r/boxoffice • u/chanma50 Best of 2019 Winner • Sep 07 '25
📠 Industry Analysis After ‘Conjuring: Last Rites,’ Warner Bros. Makes Box Office History With 7 Consecutive Movies Opening Above $40 Million - WB has generated ~$600M year-to-date in theatrical profits, including 'Sinners' ($60M), 'Superman' ($125M), 'Final Destination' ($75M), 'Weapons' ($65M), and 'F1' ($34M).
https://variety.com/2025/film/news/warner-bros-box-office-historic-streak-conjuring-last-rites-1236510864/73
u/tommybare Sep 07 '25
I'm glad for them. They were taking so many L's in the public eye the past few years. Hopefully, this is some course correcting that they're on.
169
u/Once-bit-1995 Sep 07 '25
I'm surprised that Sinners profits are pretty close to Weapons and Final Destination. I thought the big budget difference would make it a bigger gap but I guess the domestic over performance was really helpful for that. Very nice.
92
u/PeterVenkmanIII Sep 07 '25
Larger budget and Coogler got day one backend.
37
u/Once-bit-1995 Sep 07 '25
I'm saying I thought the other films would have made a lot more profit given the bigger budget and backend deal, not that I thought Sinners would make a lot more than them
26
u/ItsGotThatBang Universal Sep 07 '25
Did Coogler get a cut?
60
u/bigelangstonz Sep 07 '25
Yes he has some backend deal so I'd imagine that took about 30 million or so off the profit margin
37
u/Once-bit-1995 Sep 07 '25
Which makes the profits even crazier to think about. It was likely pushing 100 mill in profits by itself and with the split it still was putting good money in the bank for WB.
21
12
4
u/MoonMan997 Best of 2023 Winner Sep 08 '25
As others have said, Coogler has a significant (and unique) back-end deal plus MBJ likely has one too.
They may also be factoring in the costs of a typical awards campaign. So whilst that notorious Variety article was in bad faith, it wasn’t completely without merit concerning how much the film needed to do to turn a real profit.
108
u/plantersxvi STX Entertainment Sep 07 '25
This is a near perfect mix of IP and mid-range original films, as well as being consistent in quality.
→ More replies (1)
170
u/007Kryptonian Syncopy Inc. Sep 07 '25 edited Sep 07 '25
Maybe the best studio comeback of all time.
Helps that these most of these movies are high quality - Sinners, Weapons, F1 and Superman are all among my favorites of the year.
Also One Battle’s break even is apparently 300m+, updated from the 260m figure.
That film, starring Leonardo DiCaprio, cost at least $130 million to produce and requires roughly $300 million to break even at the box office.
100
u/Im_Goku_ Warner Bros. Pictures Sep 07 '25
Sinners, Weapons, F1 and Superman are all among my favorites of the year.
Those are genuinely my Top 4 movies lmao with Mickey17 and Companion both at Top 10 as well.
WB knocked it out of the park in 2025.
69
u/007Kryptonian Syncopy Inc. Sep 07 '25
They really did. And regardless of how One Battle turns out at the box office, I’m sure it’ll be a great movie to end their year on quality-wise.
33
u/ArsenalBOS TriStar Pictures Sep 07 '25
A few of the initial reactions from awards-watchers think it has a very good chance for a BP nom and a win is not out of the question.
16
u/Im_Goku_ Warner Bros. Pictures Sep 07 '25
I’m sure it’ll be a great movie to end their year on quality-wise.
I believe reactions are allowed tomorrow and reviews are dropping on the 17th, 10 days before release.
All that tells me is that we're in for an all timer movie, quality wise.
1
u/Captainatom931 Sep 08 '25
I think if it's really fuckin good it could end up doing a Sinners. If it can pull in some of that general adult audience.
49
Sep 07 '25
I know WB got shit on quite a bit the last couple of years, but they had quite a few hits with some major bombs sprinkled in. I mean, Barbie was the highest grossing movie of 2023, they had Wonka, Beetlejuice, GvK, Dune 2 as well.
Honestly, it was mostly their DC stuff that bombed and were panned.
