Disney+ Labels THE FANTASTIC FOUR: FIRST STEPS A “Box Office Hit” On Its Home Page

Disney+ Labels THE FANTASTIC FOUR: FIRST STEPS A “Box Office Hit” On Its Home Page

Despite its positive critical reception, The Fantastic Four: First Steps did not live up to financial expectations. Now, Disney has labeled the film a box office success on its streaming service.

By DanielKlissmman - Nov 05, 2025 07:11 PM EST
Filed Under: Fantastic Four

It's a time of celebration, because The Fantastic Four: First Steps is now on Disney+. Set in the 1960s, the film took Marvel's First Family back to its roots of space exploration and scientific wonder. The team's family dynamic was also at the forefront of the story, with Pedro Pascal, Vanessa Kirby, Ebon Moss-Bachrach and Joseph Quinn bringing the characters to life pretty much flawlessly. The film arrived to an impressive positive reception, scoring an 86% on Rotten Tomatoes. Unfortunately, things weren't as hot financially. 

First Steps made $521 million worldwide, and for a movie with a reported budget of $200 million before marketing, that number is likely not high enough for it to have broken even theatrically. Now, though, there's been a fun new development regarding the optics of the film's financial performance. As mentioned, First Steps is now on Disney+. Upon opening the app, some users will have the film front and center on their home page. There, the movie's poster is accompanied by this message:

"Watch the Box Office Hit Now."

image host

Though Fantastic Four was the highest-grossing Marvel Studios project worldwide in 2025—coming in ahead of Thunderbolts* ($382 million) and Captain America: Brave New World ($415 million)—it was still considered a disappointment, so it's curious to see it labeled as a box office success on the streamer. As to why Disney would brand the movie a hit, it's likely a marketing effort to make the project as enticing as possible for potential new viewers. Films are typically considered more relevant when they're released in theaters before hitting streaming. They're also arguably given an added status boost when they're box office successes. 

Labeling the movie—which is freshly out of theaters—a financial success could influence people into watching it. Admittedly, streaming viewers may not provide a significant financial benefit for Disney when compared to ticket-buyers during the film's theatrical run. However, enough viewers tuning into First Steps could, theoretically, boost public awareness around it. That could benefit Marvel in the long term, given the pivotal role the Fantastic Four are expected to play in Avengers: Doomsday. Increasing the heroes' public profile (as little as said increase may be) by marketing their film could help with excitement for the upcoming team-up event. 

Keep in mind, Disney+ declaring Fantastic Four a hit isn't, by any means, some sort of Earth-shattering scandal. It's more of an amusing representation of a marketing push.  

Having said that all of that, it may also not be entirely out of the question to label First Steps as a success. Superman, from DC Studios—which came out in the same month as Fantastic Four—made $615 million worldwide. That is roughly only a $94-million difference. Superman is often perceived as a massive financial success, and, realistically speaking, the difference between it and First Steps is nearly negligible. Given that, it's not shocking to see Marvel Studios seemingly attempting to use the same message used for Superman to improve public perception of its tentpole.

The Fantastic Four: First Steps is now streaming on Disney+. 

About The Author:
DanielKlissmman
Member Since 8/28/2021
Daniel Klissmman is an entertainment journalist who's written for Movie Pilot, CBR.com, Cinemark and AMC Theatres. He loves superheroes with a passion and really wishes he'll one day get to hang out with Moon Knight.
ZOOTOPIA 2's Rotten Tomatoes Score Revealed As First Reviews Whether Disney Sequel Has Been Worth The Wait
Related:

ZOOTOPIA 2's Rotten Tomatoes Score Revealed As First Reviews Whether Disney Sequel Has Been Worth The Wait

THE FANTASTIC FOUR's Ralph Ineson Hits Back At Rob Liefeld After Disparaging Remarks About MCU Reboot
Recommended For You:

THE FANTASTIC FOUR's Ralph Ineson Hits Back At Rob Liefeld After Disparaging Remarks About MCU Reboot

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

1 2
Lisa89
Lisa89 - 11/5/2025, 7:22 PM
User Comment Image
EskimoJ
EskimoJ - 11/5/2025, 7:29 PM
I mean, it obviously wasn't huge, but it did fairly well and why wouldn't Disney hype up its own product?
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 11/5/2025, 8:02 PM
@EskimoJ - Hyping up a product usually doesn't include outright lying about it.
Havenless
Havenless - 11/5/2025, 9:40 PM
@CorndogBurglar - Where’s the lie. People have become so hyperbolic that 500m$ is now not a hit
mountainman
mountainman - 11/5/2025, 10:10 PM
@Havenless - Generally a movie has to make 2.5x its budget to earn profit. This is because theaters take a cut and additional marketing costs. Just using rough estimates, a $200 million movie needs to earn $500 just to not lose money. This movie barely earned any money for the studio so it cannot be classified as a hit.

