Posted on 06/30/2025 5:22:44 AM PDT by Red Badger
It’s lights out and away we go at the box office as “F1,” a big-budget racing drama starring Brad Pitt, impressively revs to $55.6 million in its domestic opening weekend.
With great reviews and a promising “A” grade on CinemaScore exit polls, “F1” landed in the middle of expectations of $50 million to $60 million. At the international box office, the film collected a strong $88.4 million from 78 markets. Those initial ticket sales are significant given “F1” is an adult-skewing tentpole that’s not part of an existing film franchise — a rarity in today’s I.P.-dominated movie theater landscape. Directed by “Top Gun: Maverick’s” Joseph Kosinski, “F1” follows Pitt as a retired Formula One driver who is convinced to return to the popular motorsport to coach a slick rookie (Damson Idris) and save a failing team.
“We’re thrilled by the global response to ‘F1′ and grateful to the audiences who’ve embraced the film with such enthusiasm,” says Apple’s head of worldwide video, Jamie Erlicht. “This success is a testament to the vision of Joe, Jerry [Bruckheimer], Brad, and [F1 champion] Lewis [Hamilton], along with the efforts of the entire cast and crew. Together with Formula 1, they’ve created an inspiring cinematic journey that captures the energy and spirit of the sport.”
“F1” also marks the first commercial hit for Apple, the tech giant that financed the nearly $250 million-budgeted movie. (Apple put the production budget at $200 million but others have reported the number is closer to $300 million). That’s not including the many millions on promotional efforts, including a globe-spanning press tour. And since Apple doesn’t have a distribution arm, the company is paying a fee to Warner Bros. to put the film in theaters. WB will also receive a percentage of theatrical revenues that increases with certain box office benchmarks.
Unlike a traditional studio, Apple, with its $3 trillion market cap, is less dependent on box office revenue and home entertainment sales to justify its investment in mega-budgeted films. The company views its movies and television shows as a marketing vehicle for its technology and Apple TV+. With that vast reach, Apple has unique ways of promoting its movies, such as placing the “F1” trailer on the home screen of its streaming service and enabling iPhone push notifications for “F1” that offer a $10 discount when moviegoers buy two or more tickets on Fandango.
In a recent Variety cover story about Apple’s film and TV ambitions, CEO Tim Cook says he doesn’t view the content side as a way to move the hardware sales that fuel its core business. “I don’t have it in my mind that I’m going to sell more iPhones because of it,” he said of “F1.” “We’re into [entertainment] to tell great stories, and we want it to be a great business as well.”
Since Apple’s foray into theatrical, however, the company has backed underperforming epics (Martin Scorsese’s “Killers of the Flower Moon” and Ridley Scott’s “Napoleon”) as well as critically reviled flops (“Fly Me to the Moon” and “Argylle”) and one Oscar best picture winner (the straight-to-streaming “CODA”) without a single profitable film to show for its efforts. “F1” has a long and winding road to profitability, to be sure, but this is Apple’s closest attempt to all-audience blockbuster territory. “F1” has generated $144 million globally after three days in theaters, nearly outgrossing the entire theatrical run of “Killers of the Flower Moon” ($158 million worldwide) and will soon outpace “Napoleon” ($221 million) as Apple’s highest-grossing movie.
“A lot about this movie looks easy, like a sure-fire hit, but it’s not,” says David A. Gross, who runs the FranchiseRe movie consulting firm and referred to “F1’s” start as “outstanding.” “Race car films and sports dramas have a long and mixed track record. This time, everything is working.”
The makers of “F1,” including “Top Gun” producer Jerry Bruckheimer and seven-time Formula One champion Lewis Hamilton, have been touting the movie as the “most authentic” racing movie ever. In order to replicate the need for speed on screen, the filmmaking team brought immersive Imax cameras as they circumnavigated the real Formula 1 global circuit — yes, Pitt is really driving at speeds that top 180 mph — from Silverstone to Las Vegas to Abu Dhabi. Those efforts translated to ticket sales as audiences turned out in force to watch “F1” in Imax and other premium formats, which accounted for 55% of domestic ticket sales. Imax in particular fielded a strong $27.7 million globally, representing 19% of overall revenues.
“With the most realistic racing sequences ever committed to film, ‘F1: The Movie’ quite simply demands to be experienced in Imax, and audiences around the world clearly got that message,” said Imax’s CEO Rich Gelfond. “Joseph Kosinski and Jerry Bruckheimer innovated and pushed our technology to new frontiers to deliver a film tailor-made for Imax, and we expect moviegoers will continue to seek out our screens for ‘F1’ through the U.S. holiday weekend ahead.”
With “F1” in pole position, box office competitors were left in the dust. This weekend’s other major release, Universal and Blumhouse’s campy horror sequel “M3GAN 2.0,” fizzled in fourth place with $10.2 million. The film, which sees M3GAN (short for Model 3 Generative Android ) rebuilt with advanced upgrades to stop a humanoid military robot that’s attempting an AI takeover, collected another $7 million from 80 international markets for a $17 million global tally. It’s not a terrible start for the modestly budgeted thriller, which earned a “B+” on CinemaScore exit polls (above the “B” grade that was bestowed upon 2023’s “M3GAN”). But those ticket sales are a steep drop from the original, which ignited to $30.4 million domestically and $45 million globally during the notorious box office dead zone of January. The first film achieved sleeper hit status with $180 million worldwide.