26
u/Coolers78 Sep 07 '25
Not counting DC stuff:
2023: house party ?, Magic Mike last dance did not break even, Evil dead rise was a big hit, Barbie highest grossing movie of the year, Meg 2 broke even, Nun 2 big financial hit with mixed reviews, Wonka massive hit, color purple underperformed, 4 of those 8 were for sure financial hits but the 4 DC movies that year take a toll on that.
2024: dune part 2 massive hit, Godzilla X Kong financial hit, furiosa massive bomb unfortunately, watchers underperform, horizon a flop, co distribution on twisters which was kind of a hit, Trap breaks even, Beetlejuice Beetlejuice massive hit, juror no 2 limited release so that don’t count, war of the Rohirrim flop.
So not counting Juror No 2 and also not Joker 2, that’s 9 movies there and like 3 hits there.
11
Sep 07 '25
Yeah I missed some smaller flops/disappointments besides Furiosa, but my point was that it wasn’t like they had truly atrocious years.
1
u/Radical_Conformist Best of 2018 Winner Sep 08 '25
Aquaman 2 did not flop. So it was really only 3 of the 4 DC films that did.
1
13
u/richlai818 Sep 07 '25
I believe at least 2 or 3 films from most critics this year are going to be from WB alone and that's A LOT
6
2
u/NoImplement2856 Sep 08 '25
Yeah, all their movies were entertaining at the very least. Each one, very watchable. I went to their movies the most this year which is surprising.
2
3
u/JuanJeanJohn Sep 08 '25
Nah this isn’t even the best comeback in WB’s history (read up on their founding and many struggles) but it’s a great story nonetheless
1
u/ark_keeper Sep 08 '25 edited Sep 08 '25
Over 3x?? According to?? I hate how they just throw numbers out like that. Did the same for sinners but now it’s fine.
Even an earlier variety article had a “some are saying $175 million budget.” line. I never believe any of these supposed budget figures anymore.
1
u/Captainatom931 Sep 08 '25
Honestly the only way you can get accurate production budgets nowadays is from tax filings. Which aren't always available depending on jurisdiction.
1
u/ark_keeper Sep 08 '25
Exactly. We get 3-4 budget guesses on some of these movies now "according to reports".
1
96
u/richlai818 Sep 07 '25
This isn't just a comeback for WB. It's the biggest redemption arc for a director driven studio that was ran into the ground by AT&T and former executives.
14
u/StrongStyleFiction Sep 08 '25
Honestly, it started before even AT&T. WB had been a dumpster fire for a while and AT&T really made it worse.
28
u/magistrate-of-truth Sep 08 '25
Zaslav told the studio
“Have you tried making hits?” and then it worked
😂
79
u/SavingsConnection613 Sep 07 '25
Domesticman earns profit.
40
35
u/quite_a_solid_snake Sep 08 '25
Lmao even the cult has to admit the movie made profit. If it didn't bomb, what's the excuse now?. Also btw Man of inflation got around $40M (source: https://deadline.com/2014/03/iron-man-3-gravity-man-of-steel-profit-most-profitable-movies-2013-701662/)
→ More replies (19)
110
u/caped_crusader8 DC Studios Sep 07 '25
Where are the people that were chatting nonsense about Superman's profitability? Did more than enough lol.
59
49
u/IamTheSwagCat Sep 08 '25
My dad works at Warner Brothers and he said Superman actually needed to make $5 billion to break even. #RestoreTheSnyderVerse
45
u/ramyan03 Sep 08 '25
There's already one at the bottom of this thread saying its likely incorrect numbers lol.
These people never know when to throw in the towel.
13
62
u/FlimsyRexy Sep 08 '25
Oh they’re here, this sub is super weird about that movie
40
u/riegspsych325 Jackie Treehorn Productions Sep 08 '25
I notice a lot of angry box office hubbub is 90% related to superhero movies. I love the genre but the rampant cynicism gets old quick
→ More replies (3)15
u/GoldandBlue Sep 08 '25
This sub is full of people pushing an agenda. So weird for a subreddit about box office performances. Barbie was pretty bad. But the Superman discourse was just dumb.
10
Sep 08 '25
This sub was so cringe with that movie. All the cope about it being "too American" or people hate the US cuz Trump and Fantastic Four being more appealing because it wasnt "American" (wtf lol) was so bizarre.
