***KotPotA*** vs ***Furiosa***
Both post-apocalyptic movies featuring a female lead that barely speaks much,
both being part of an IP that originated in the previous century,
both movies missing the main character from the previous installment,
both similarly coming after a hiatus of 7 and 9 years respectively,
both having similar 150 minute runtimes,
both movies being certified fresh on RT,
the only difference being R vs PG-13 and spin-off prequel vs standalone sequel.
**Yet one is still in the top five in its seventh weekend while another out of the top ten in its fifth weekend.**
by HumanAdhesiveness912
29 Comments
Because **Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga** is:
1. A prequel to a film that underperformed at the box office.
2. Very, Very, VERY disturbing at times – even more so than its predecessor.
3. Divided into 5 chapters with their own runtimes and 3-acts structures.
Simple. The former succeeded because it was the start of a new trilogy that people were intrigued to see more from a franchise of while the latter is from a niche franchise and a prequel no one asked for.
Hence why Furiosa bombed while Apes succeeded.
Maybe because Apes is a more successful franchise?
One is for the general audience and one is for cinephiles who overestimated its appeal/interest level.
Planet of the Apes has always been a more successful and mainstream franchise than Mad Max. The Burton film actually almost broke the opening weekend record at the time
Those comparisons are kinda stretching it tbh.
The lowest grossing *Apes* film in the trilogy (*Rise*) made $470 million worldwide. That already shows a huge amount of interest in the franchise.
*Fury Road* made $380 million. And I’m pretty sure nearly everyone who liked the film came out hoping to see another adventure with Max. So *Furiosa*, while fantastic, just felt like moving a step back instead of going forward. A sequel should’ve also come out like 4 years later at most, but Miller’s lawsuit stalled it.
The former is more established and has been more active than the latter. It also might help that Apes isn’t associated with any particular lead character or actor unlike Mad Max.
Furiosa is a prequel to a movie which is a part of a series with little commercial appeal, no matter how influential it was / is.
Apes is a sequel to a trilogy with proven commercial appeal.
Everything else, and in particular the oft-repeated “nobody asked for X”, is just unnecessary guesswork.
furiosa is r rated in america right ?
its rated 14 where i live, same rating as the deadpool movies and joker.
Simple. One movie has monkeys while the other doesn’t. It’s all about the monkeys.
Apes > Humans
I’m trying to understand the comparison. Completely different franchises.
Because Apes is a bigger franchise with a lot more success and recognition
theres 10 apes movies and 5 mad max movies. One series is certainly more well known and has had way more success at the box office. The best comp is how Fury Road couldnt even pass 400M while the modern Apes movies mostly did (at least the 2010s trilogy did).
These similarities mean absolutely nothing.
It’s like saying why do some movies with humans succeed while other fail?
Apes together strong
The answer kind of lies in their roots!
The first Mad Max film is more akin to The Evil Dead — a low budget, down and dirty genre flick made by young filmmakers. Similarly, The Road Warrior continued in that spirit in much the same way that Evil Dead II did.
The Mad Max films were never box office juggernauts — they were always a bit too weird, a bit too leather-y, etc.
Furiosa has basically regressed back to roughly where the original franchise was for Road Warrior and Thunderdome. Fury Road is the one performed out of the ordinary.
Planet of the Apes, however, started as a big budget Heston sci fi vehicle co-created by Rod Serling — and it was the sixth highest grossing film of 1968. The franchise was always pretty popular.
Even the much maligned Tim Burton adaptation grossed 180M DOM in 2001 — which comes out to about 342.8M when adjusted for inflation.
Apes together… strong
More people wanted to watch it.
More seriously, Apes has kept audience interest up for a very, very long time now. Fury Road compared to the modern Apes trilogy… not exactly the same in terms of engaging the audience. Furiosa is also rated R and that hurts movies. This perception that it would be a smash hit is skewed by interest for it in the sorts of people that nerd out over movies online to begin with, there’s way more people walking up to Apes who don’t post about it.
The fact that Mad Max has been around a long time does not make it the same as Apes. You aren’t asking me why Furiosa didn’t do as well as The Force Awakens, which had a *longer* gap since the last main Star Wars movie previous to it. Star Wars has been around a long time too, but it just attracted mainstream audience interest that hasn’t been there for Mad Max. Maybe there’s people that like it a little, but in an age where most people not on box office subreddits only watch a few movies a year, they’re prioritizing and it appears Furiosa isn’t making the grade.
The woman who barely speaks is not entertaining. Kingdom female protagonist wasn’t the focus of the story, she was surrounded by far more entertaining characters like Proximus, Noa, and Raka.
Also movies with family themes are more relatable to mainstream audiences and play strongly in certain markets. Just see how IO and Coco perform in Latinamerica. Going to movies with your family is still a thing there and it’s easier to do that with a movie like Kingdom than with Dune and Furiosa.
Apes is a stronger franchise.
What similarities? Apes is a hit franchise
They don’t have similarities.
Furiosa is a prequel to a box office flop (Fury Road) in a franchise that is commerically unpopular.
Kingdom is a sequel to a box office hit in a popular and commercially successful franchise.
Furiosa has a female action lead without a strong or well-known male co-lead. These types of films usually fail at the box office. The most successful female action led films have historically had strong or recognizable male co-leads.
Kingdom had an animated male lead and female co-lead.
Furiosa is an R rated film that was released on a 4 day holiday weekend opposite a G rated animated family film that still is charting weekly.
Kingdom had a standard wide release and is PG-13.
The way this sub has misunderstood Furiosa is a disgrace. This is not the sub you should be part of if you don’t understand market demographics, film positioning, and so on.
People like apes. That’s why Godzilla x Kong did better than the solo Godzilla movie. There should’ve been a chimp in Furiosa.
Because people on this subreddit don’t go to the theater. Y’all need to ask yourselves that. Y’all pray on the downfall of every film that comes out. This subreddit is becoming toxic
Well with the Ape films, there wasn’t a massive gap between two films.
You are reaching farther than MJ’s buzzer beater in Space Jam
Also a fun fact, both filmed in New South Wales, AustraliaÂ
Because the stars and always have been the Apes in POA. Heston was a big part of the original, sure, but the effects soon took center stage and have stayed there.
If a POA film has utterly terrible effects, it will fail to deliver what people expect.
Because Apes Strong Together