Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
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.
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
PING!...............
I went to see it. I am an F1 fan. I expected it to suck.
It was actually pretty good.
It wasn’t “woke”. It was like Top Gun that way. Just a good solid, “men being men” movie.
Imagine that! a “men being men” movie actually making money!
Disney should take notes...................
Question: can someone who doesn’t; understand English get into it?
I don’t know, but knowing Apple, there probably is are Spanish and other languages versions............
“‘M3GAN 2.0’ Fizzles With $10 Million”
Go woke, go broke.
How many Formula 1 drivers are black?
M3GAN 1 was just a Chucky in a robot doll...............
Lewis Hamilton. So about 5% of the drivers. The “junior” character in the movie was clearly based on Hamilton.
If you follow F1 you would agree that the drivers are there to score points. If they don’t perform, they get the boot.
Auto racing.
Lots of masculinity there.
Not as much as a Rocky movie, but still very masculine.
Masculinity is still box office.
So-called gender “fluidity” is not.
This movie being big box office is kinda like Trump winning the popular vote.
Saw the movie a week ago at the premiere in Daytona (it was also the grand opening of the first IMAX theatre in Daytona). Best movie I have seen in quite a while. The first 15 minutes of the movie are set in Daytona at the Rolex 24.
Pitt plays an aging driver that started in F1, and had a bad accident where he almost died. He bounces around other circuits (which is why he was in the Rolex 24) until an old friend (Javier Bardem) asks him to come be a driver on his team. Pitt plays the wiley veteran who tries to mentor a skilled but arrogant young driver as they try to get a win to save the team. I never really understood how the “team” dynamic worked in racing, but by the end of this movie you get it.
I have been to 3 movies in theatres over the last decade ... this one was definitely worth it.
If it doesn’t make a profit, it’s not a hit.
It’s not gonna make a profit.
This is spin.
Numbers look good..........
https://www.boxofficemojo.com/release/rl2507374593/?ref_=bo_hm_RECENT_WEEKEND_WIDGET_1
I am sure the masses will love it, the masses who know nothing about motorsports and don’t actually watch auto racing. Same for Ford vs. Ferrari. The masses loved it. If you watch LeMans each year and if you know the real story of how Ford came to sweep LeMans in 1966 and 1967, after years of Ferrari dominance, then Ford v. Ferrari was a basket case. If you have followed Carroll Shelby over the years, seeing Matt Damon as Shelby made you puke.
This F1 movie will be the same. The general public will love it while those of us who actuall watch auto racing will throw up in our mouths.
I will eventually watch it but I will be beyond shocked if I don’t either turn it off after half way or fast forward through all the stupidity and fakery.
All that said, at least it is a “normal” movie and not another woke LGBTASRFEW vehicle for brainwashing and virtue signalling.
“... seeing Matt Damon as ________ made you puke....”
Do you know who Big Daddy Don Garlits is, do a lot of people remember him?
Javier Bardem (F1) alone is ALWAYS worth the price of admission! :)
“ This F1 movie will be the same. The general public will love it while those of us who actuall watch auto racing will throw up in our mouths.”
————-
There was a scene at the end of the movie where i “guffawed” audibly. My wife asked after the end, “What caused you to laugh out loud.”?
I told her, “Hamilton in the lead driving for Mercedes last year.”
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.