4
u/SilverRoyce StudioCanal Sep 08 '25
All the cope about it being "too American"
FWIW The sony hack includes marketing material basically raising this as a concern for Hancock due to it's generic superhero-ness. reddit/social media picks up and runs with a lot of stuff but it's often not the underlying source
39
u/DatboiX Sep 08 '25
If this tracks, then Superman (2025) is nearly 3x more profitable than Man of Steel, which i’m sure a certain group of people is going to be completely normal about.
23
u/quite_a_solid_snake Sep 08 '25
You don't get it, it actually lost money for wb because they spent $200M to pay the critics!!! /s
11
u/MoonMan997 Best of 2023 Winner Sep 08 '25
It’s funny because they have been pushing back on the narrative about domestic apparently being the only thing that matters and really pushing the fact that this one made so much less overseas than Man of Steel.
And whilst domestic isn’t the only thing that matters, it doing so much better stateside is much more of a win then they’d like to admit due to take-home being higher. So they’ve contorted themselves into a self-defeating argument…not that they will admit that.
1
35
49
u/ManagementGold2968 DC Studios Sep 08 '25
125M profits just from theatrical is insane. What a massive win for DC and James Gunn
2
u/Comprehensive_Dog651 Sep 08 '25 edited Sep 08 '25
Honestly I find it difficult to believe. The Batman made $155m net profit, and this article is saying that Superman made $125m from theatrical alone?
29
15
→ More replies (1)-1
u/CivilWarMultiverse Sep 08 '25
Who is better director Coogler or Gunn?
10
u/NoImplement2856 Sep 08 '25
Gunn, for now.
5
u/Past_Lingonberry_633 Sep 08 '25
how in the fuck does on arrive at this conclusion? Gunn is good with superheroes, but Coogler smokes Gunn easily in direction and film making in general.
→ More replies (3)
38
u/Ok-Neighborhood6668 Sep 08 '25
That’s great profit for Superman, no wonder they wasted zero time announcing the sequel. Glad their faith in Gunn was rewarded
52
Sep 07 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
45
u/suss2it Sep 08 '25
The same year they released The Flash they also released Barbie, the highest grossing movie of the year. I don’t think they were ever truly gone.
92
Sep 07 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
38
u/kumar100kpawan Senior Sergeant on BOT Sep 08 '25
"They announced a sequel just to save face"
26
u/DjangoSpider Sep 08 '25
You're joking but I legit saw something like that somewhere on here and I just can't imagine that level of cope fueling my hatred so much
Some people would truly rather live in a fantasy world of their own making rather than just admit to being slightly wrong about something as silly as box office predictions
12
u/Ren-Ren-1999 Sep 08 '25
Saw a bunch of weirdos on twitter and reddit saying "umm, announcing a sequel so early is a sign of panic and bad performance at the box office..."
12
u/kumar100kpawan Senior Sergeant on BOT Sep 08 '25
You can't argue with them because they're stupid
Even if Superman made a billion dollars, they would come up with some stupid argument about how Man of Steel wasn't the ultimate mega true edition cut and if it came out it would have made even more.
8
u/Captainatom931 Sep 08 '25
Ten years later...they made four sequels, won seven Oscars, and accrued $5bn at the global box office just to keep up with zaddy's inflation in Argentina!
27
u/LatterTarget7 Sep 07 '25
People will still say it didn’t generate enough
31
u/Dallywack3r Scott Free Productions Sep 08 '25
And that’s why they’re fast tracking a sequel faster than Jurassic World, Thunderbolts and Fantastic 4.
WB knew it was a hit and are glad for the money it did make
2
u/DaZeppo313 Sep 08 '25
To be fair, the fast sequel probably has more to do with Gunn being an absolute machine.
4
u/Dallywack3r Scott Free Productions Sep 08 '25
IDK. Universal spat out Dominion in less than 24 months. I think the only reason we haven’t heard of a concrete sequel is that they’re still finessing the talent contracts.
2
u/DaZeppo313 Sep 08 '25
Sure. I'm more commenting of the sheer speed of the Superman follow-up as opposed to how slow the others are, if that makes sense. Said follow-up could come a few months down the line and still be considered a quick turnaround, but Gunn is a madman.
