So how DOES ‘Furiosa’ stack up against 2015′ ‘Fury Road’. Sadly, it suffers in comparison. But it’s a lot like doing a taste test between an expensive porterhouse and a happy hour steak sandwich – of course one’s better, but if you’re hungry, hey……meat’s meat, fella.
Miller’s follow-up prequel dives into the backstory of the titular character, portrayed in ‘Fury Road’ by Charlize Theron, this time around played (primarily) by Anya Taylor-Joy. The story begins with Furiosa’s childhood in the Green Place, a little piece of foliage and peaceful paradise, hidden far away from an otherwise apocalpytic landscape of dirt, drought and violence. Very early on in the movie, Furiosa is captured by a band of sinister bikers, led by Dementus (Chris Hemsworth). The goal of the antagonists is to have Furiosa lead them to the land of plenty, but give the kid credit, she refuses to budge. For decades.
Those who loved the never-ending action mayhem in ‘Fury Road’ will likely be disappointed that Miller spends a lot more time building the story in ‘Furiosa’ than revving the engines; it’s fascinating how we, the audience, finally get to explore the supply chain that runs from Bullet Farm, Gas Town and the Citadel….unless you’re the part of the audience that came ONLY to see pasty goons jumping on and off runaway tanker trucks and driving over landmines. If that’s the case, then yes…I can understand how frantic wins. It’s a pretty hefty sit too, at 148 minutes. Longer doesn’t equal better – but as far as sequels go, you could do far worse than this.