Mad Max: Fury Road

Well to be fair, what is Fallout but a Mad Max fanfiction gone out of control?

It's a Wasteland fanfiction.

GURPS in a post-nuclear hellhole.

I think that there's little chance that a Furiosa spin-off won't include Mad Max in the title in one way or another. They will want to capitalize on the brand name as much as they can, and since the term "Mad Max" predates Furiosa, they would be wise to use it. At least from a financial perspective.

Now, should they simply call the movie Furiosa? Of course they should :-)

Yes, that I don't disagree one bit. Hell, as far I am concerned, the recent movie could have been "Furiosa: Fury Road".

Well, Guardians of the Galaxy was called Guardians of the Galaxy and not "Avengers: Guardians of the Galaxy". I think it would be smarter to try to establish a parallel running new franchise than disappoint people who expect to see a Mad Max movie and then get one without Mad Max in it.

I dunno to be honest. I loved Furiosa to death but what's the movie gonna be about exactly? Her past? The future of the Citadel?

I kinda felt like her story was done by the time Fury Road was over.

Honestly, even if I had not seen Fury Road, a movie called "Imperator Furiosa" would have gotten my butt in a theatre seat faster than you can say "blood bag".

Personally, I think there's no place in the franchise for the cannibalisation of character arcs. Mad Max is all about a hobo on wheels Walking the Earth and catching glimpses into the existences of other people who, unlike him, still have a purpose in life. While it would be at times interesting to learn more about the people he encounters, I think it goes against the narrative nature of the series.

edited 28th May '15 1:10:48 PM by TAPETRVE

Well, Guardians of the Galaxy was called Guardians of the Galaxy and not "Avengers: Guardians of the Galaxy".

Actually, it was called "Marvel's Guardians of the Galaxy," so yep, they did go with a well known brand name.

I think the official name doesn't include the "Marvel's", but, of course, the MARVEL logo is always present in all promotion. The difference is that Guardians of the Galaxy is a Marvel movie, and that alone is already a huge push, regardless of the Avengers brand. The Marvel Studio brand is not limited to the Avengers.

I don't know. I mean, the official name for AOS is Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., so I think sometimes it is included.

If I had to guess, I would say it is because it is a TV series and Marvel wasn't well established there yet. I think all their series have this prefix.

edited 28th May '15 1:51:11 PM by Heatth

Agent Carter doesn't have the 'MARVEL'S' but in the official title.

Wikipedia says it has.

Wikipedia also says that it's called Marvel's The Avengers.

Huh, who would have thought?

The reason it is more relevant and visible in the TV series is because the name of the series is spoken as much as it is shown. Like, in Avengers promotion, it doesn't usually have some narration for the name. They just show the logo on the screen/poster/whatever. But for the series, they actually need a voice for the "Next/Previously in Marvel's Agent of SHIELD". That means every episode we have the name being spoken, so it becomes really obvious.

I'd say as long as they prominently put something to the effect of "From the world of Mad Max" on the posters/trailers/assorted promotional material, everyone who cares is going to know that it's part of the Mad Max universe.

I think the potential harm for actually calling a hypothetical dedicated Furiosa movie Mad Max: Furiosa and then not featuring Mad Max at all is far greater then any loss of brand recognition caused by not having "Mad Max" the title.

For a Furiosa movie they could simply put the sentences "set in the world of Mad Max" into the promotion. Then you have the brand recognition without the risk of alienating fans who expect to see Mad Max. Furiosa could become the counterpoint to Mad Max. Instead of being a "watcher" she could be someone who pushes for changes. They could even go so far to make first a movie with Mad Max encountering a society showing how he affects it (or not) and then show how Furiosa encounters the same society later, and how she reacts totally different to it.

edit: lol, sorry, that went cross. Needless to say, I agree.

Yeah, Marvel slaps their name in front of all the TV-Shows (it's also not "Daredevil" but "Marvel's Daredevil"), but nobody really uses it.

edited 28th May '15 2:22:11 PM by Swanpride

The thing is, Mad Max is a franchise named after a character. They are fairly rare. The other famous examples I can think of are Sherlock Holmes and James Bond, both being impossible to dissociate from their main characters - while Max is about the setting as much as (or even moreso than) the eponymous character.

Sci-Fi universes tend not to be named after characters. Avatar would be the closest thing I could think of, since it is a kind of character while the universe focuses on Pandora - but so far, it is a single movie, not a franchise.

Star Wars, Fallout, Ghost in the Shell, Battlestar Galactica, Stargate, Star Trek, Starcraft, Mass Effect, Halo or Metroid Prime, however...

Don't forget the Riddick franchise, albeit that name was established after Pitch Black. That said, Mad Max is arguably less SF than a fantasy film - with western influences, moreover. There are many, many westerns named after their main character(s).

There are quite a few franchises named after characters. Jason Borne, Harry Potter, Percy Jackson, nearly every comic book franchise from Batman to Iron Man, the Shrek franchise, the Indiana Jones Franchise....

There are quite a few franchises named after characters. Jason Borne, Harry Potter, Percy Jackson, nearly every comic book franchise from Batman to Iron Man, the Shrek franchise, the Indiana Jones Franchise....

Indeed, but I don't think many can compare to Mad Max.

• Bourne & Indiana Jones work because of their eponymous character. Remove them, you get a generic actioner (like the last Bourne).
• Marvel & DC works don't hesitate to put the name of their spin-offs without the original work. Harley Quinn has her own adventures now, like many others. The multiple characters are the point of the franchises, it is not minimalist like Mad Max can be. On the contrary, spin-offs are expected.
• Harry Potter, Percy Jackson (that I don't know) or Shrek work - Shrek did have a rather good spin-off - but they are aimed at young or teenage audiences. I don't know how to explain it, but spin-offs are much more common for this audience. There will be Finding Dory next year iirc... Also, Shrek is a large parody of a universe, and suffers from light Sequelitis syndrome due to the limits of that problem. Mad Max may make fun of some other movies, but the universe in itself is rather serious and dark.

Harry Potter would be the closest example of something that could compare though. You could have a story in the Wizards world about anyone else that would remain interesting despite not being named "Harry Potter".

They are making that "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them" movie spin-off from Harry Potter. No word on "Harry Potter" being part of the title.

Yes. But I don't think any fictional universe bar Star Wars and maybe TLOTR can compare to Harry Potter when it comes to popularity.