To help with this in the future, learn about the difference between revenue (money made) and profits (money made minus costs and expenses).
LeoAtrox1
LeoAtrox1 - 11/5/2025, 11:05 PM
@CorndogBurglar - Do you realize that "hit" is a subjective term? There's not an actual objective benchmark that determines what is a "hit" movie. Seeing as how it is subjective, it's not a lie if someone's criteria is simply different than yours. So "outright lie" is outright wrong.
TheCoonII
TheCoonII - 11/6/2025, 9:27 AM
@Havenless - well you see superman made more that automatically makes this a failure (please note the sarcasm)
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 11/6/2025, 2:13 PM
@Havenless - Generally speaking, if a studio loses money then it's considered a flop, not a hit.
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 11/6/2025, 2:14 PM
@LeoAtrox1 - Generally speaking, if a movie loses money its considered a flop. Not a hit.
Apophis71
Apophis71 - 11/7/2025, 8:15 AM
@CorndogBurglar - Even IF a studio doesn't cover ALL costs for production at the BO alone it can STILL turn a profit once you then add on digital sales/rentals, merch and licencing etc.

The break even point is normaly said to be 2.5 time reported production budget which on a reported $200M means it crossed that point thus into profit even if some dispute those figures and maths. Those numbers ARE fairly debated but even still AFTER covering at minimum MOST the costs at the BO it will easily make a reasonable to good amount of profit over and above costs from digital sales/rentals, merch etc without even factoring in a fiscal figure for how much free D+ viewing figures adds to all that.

There has been over 9,000 films made this year with almost 600 BO releases in America alone already thus domestic is almost in the top 1% of movies in regard to TOTAL ticket sales (as sitting at 6th highest DBO of the year) regardless if it made a profit or not. That doesn't normaly qualify as a flop esp so with high aggragate critic/audience scores AND passing 2.5 times reported production budget.

It isn't a smash hit, or massive hit, or runaway success. It did the bare minimum it needed to do, it did OK. However on every statistical measure it JUST scraped past the point where on all metrics that matter it CAN be called a hit even if any of us don't think it was and marketing is always going to use clever wording to push as positive a narrative as they can thus making this entire thing barely worth comment cos the studio simply did what all studios would do giving the facts of this case.

What it certainly isn't is a flop even if in the grey zone between what we choose to define as hit/flop on varying metrics just as MoS and SM2025 were not flops even if many may think they under performed or barely scraped a profit.
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 11/7/2025, 8:43 AM
@Apophis71 - Are you missing the point? They called it a "box office hit". All those other things you mentioned about a movie making money in the long run are things that happen outside of the box office.

You can't call something a "box office" hit if you're relying on all these other things outside of box office numbers to turn an actual meaningful profit.
Apophis71
Apophis71 - 11/7/2025, 10:01 AM
@CorndogBurglar - As I imply depends on definition of BO hit BUT it is roughly in the top 1% at the DBO this year (WWBO even higher as in the top 10 BO returns of 9,000 WW films) AND crossed the normal calc of break even point of 2.5x reported budget AND over 90% positive verified BO audience reviews ALL suffice to call it a hit on those individual criteria or in combo, just, no matter how small total profits end up being but fair if any DON'T think it is and/or only narrowly on technicalities of certain narrow definitions.

What it wasn't, by ANY definition, was a flop even if it didn't do enough by any personal metric to qualify as a hit either thus in a grey zone between.
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 11/7/2025, 3:24 PM
@Apophis71 - Thats fair. It definitely does depend on what we're talking about.

If we're talking about total number of people that went and saw it, then no its probably not a flop. Which is probably the metric everyone needs to go off of when talking about flops, if we're being honest.

Because if a movie has a massive budget, but still gets an extremely large amount of customers, it still may not break even, but can we really call that movie a flop then?

