Movies of War

Mar 8, 2026 12:56pm PT 5 Reasons ‘The Bride!’ Was Dead on Arrival at the Box Office By Rebecca Rubin Plus Icon Rebecca Rubin Senior Film and Media Reporter rebeccaarubin Latest Box Office: ‘Hoppers’ Powers to $88 Million Globally, ‘The Bride!’ Flatlines With $13 Million Worldwide 3 hours ago Box Office: ‘The Bride!’ Bombs With $7 Million Opening Weekend, Pixar’s ‘Hoppers’ Scores $46 Million Debut 5 hours ago Daisy Edgar-Jones Starring in ‘Tomorrow, and Tomorrow, and Tomorrow’ Movie Adaptation at Paramount (EXCLUSIVE) 3 days ago See All ©Warner Bros/Courtesy Everett Collection It’s alive, but it’s not exactly showing signs of life. “The Bride!,” director Maggie Gyllenhaal‘s punk rock, feminist reinterpretation of “The Bride of Frankenstein,” flatlined at the box office with $7.3 million domestically and $13.6 million globally in its first weekend of release. That’s a terrible result given that Warner Bros. spent $90 million to produce the R-rated film, not including a reported $65 million on marketing expenses. Related Stories Robert De Niro Calls on Americans to 'Resist' Donald Trump and 'Save the Country': 'Trump Is Destroying It. It's Sick. It's F---ed Up' Park Chan-wook to Preside Over 79th Cannes Film Festival Jury Set in the 1930s, “The Bride!” follows a very lonely Frankenstein’s monster (Christian Bale) and his undead love interest (Jessie Buckley) as deranged outlaws on the run. Middling reviews, frighteningly bad audience scores and a puzzling release date didn’t help the turnout for “The Bride!,” which landed wildly behind the studio’s projections of $16 million to $18 million domestically and $40 million globally. This ends a remarkable winning streak for Warner Bros. after a string of nine No. 1 hits, including “A Minecraft Movie,” “Sinners,” “Weapons” and “Wuthering Heights.” Popular on Variety Here, Variety autopsies five reasons why “The Bride!” failed to inject new life into the box office. Inauspicious release date “The Bride!” was originally scheduled to debut on Oct. 3, 2025, which made sense given its proximity to Halloween. There’s a reason that horror movies tend to thrive during the spookiest month of the year. So then why would Warner Bros. executives relocate a film where (spoiler alert!) the Halloween anthem “Monster Mash” plays over the end credits to a time as random as early March? Sure, this calendar placement has been favorable to the studio’s recent tentpoles, including “The Batman” and “Dune: Part Two.” (It helped that audiences actually liked those films.) But “The Bride!” might have done nominally better in theaters during the season of the dead. Too much “Frankenstein,” too little time One reason “The Bride!” was pushed to 2026 was to distance itself from Guillermo del Toro’s take on “Frankenstein,” starring Jacob Elordi as the stitched-together monster known as the Creature. That movie, which premiered last August at Venice Film Festival and landed on Netflix in November, has remained in the cultural conversation as an awards player. (“Frankenstein” was nominated for nine Oscars, including best picture.) Even though Gyllenhaal and del Toro’s movies were vastly different, the Gothic subject matter was too similar to be released just a few months apart. Hollywood, maybe it’s time to put a pin in Mary Shelley adaptations? Budget gone wild “The Bride!” cost way, way too much for an R-rated, genre-bending crime story with arthouse ambitions. When Mike De Luca and Pam Abdy began crafting their slate as Warner Bros. Motion Picture Group co-chairs, they placed a big emphasis on expensive, auteur-driven swings. It paid off in the case of “Sinners,” an Oscar darling that generated $370 million globally against a $90 million budget. And much of the studio’s 2025 slate was populated by commercial winners, such as “A Minecraft Movie” and “Final Destination 6,” which generated some enviable profit margins. But, so far, their other gambles lost a lot of money: 2024’s “Joker: Folie à Deux” was rejected with $207 million against a $250 million budget; 2025’s sci-fi satire “Mickey 17” stumbled with $117 million against a $118 million budget; and “One Battle After Another,” another awards frontrunner, only generated $209 million against a $140 million budget. In a note to press on Sunday morning, Warner Bros. defended the results of “The Bride!” by writing, “In an increasingly ‘risk-averse’ business like ours, we believe the business is better served with studios taking bold swings on originals like this one.” That’s true — and Hollywood shouldn’t stop investing in originality. But there has to be a way to take chances without betting the farm. A press tour that forgot to sell the movie Apparently, audiences don’t want to hear how the monster was stitched together. During the promotional circuit, Gyllenhaal spent a lot of time talking about the film’s tragic test screenings when she needed to be convincing the masses to buy a ticket. Meanwhile, her star, Buckley, was busy on the awards circuit as the frontrunner in the Oscar best actress race for “Hamnet.” Then again, there was probably a reason the cast didn’t want to do a ton of publicity. Audience rejection It’s as simple as that. Reviews were weak. But moviegoers were downright dismissive, saddling “The Bride!” with a “C+” grade on CinemaScore exit polls. When word-of-mouth is that lethal, there’s no amount of marketing magic or charming stories on late-night talk shows that can convince people to get off the couch. That’s the scary truth. Jump to Comments Harry Styles Crashes Ryan Gosling’s Alien-Filled ‘Saturday Night Live’ Opening Monologue Box Office: ‘Hoppers’ Bites Down on $13.2 Million; ‘The Bride!’ Stumbles With $3 Million Quentin Tarantino Is Developing a British Play Tipped for Fall Premiere, Possibly on West End James G. Robinson, Morgan Creek Co-Founder, Dies at 90 Timothée Chalamet Faces Backlash From Ballet and Opera Communities After Viral ‘No One Cares’ Comment: ‘We’d Love To Change Your Mind’ Pete Docter Says Pixar Cut LGBTQ Storyline From ‘Elio’ Because ‘We’re Making a Movie, Not Hundreds of Millions of Dollars of Therapy’ JavaScript is required to load the comments. Loading comments...