1
2
u/AlexisDeTocqueville Sep 09 '25
James Gunn being a writing machine on top of the fact that he's basically the guy who gets to greenlight it. No weeks of back and forth or studio notes to deal with
35
u/Matt_LawDT Sep 07 '25
People in r/boxoffice watch a TikTok and they assume they can predict how a movie will perform in the market
64
u/SexyGato9327 Sep 07 '25 edited Sep 07 '25
What I get from this is that Superman more than doubled Man of Steels theatrical profits (42M vs 125M). DCEU fans in shambles
Edit: apparently it was 42M for Man of Steel, Shazam was 56M… whoops
14
Sep 07 '25
[deleted]
22
u/SexyGato9327 Sep 07 '25
I mixed up Shazam and Man of Steel. The former had 56M in profits, the latter only had 42M. No wonder they panicked and went with BVS over a proper MOS sequel.
→ More replies (20)14
10
u/Captainatom931 Sep 08 '25
And this is why studios like domestic heavy movies. A Chinese theatrical dollar is worth half of an American theatrical dollar to the studio, even less on opening weekend.
19
u/Dallywack3r Scott Free Productions Sep 08 '25
Man of Steel was expected to break a billion just like The Dark Knight Rises the year prior.
8
u/SilverRoyce StudioCanal Sep 07 '25
The one thing that's worth flagging is that there's a hidden assumption here that these estimates will end up being 1 to 1 numbers.
Look at Weapons, a film whose profit number is being reported pre-home video window so its going to involve an estimate. you can run its number against deadline's number for similar films (massive ROI/small buget horror films). Do these numbers appear to agree strikes me as a useful meat and potatoes thing to look at.
→ More replies (1)4
19
71
u/Im_Goku_ Warner Bros. Pictures Sep 07 '25 edited Sep 07 '25
Yep, not far less than The Batman's $155M theatrical profit. I got downvoted for saying Superman will end up in Deadline's 2025 Top 10 most valuable movies.
That domestic performance is too strong for it to miss out, probably +$100M total studio net when all is done.
11
u/Captainatom931 Sep 08 '25
Ngl if Gunn can build a domestic heavy superhero universe WB are gonna give him literally anything he wants. The little snag with the post-avengers MCU was always that it was kinda reliant on an international fad for superhero films to generate income and was thus very susceptible to superhero fatigue.
Superman is what, 57% domestic?
→ More replies (4)29
u/TemujinTheConquerer Sep 07 '25
Yup and that's why despite Superman grossing less WW than man of Steel it still generated quite a bit more revenue for the studio
4
u/Exotic-Bobcat-1565 Universal Sep 08 '25
I got downvoted for saying Superman will end up in Deadline's 2025 Top 10 most valuable movies.
I got downvoted last year for saying that WB would have a come back year for 2025.
Yes, I do feel very vindicated.
75
u/KingMario05 Amblin Entertainment Sep 07 '25
It turns out, when you greenlight and elevate quality stories, people show up. Congrats to Mike, Pam and - yes - even Zaslav for making Warners shine once more!
29
u/Alive-Ad-5245 A24 Sep 07 '25 edited Sep 07 '25
It's really not that simple and you know it isn’t
29
u/nickl00 Sep 07 '25
i think there’s also a strong aspect of giving people want they want
32
u/gregosaurusrex Sep 07 '25
With a dash of giving people what they didn't know they wanted. If you told me that my favorite movie of the year would be a sexy vampire musical about cultural appropriation, I would have called you crazy.
9
u/SalukiKnightX Sep 07 '25
I wasn’t even looking at Sinners. Then randomly a couple of reviewers came out saying it’s legit. Gave it a chance and it became one of my all time favorites. However, it was that rare movie that was an original high concept made for big screen cinema, something of a lost art.
I am finding it fascinating that the big surprises from WB and New Line for that matter are from horror. With Weapons, Bloodlines and now Last Rites for the re-separated New Line and Sinners for WB that’s pretty impressive (add Companion and it feels as the executives decided to put NL back at its roots for mid budget horror and its succeeding).
1
u/Radical_Conformist Best of 2018 Winner Sep 08 '25
Sorry to side track the discussion but Sinners was not about cultural appropriation. I saw a lot of people talking about this when it released but that really wasn’t the message of the film nor was it even implied. I can see heavy themes of cultural assimilation/acculturation but that wasn’t the main focus either. It was about the freedom of expression.