I think Doomsday is a good example of this. That budget is rumored to be insanely high. It may not matter if it pulls $1 billion at the box office, it still may not break even. But if it pulls $1 billion, how can anyone really call it a flop?
Apophis71
Apophis71 - 11/7/2025, 4:34 PM
@CorndogBurglar - Yup, biggest problem is bloated budgets which they somehow need to get a handle on, just hopefully not with AI actors :D
Huskers
Huskers - 11/5/2025, 7:36 PM
You know I just watched it for the first time today, and I was pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed it. It’s by far the best FF movie I’ve seen outside of The Incredibles. For the first time onscreen they really felt like a family, which is the key to the FF. And Reed was definitely a super genius, he invented faster than light travel! So I enjoyed it!
dragon316
dragon316 - 11/6/2025, 8:14 AM
@Huskers - felt like family maybe didn’t fight like team mostly about sue whole movie
String
String - 11/5/2025, 7:37 PM
Honestly, in today's climate, theatrical gross is not the only measure to determine if a film is a hit or not. Product endorsements, digital sells, physical media, country tax credits all play a part in the accounting process for films. Fantastic Four: First Steps filmed in U.K. for a reason. That country offers up a % of tax relief on productions and allow films with high-production costs to become cheaper to produce. All of that plays a factor if a film makes money or loses money. We won't know until a publication like Forbes does a forensic study and gives readers a point-by-point analysis but at the moment Disney knows, if a film they distributed is a dud or not.
CreateNowSlpL8r
CreateNowSlpL8r - 11/5/2025, 7:55 PM
@String - "Honestly, in today's climate, theatrical gross is not the only measure to determine if a film is a hit or not."

Huh? Yeah, they got a tax break which btw, denied American jobs. Also, a movies theatrical run is 100% the only way to determin if a film is a hit or not.

Even using the BS $200m budget (rumors say it could have been up to 350m with reshoots) and marketing, this film didnt even break even. So not only is it not a hit, it failed financially.

I dont know why we have to move the goal posts all the time.
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 11/5/2025, 8:03 PM
@String - Theatrical gross is 100% the only way to determine of a movie is "box office hit". Which is what they are claiming.
Havenless
Havenless - 11/5/2025, 9:42 PM
@CreateNowSlpL8r - How did it not break even? You’re just coming up with random numbers
CreateNowSlpL8r
CreateNowSlpL8r - 11/5/2025, 10:40 PM
@Havenless - Ugh, that was their own numbers numbnuts.

Now if you're asking about the rumored 350m it because marketing isn't part of the original budget and an industry standard guess is 50%. Now, add reshoots which not only did this film like most MCU films have them but they were screentesting multiple cuts.

Finally, for the last time, the studio doesnt get nearly the 520m gross and honesly, Im tired of explaining it to people on this board. Overseas is much less. China is as low as 25%. Domestically is a rolling number, depending on the size of the film. It can start at 60% but winds down as the movie goes on. Depending on the length of time, it can go as low as 40%.

So this film lost money. Just like Acolyte, Willow, etc. We won't what they actually spend until the financials get released but it wont stop all the usual site from pretending it made money, just like every other project they shill for.

All three Marvel movies lost money this year. Its as simple as that.
LeoAtrox1
LeoAtrox1 - 11/5/2025, 11:12 PM
@CreateNowSlpL8r - The estimated budget for production and marketing is $400-500 million for Fantastic Four (an estimated $250 million of that was the production budget). Its global box office take was $508.5 million, making it profitable even before factoring revenue generated from tie-ins (endorsements with third-party companies, toy and clothing sales, etc.). There is no credible information that suggests Fantastic Four lost money, even with the most conservative estimate.

And besides that, "hit" is a subjetive term. So, no, "a movies[sic] theatrical run is 100% the only way to determin[sic] if a film is a hit or not." In fact, there is no way to determine objectively if a movie is a hit. "You know it when you see it." And how you see it clearly isn't the same way that some other people see it.
CreateNowSlpL8r
CreateNowSlpL8r - 11/6/2025, 12:02 AM
@LeoAtrox1 - This could be the dumbest post I've read in awhile here, and that is saying a lot.


I movie is a hit based on a subjective feeling one might have, not facts. How I see it is facts. Even the OP article says its didnt break even. You guys dont understand how budgets work I guess.

"an estimated $250 million of that was the production budget). Its global box office take was $508.5 million, making it profitable even before factoring revenue generated from tie-ins"

Go read my post again and do math. It did NOT break even. Add the marketing budget, not break down the box office. I reviewed the movie on THIS site. I was pretty fair to it. I didn't say YOU shouldn't like it. I said, it financially failed.

Tie ins? Like what? The claim is BOX OFFICE HIT. Not streaming hit. Not how many t-shirts were sold. Box office. So whatever you are trying to quote is wrong. A hit is something that is successful at the box office. We use "cult following" to describe a movie that underperformed but was received well and grew a loyal fandom over time.

