By Drew Dietsch
| Published
Now that Weapons has succeeded at the box office — don’t worry, we’ll start getting into numbers and comparisons in a bit for all you data dorks — it’s time for everyone to start declaring why it’s done so well. There are boring answers like a strongly designed and pervasive marketing campaign, but what I think is worth really focusing my discussion on is the audience response to the film.
Because not only did plenty of people show up to give Weapons the number one spot at the box office, they also seemed to have liked the movie quite a bit. I did as well (my review) and it’s more fuel to the fire that’s burning at the movie theater this year.
Audiences want original stories driven by bold, creative filmmakers.
Weapons Box Office Stats
Let’s get the business of this out of the way: Weapons topped the box office with a more-than-expected $42.5 million haul. That’s impressive considering it also played on over 700 fewer screens than its opening competition, Freakier Friday. Nobody sane ever expected the long-due comedy sequel to beat Weapons, but it’s hard to deny that the Zach Cregger joint overperformed and yoinked a larger share of eyeballs than even more optimistic projections would’ve thought. Just to give you some numbers to munch, Freakier Friday played on just under 4000 screens (3975 is the reported number) and averaged $7295 per screen. Weapons played on 3202 screens and averaged $13,272 per screen.
As far as stats go, Weapons is a winner. But stats are far less interesting and worth focusing on than how audiences are responding to Weapons.
Audiences Want The Unexpected
Weapons doesn’t just look good by the box office numbers. CinemaScore audiences gave the twisted horror mystery an A- average. Anything in the A range is an indication of reliable positive responses at CinemaScore, but the same looks to be reflected in the Rotten Tomatoes audience percentage. As of this writing, it has an 87% audience score.
Warner Bros. is on a roll with original, filmmaker/creative driven horror making bank this year with Weapons and Sinners. So, it’s time to acknowledge a key factor in both these movies’ successes: they were something audiences didn’t expect. They weren’t based on any direct source material or known property. Instead, they were original ideas from writer-directors who were allowed an impressive but not bank-breaking budget to make the movie they wanted to make.
That’s the lesson studios need to take away from Weapons and Sinners because the box office proves it. Yes, there will always be a place for your Supermans and Fantastic Fours and Fast and Furiouses, but it’s clear that audiences (especially younger demographics) want to be surprised at a movie from the ground up.
I’m very pleased audiences are responding to Weapons and gave it a box office opening weekend worth celebrating. Horror has always been a dependable genre with audiences and it’s great to see more unique voices like Zach Cregger’s get to speak to a hungry crowd. Here’s hoping the studio’s response is finding and supporting more creative filmmakers instead of, “Zach! Whatcha got for Weapons 2?”