With a $25 million price tag, “M3GAN 2.0” won’t require a ton of coinage to turn a theatrical profit. But a weak turnout for the sequel suggests the murderous A.I. doll with killer dance movies was more of a one-off viral phenomenon rather than the face of an enduring film franchise. That could be a problem since a spinoff, titled “Soulm8te,” is set for 2026.
“The idea of a child-sized humanoid robot doll powered by AI generated a lot of interest the first time, but that interest has fallen apart,” says Gross. “Nothing appears to be wrong with the movie [but] the story is struggling to show something new, and fans are moving on.”
Elsewhere, holdover titles populated the top of the box office charts. Universal’s “How to Train Your Dragon” slid to second place after two weekends in the No. 1 spot. The live-action remake added $19.4 million in its third weekend of release, bringing its North American tally to $200.5 million. Globally, the action epic has collected $454.5 million to date.
In third place, Disney’s intergalactic Pixar adventure “Elio” continues to face fierce headwinds from fellow PG offerings “How to Train Your Dragon” and another Disney tentpole, “Lilo & Stitch.” In its sophomore outing, “Elio” brought in $10.7 million from 3,750 venues. That’s a 49% decline from its $20 million debut, which ranked as the worst start in modern history for Pixar. Despite solid reviews and positive audience scores, “Elio” has grossed only $73 million worldwide. The $150 million-budgeted property is shaping up to be a big money loser for Disney.
At Disney, though, the enduring success of “Lilo & Stitch” will help to offset any theatrical losses from “Elio.” After six weekends on the big screen, the live-action “Lilo & Stitch” has grossed $946 million and will eventually be the year’s first billion-dollar blockbuster. A live-action sequel is already in the works.
Rounding out the top five is Sony’s zombie thriller “28 Years Later,” which cratered in its second weekend with $9.7 million from 3,444 venues — a painful 68% decline from its opening weekend. Ticket sales stand at $50 million domestically and $103 million globally against a $60 million budget.
Looked it over. Hard Pass. Subject not interesting to any of us in this house.
We’ve got “Jaws” and “Born on the 4th of July” on tap for the 4th this week.
Even Top Gun Maverick(the second to last movie I saw in a theater)was kinda woke.
In the fact that they had one woman/Hispanic pilot, one male Asian, one male African American, etc. I am surprised that they didn’t have one of the pilots come out as gay.
Of course, the heros of the movie were both WHITE MEN.
The only other movie I have seen in a theater was the most recent Mission Impossible. Another Tom Cruise movie.
otoh I did get goosebumps in the first 5 minutes.
Since Jaws II was partially filmed here in Destin and we have real sharks to contend with, Shark movies are overkill here.............
Hollywood has no new movie stars.
If they want to put butts into seats, they need to cast guys like Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise who have been movies stars for the past 30-40 years in order to do it.
Hollywood has TOO MANY movie stars.
Back in the Golden Age of Hollywood, when the Big Studios ruled the industry, they had actors under exclusive contracts
and they were limited in numbers. When an actor’s contract expired it was either renewed or not depending in the draw of that actor’s movies.................
Hey everybody. Get it? Get it? See what the author did there? *nudge nudge*
We went and saw it this past weekend & I told my wife if I ever ran into Brad Pitt, I’d ask for my $$ back.
AI will soon render the human ones for movies obsolete!
The only work for actors will be stage.
“...The only work for actors will be stage....”
3-D Projectors will render that profession obsolete as well.............
I don’t know if Megan 2 went woke. But they did go away from the core of the original. Megan was a pretty OK creepy robot horror movie, not great but solid. At least according to the trailer Megan 2.0 went with a creepy robot vs creepy robot action movie and looks pretty pain by numbers. Now I know Alien made a similar conversion, but both were great. Breaking formula only works at the top.
Very possible!
🙄................................
i hate to admit but i saw it.
as someone who grew up in the racing world i can say without a doubt it was utter garbage.
the forced drama was eyerollingly bad and nonstop.
brad pitt’s character was semi interesting but was constantly disrupted trying to boost up the junior black driver to the detriment of the team. of course, they make Pitt’s character essentially all powerful and could control the race from the back to allow the black guy to win.
the racing world doesn’t suffer DEI well... as the unqualified drivers quickly get removed by bad times or accidents.
this movie was just terrible.
did you miss the parts where Pitt’s character was doing everything he could to get the black kid to win?
I found "Conclave" on a streaming source last week and watched it because I heard about it during Oscar season - UGH worse than I could have imagined.
one. ever.
the entire movie was using Pitt’s character to prop up the lack luster junior driver that brought them to last place after half a season.
I lost count at how many Swamp Rats he has made ;-)
I didn’t see him as “the black kid.” I saw him as “the kid.”
I guess people see what they want to see.
Did you see where the kid knocked off the black guy so the old guy could win?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.