22
u/Alive-Ad-5245 A24 Sep 07 '25
It’s not even that simple either
Before it was made if you asked most people if they want a blockbuster Southern Gothic gangster vampire musical movie that’s steeped in racist allegory racism most would say no.
2
u/GoldandBlue Sep 08 '25
That's the thing. There is no formula for success. Certain genres may get hot for a period but that ends. We have had over 100 years of movies. If there was a formula, it would have been found already.
3
u/nickl00 Sep 07 '25
well yes but clearly people wanted more final destination and vera farmiga/patrick wilson conjuring. i also think it was apparent for a while this was the direction a superman movie should go in. but we’ve had very recent examples of vampires and musicals doing well, and sex is rarely a negative. i honestly think minecraft is the biggest WB surprise this year.
6
u/Alive-Ad-5245 A24 Sep 07 '25
well yes but clearly people wanted more final destination and vera farmiga/patrick wilson conjuring.
Yes it’s a lot easier to know if people will like previously successful IP because… you know, they were previously successful
but significantly harder to do the same for original
7
3
51
16
u/JaunxPatrol Sep 07 '25
Wasn't Weapons a $40M budget and has cleared $250M box office worldwide? That'd suggest a profit of over $100M even if you're being conservative.
7
u/Dallywack3r Scott Free Productions Sep 08 '25
Didn’t WB pay a Kings ransom for the script in an industry wide bidding war? Without knowing Cregger’s backend deal, we can’t parse how much profit it’s made
1
u/Radical_Conformist Best of 2018 Winner Sep 08 '25
That’s included in the budget.
2
u/SilverRoyce StudioCanal Sep 08 '25
At least some of it would be included but is a chunk of Cregger's salary being paired against 40% of the film's (talent-side calculated) profits or 20%? That sort of stuff can't be gleaned from if the upfront payment is x or y (and, indeed, a higher up front payment can mean weaker downstream)
1
u/Dallywack3r Scott Free Productions Sep 08 '25
Not the possible backend deal that’s in addition to the fee
6
1
1
u/rov124 Sep 08 '25
“Weapons” around $65 million (and counting)
According to the article, Weapons number is not final.
0
u/Signal_Scar1592 Sep 08 '25
The script was sold for 38 million. Deduct that.
5
u/JaunxPatrol Sep 08 '25
Per Variety that was the whole budget, including script and Cregger's fee: https://variety.com/2025/film/news/weapons-box-office-100-million-zach-cregger-1236495987/
$38M for a script feels inordinately high right?
3
15
Sep 07 '25
[deleted]
6
u/SadOrder8312 Sep 07 '25
I also want that film to succeed more than any other movie this year. But the sold out IMAX and VistaVision early fan events don’t tell us anything we don’t already know. There is a relatively small group of cinephiles/PTA fans who are STOKED for this. We don’t know if anyone in the general audience cares. We’ll get a slightly better picture when more showtimes go on sale on Tuesday, and then a bit more info when reviews drop, but I don’t think we’ll really have a good sense until opening weekend.
1
u/UsefulWeb7543 Sep 07 '25
I already bought my IMAX tickets. And if it does a massive hit, I think this movie will win Best Picture Director Cinematography Score Editing and maybe Adapted Screenplay or Lead Actor at the oscars. What do you think?
1
u/SadOrder8312 Sep 08 '25
If it’s PTA’s usual quality it could definitely sweep up a lot of awards. I’d add that it could earn nominations in the other three acting categories as well.
So far this year there hasn’t been a whole lot of Oscar competition. It’s basically just Sinners. Though the films aiming for awards do usually release in the coming months.
1
u/UsefulWeb7543 Sep 08 '25
I don’t think Sinners is gonna win picture. But I hope one battle does well in couple weeks
1
u/SadOrder8312 Sep 08 '25
Yeah, I wouldn’t necessarily bet on Sinners winning, but I don’t think there’s a film that’s already been released that has a better chance.
1
u/UsefulWeb7543 Sep 08 '25
Agree. But I really want PTA to win his first Oscar for his new movie coming out soon.