"And how you see it clearly isn't the same way that some other people see it."

Quite right. I see it properly, and you true believers try to argue facts with feelings.

It lost money.
Apophis71
Apophis71 - 11/6/2025, 6:31 AM
@CreateNowSlpL8r - Sigh, the go to rule of thumb for break even point has always been 2.5 times production budget thus meaning if we go by that it ended it's run with a small profit after crossing the $500M mark. I know many dispute the reported numbers and the maths of it all but if by the standard metric it broke even it CAN be classed as a hit technicaly speaking even if any dispute calling it one, end of story.

Everything else beyond that is just opinion for something you admit is a fairly standard marketing gimmick barely worth commenting on yet here we are. The film did OK considering the current state of ticket sales across the board for ALL genres but esp so for CBM's (it isn't 2019 and nowhere near back to those sort of numbers).

It wasn't a MASSIVE hit and nor is anyone saying Superman was either, almost nothing that wasn't Minecraft was thus far this year, but it did OK. Enough so that no matter how we do the maths it will make the studio a profit as they continue to make money off of films even after the end their theatrical run anyway what with digital sales, merch etc.
CreateNowSlpL8r
CreateNowSlpL8r - 11/6/2025, 10:08 AM
@Apophis71 - I dont know why person after person keeps trying to tell me I'm wrong. Marvel doesn't release three movies in a year hoping they do ok. In the case of FF, the put all their chips in. It was a massive marketing campaign. You cannot classify a movie that did just ok a hit. The current stake of ticket sales doesn't matter. As a matter of fact, if we adjust for inflation, this movie did terrible. If you want a 1:1 comparision, you would calculate it in ticket sales, but they dont do that. Since prices are double what they were, that means 1 person went instead of 2.

What you're doing is playing with the numbers. All of it boils down to excuses. For example, if this article was about Lilo & Stitch, or Barbie. You guys wouldn't be playing word salad with me because those were hits. People went to see those films in droves.

You guys keep mixing up how you feel about the movie. This movie lost money. It doesn't matter what mark it crossed if they pushed it to the moon and it still failed.
Apophis71
Apophis71 - 11/6/2025, 6:28 PM
@CreateNowSlpL8r - Nothing to do with how I felt about the movie, cos when I posted that I hadn't even seen it, but 2.5 times reported budget has ALWAYS been the main go to rough calc for break even point thus with a reported budget of $200M it made a profit AND is in the top ten releases of the year.

As I say it wasn't a MASSIVE hit, didn't do HUGE numbers JUST OK, but in the current climate any film that turns any kind of profit CAN be called a hit if anyone chooses to, any film in the top ten this point in the year likewise and a studio is always likely to spin it in the most positive light possible.

As such on pure statistics, even if pushing it to classify it as one, it DOES qualify as a hit esp when you also look at aggragate review scores and all of that SANS opinion on if the film is good or not.

I mean I was saying the exact same with MoS that it turned a profit thus a hit EVEN if it underperformed in anyones personal PoV, a film I was so-so on, when others were trying to paint it as a flop and THAT was at a time when a billion for a CBM was almost considered almost the norm after Avengers and the Nolanverse for A listers, not beyond anyones expectations. Heck I've called films a statistical hit that I thought were REALY bad movies in the past, cos ANYTHING film wise that on paper passes break even point CAN be called a hit and always can be even if pushing it to do so but doesn't mean you or I have to agree that they are, only that they CAN be called one IF they pass break even and doubly so if on aggragate well recieved.
CreateNowSlpL8r
CreateNowSlpL8r - 11/6/2025, 9:57 PM
@Apophis71 - I cant go back and forth with you if you refuse to take 2 seconds to educate yourself.

"with a reported budget of $200M"

That is the starting production budget. It does not include marketing with is usually 50% or more of the total production budget. That means, reshoots or anything else is added on to the total budget. So even using friendly math, its a 300-350m dollar budget. Disney/Marvel/Star Wars has reportedly lied about budgets. They arent the only ones but they are known for it. From movies to TV shows. Then the financials hit and we find out the truth. Thats what I meant earlier about the Acolyte. They said it was 180m when it was A LOT more than that.

So Im going to say it one last time. The claim is box office hit. The only metric to quantify that is ticket sales and this movie DID NOT break even.

