Weapon Box Office proves that Hollywood needs to listen to audiences

By Drewsch
| Announce 3 seconds ago

Now that Weapon Having passed the Box Office – don’t worry, we’ll start getting into numbers and comparisons in a while for all your data docs – it’s time for everyone to start declaring why it has done so well. There are boring solutions like a strongly designed penetrating marketing campaign, but what I think is worth focusing on my discussion is actually the audience’s response to the film.

Because not only did enough people showed up Weapon The number one piece at the Box Office, they also seemed to have liked the film a bit. I did too (My review) And it’s more fuel for the burning fire in this year’s film theater.

Audiences want original stories to be driven by bold, creative filmmakers.

Weapon Box Office stats

Let’s get this business out of the way: Weapon At the top of the Box Office with a more than expected $ 42.5 million pull. That’s impressive considering he also played at over 700 fewer screens than his opening competition, Friday Freakier. No one ever expected the long-debilitated comedy sequence to beat Weapon. Just to give you some numbers to Munch, Friday Freakier Played at just under 4000 screens (3975 is the reported number) and an average of $ 7295 per screen. Weapon Play at 3202 screens and an average of $ 13,272 per screen.

As far as stats go, Weapon is a winner. But stats are much less interesting and worth focusing on than how audiences respond Weapon.

Audiences want the unexpected

Weapon It doesn’t just look good by box office numbers. Cinemascore audiences gave an average of average to the spiral horror mystery. Anything in the range A signifies reliable positive responses in Cinemascore, but the same seems to be reflected in the Rotten tomatoes the percentage of the audience. From this writing, he has an audience score of 87%.

Warner Bros. on the register with the original/creative -driven filmmaker making a bank this year with Weapon and Sinner. So, it’s time to recognize a key factor in these two film successes: they were something that audiences didn’t expect. They were not based on any direct source material or known properties. Instead, they were original ideas by writers-directors who were allowed an impressive budget but not cutting a bank making the film they wanted to make.

Those are the lessons that studios need to remove Weapon and Sinner Because the Box Office is testing it. Yes, there will be space for your Supermansa Fantastic Foursa Fast and fierceI went, but it’s clear that audiences (especially younger demographics) want to surprise a movie from the bottom up.

I am very proud that audiences respond to Weapon and gave him the opening weekend of a box office worth celebrating. Horror has always been a reliable genre with audiences and it’s great to see more unique voices like Zach Cregger having talk to a hungry crowd. Here’s hope that the studio’s response is finding more creative filmmakers and supporting it instead, “Zach! Whatcha got for Weapons 2? “