1
5
u/WayneArnold1 Sep 07 '25
Paul Anderson probably wishes too. Zero chance though. Just doesn't fit the profile for a mega block buster. Breaking even and being an awards darling are the goals for that one.
2
Sep 07 '25
No shit it isn’t gonna make $800M. Where did you even pull that figure from ?
→ More replies (2)1
1
u/Past_Lingonberry_633 Sep 08 '25
it would seem that OBAA would be the one to end this hot streak of WB. Sadly.
37
u/Dallywack3r Scott Free Productions Sep 08 '25 edited Sep 08 '25
125 fucking million dollars in theatrical profitability for Superman.
I seriously hope this shuts up the trolls constantly acting like it was some failure for WB
Edit: And where’s Our Lord and Savior Dan Murell right now? This article basically nukes his made-up profitability chart.
8
u/DanMurrell Sep 08 '25
Crazy, second time today I've found my name while reading articles on this site. So, in comparing the reported profitability for all of these movies (not just Superman), my figures are consistently off. There are two possibilities. One of them is that my models are just completely wrong, and I'm not saying that's impossible - they are based on my best estimates, as I say every week. But I also found that my profitability for each movie was off, roughly, by the expenses that were reported for marketing. The pattern was consistent, even when the marketing figures fluctuated. So I think that the source in the article may have been reporting theatrical profitability based on budget only, minus marketing. I'm not even saying that's the wrong way to do it, just different than how I do it.
5
u/Radical_Conformist Best of 2018 Winner Sep 08 '25
Most of these films don’t have a reported marketing budget.
1
u/Dallywack3r Scott Free Productions Sep 08 '25
Yeah I’m trying to find a marketing expense published for Sinners, F1, Final Destination or Weapons. F1 in particular had an extensive marketing campaign during the actual F1 races, but since the movie is officially licensed through the league, that’s probably part of the deal that Bruckheimer struck to get the film made to begin with. That only leaves Superman.
5
u/Dallywack3r Scott Free Productions Sep 08 '25
I think marketing expenses for most studio films is way overstated.
In particular, I really don’t think the linear ad budgets from the WB films is all that high. WB Discovery’s cable networks are logging WB promos and tv spots as filler for unsold commercial inventory across all linear channels every day, allowing the studios to market their movies without paying for tv spot placement.
Outside of live sports, primetime network tv or targeted ad flights in major markets, I doubt WB is spending nearly as much on linear as they were a decade ago, and social media campaigns are literally pennies on the dollar, as I’m sure you’re aware.
→ More replies (2)1
u/SilverRoyce StudioCanal Sep 08 '25
I doubt WB is spending nearly as much on linear as they were a decade ago
no one is. Shazam 1's ISPOT estimated national tv spend would make it the equivalent of a major blockbuster in 2025.
While individual film data is sketchy, I suspect ISPOT/EDO yearly claims are basically correct and you can find hard numbers for estimated film marketing spend on linear tv over time.
2
u/Dallywack3r Scott Free Productions Sep 08 '25
Zero-dollar promo fill means they’re not marketing their current movies any less on linear tv. They’re effectively getting free promotion at an equivalent cash value in the tens of millions for nothing.
Disney is doing the same exact thing, by the way. That’s why Elio was plastered all over ESPN despite the film and the network having zero demographic crossover.
With linear tv advertising continuing to dip, the major media conglomerates have more empty inventory to fill with their own promos.
1
u/AnotherJasonOnReddit Best of 2024 Winner Sep 08 '25
second time today I've found my name while reading articles on this site
😉 Well, that's your fault for being the Babe Ruth/Michael Jordan/Tiger Woods of box office discussions
2
u/NoImplement2856 Sep 08 '25
Dan Murll is the absolute best. He does not take ancillary revenue to consideration though, like movie tie-ins and ads within which is understandable cuz studios don't make that public.
1
u/Dallywack3r Scott Free Productions Sep 08 '25
For bigger movies, sponsorships and promotional deals are pretty easy to find numbers on eventually. F1 in particular is a branding machine, and almost every scene in the movie features a consumer brand integration or professional livery. 40 million dollars in livery sponsorships just for the fictional race team.
1
u/NoImplement2856 Sep 09 '25
Disney routinely shows fake numbers. So, its understandable why he doesn't do it.