Thats it. Thats the answer.
Apophis71
Apophis71 - 11/7/2025, 6:11 AM
@CreateNowSlpL8r - The standard calculation for break even NEVER included marketing costs, esp with front loaded films.

WHY?

Cos first two weeks the studio gets MORE than 50% back and some of those marketing costs are covered with advertising product ties in's/licences in advance of release but ALSO why it is 2.5 time production cost and NOT just a flat two times that. Marketing is normaly capped at a max half prod budget, sometimes well below that but an exact figure rarely known thus negating an accurate calculation including it.

Everything else is your OPINION, not a solid statistical fact, and as I say a studio will put as possitive a spin as possible on anything and everything THUS if it can (even if fair to question) be stated a film DID pass break even point by the lowest and most standard way of calculating it at the BO AND it has high aggragate review scores it CAN qualify under the definition of a BO hit, end of story.
CreateNowSlpL8r
CreateNowSlpL8r - 11/7/2025, 12:08 PM
@Apophis71 - We are saying some of the same thing.

Where we disagree is I dont believe those numbers because of Marvel's history of lying about them and the access media spewing headlines of success only to contradict it a year later when the financials come out.

So I dont believe this fim cost $200 + 50% marketing. The freakin Acolyte cost more than that. BNW cost more than that and Thunderbolts marketing budget was reportedly 100m, 20m more than the reported production budget. Thunderbolts used mostly practical effects and didnt have complex, CGI set pieces. I can buy that. FF was marketed WAY more heavily than TB.

Also keep in mind. Disney reported BNW at 180m but insiders claim it cost upwards or 400m due to reshooting half the movie.
Apophis71
Apophis71 - 11/7/2025, 12:17 PM
@CreateNowSlpL8r - I never believe any reported numbers from Hollyweird, but is the closest thing to a solid enough number to base the rough 2.5x calc of break even point so is what it is and on the basis of that number it did pass the mystical magic line in the sand into profit at the BO even if we don't believe it all to be true which lends itself to carefully worded marketing spin. Go much further into the numbers it gets crazy complicated fast what with rebates, tax breaks, grants, product placements, licencing etc etc.
CreateNowSlpL8r
CreateNowSlpL8r - 11/7/2025, 12:55 PM
@Apophis71 - I agree, but we do know that once the real numbers sneak out, Disney has a history. So just ballparking the percentages the theaters took, and accounting for reshoots, there isnt a lot of wiggle room.

Plus, if this movie made money, every outlet would be bragging about it and even this site is admitting it probably didn't break even. Superman probably didn't either but it did make a little more money.

The truth is, Marvel and Star Wars are offensively inefficient. Independent of quality, they are bloated and run studios like the federal governement. How does F does the Acolyte cost that much money? Well, they gave it to an ineperienced activist to lead it. Looks at Godzilla Minus One. They make Hollywood look stupid with what they can product for so little.
UltimaRex
UltimaRex - 11/5/2025, 7:41 PM
The studios have changed their definition of a "hit".

The box office run is the advert for digital and streaming. If it makes one dollar over budget, it's a hit now.
soberchimera
soberchimera - 11/5/2025, 7:41 PM
User Comment Image
HashTagSwagg
HashTagSwagg - 11/5/2025, 7:48 PM
User Comment Image
epc1122
epc1122 - 11/5/2025, 7:56 PM
I think the big thing is, does it really affect me in any kind of way? I won’t see the money and if they want to deem it a box office hit then great for
them 👍. Started to watch it again for the second time this morning and it was a slightly better experience for me. Didn’t finish bc I had to go to work. But in the long run, does it really matter if they want to label this movie a box office hit? Really?
Skestra
Skestra - 11/5/2025, 8:00 PM
I think we're all misunderstanding what they meant. They're implying the Box Office TOOK a hit - hence, "the box office hit."

Doesn't make a difference though. A good movie is still a good movie.
Lokiwasright
Lokiwasright - 11/5/2025, 8:26 PM
@Skestra - it was mid. Not as fun as anything from phase 1 2 and 3
TheLobster
TheLobster - 11/5/2025, 8:17 PM
Marvel is truly becoming a joke of what they used to be. Trying to do FYC for meaningless crap like Brave New World and labeling this a box office hit when it barely edged out a profit is a huge LOL

I’m honestly embarrassed for the studio at this point. Let’s hope Doomsday actually hits or else they’re so monumentally [frick]ed lmao
Mongrol
Mongrol - 11/5/2025, 8:34 PM


Well done, now bring on Kangdom Come

User Comment Image
1 2

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.

View Recorder