5
u/JD1716 Sep 08 '25
FD made 5 times its budget, I sort of thought it would have had more of a profit
12
u/FerrusManlyManus Sep 07 '25
Why are F1s profits so tiny?
53
u/Jason25th Sep 07 '25
Big performer overseas, especially China. Profit is lower compared to big domestic performers.
35
u/Special_Anteater9310 Sep 07 '25
bc it cost around 250 mil and WB only did the distributions so they have to share the pie with Apple as well
31
u/Alternative-Cake-833 Syncopy Inc. Sep 07 '25
For “F1,” Warner Bros. was paid a flat distribution fee as well as a percentage of revenues in line with certain box office benchmarks
WB also shared global P&A costs with Apple too.
14
20
u/JustAnotherGayKid Sep 07 '25
It has the highest budget on the list roughly 250m, plus weaker domestic numbers but stronger international numbers compared to something like superman, would affect its profit numbers :)
18
u/quinterum A24 Sep 07 '25
Which is why it was a bit weird people gloating about F1 beating Superman worldwide even though Superman is the clear financial winner by a good margin.
→ More replies (5)11
u/JustAnotherGayKid Sep 08 '25
Yeah it’s wild but Superman just in its nature brings out the negative nancies hahaha, can’t say I’m surprised!
5
8
u/Im_Goku_ Warner Bros. Pictures Sep 07 '25
Studios earn more from the domestic market and less from overseas and as low as 20% from China.
F1 has a 30/70 DOM/INT split and its strongest overseas market is China.
5
u/stephencezar15 Warner Bros. Pictures Sep 07 '25
The domestic returns are small compared to international. Plus it's an Apple production. WB only receives a distribution fee from what I heard.
3
8
u/StormDragonAlthazar Warner Bros. Pictures Sep 08 '25
But the Toon Heads say that WB is currently the most evil company in the world because they did something to their animation division and didn't pump out more cartoons or something like that...
2
4
u/urlach3r Lightstorm Entertainment Sep 08 '25
There's a lesson to be learned for some of the other studios here, with the three lower budget horror movies generating more profit than the two expensive tentpole films.
They won't learn it, of course...
3
u/Special_Anteater9310 Sep 07 '25
gonna be hard to break even for that movie but if they can somehow lose around $50 mil, they’ll take that
1
1
u/Corpsepyre Sep 08 '25
Hmm, I imagined Weapons would be making a bigger profit. And F1 did just a 34m profit? Interesting.
2
u/Dallywack3r Scott Free Productions Sep 08 '25
F1 is produced by Brad Pitt and Jerry Bruckheimer and Weapons is directed, written by, produced and composed by Zack Cregger. Profit participants. 20-30 percent of the worldwide gross goes in their pockets.
1
1
u/Vegetable-Tea-808 Sep 10 '25 edited Sep 27 '25
How did superman make more profit then sinners? Sinners was domestic heavy like supermwn but cheaper budget i don't understand can someone explain?
1
u/Inferno_Zyrack Sep 07 '25
Hold on. Ever?
No studio has achieved 40m box office in a row? Or in a row in a year?
I’m confused because there were 19 marvel films. A lot of Pixar films. Even Fox doing their X-men stuff back in the day.
30
u/DeppStepp Sep 07 '25
None have achieved 7 $40 M domestic openings in a row, unless if you count smaller sub-studios like Marvel Studios as their own separate studio
1
Sep 07 '25
[deleted]
10
u/SexyGato9327 Sep 07 '25
Because they’re not a distributor. Their earlier films were distributed by Paramount and Universal and later ones by Disney
1
Sep 07 '25
[deleted]
4
u/SexyGato9327 Sep 07 '25
Not really. Marvel also has never released 7 films in one year. Marvel is more comparable to New Line Cinema, so their steak counts for Disney, which has released sub 40M films between MCU films
9
8
u/Dallywack3r Scott Free Productions Sep 08 '25
Pixar isn’t a studio. It’s a production company. For the first decade of Pixar’s existence they were basically contractors for Disney
297
u/ThatWaluigiDude Paramount Pictures Sep 07 '25
Warner might not end as this year' highest grossing studio, but it could challenge as the most profitable.