THUNDERBOLTS* aka THE NEW AVENGERS Crosses $300M Worldwide; Plus How It's Stacking Up Against BRAVE NEW WORLD

THUNDERBOLTS* aka THE NEW AVENGERS Crosses $300M Worldwide; Plus How It's Stacking Up Against BRAVE NEW WORLD

In its third weekend, Thunderbolts* has surpassed $300 million worldwide. The Marvel film was produced on a $180 million budget, with an additional $100 million allocated for marketing.

By MarkJulian - May 18, 2025 01:05 PM EST
Filed Under: Thunderbolts

Closing out its third week of release, Marvel's Thunderbolts* has officially grossed over $300 million at the worldwide box office.

"The New Avengers" added $16.5 million domestically and $15.7 million from international territories to bring its worldwide gross to $325.7 million.

The problem here is that the film carries a hefty $180 million production budget and has an estimated $100 million marketing budget, meaning Marvel Studios' total all-in cost is approximately $280 million.

 The revenue split between movie theaters and studios is a complex and dynamic process that isn't a fixed percentage.

The division of box office earnings isn't etched in stone with a single, unwavering percentage; rather, it's a fluid arrangement that evolves over a film's theatrical run.

In the crucial first few weeks of a movie's release , the lion's share of ticket sales typically flows into the studio's coffers. This initial dominance, often ranging from a substantial 60% upwards or more, acknowledges the studio's significant investment in production and marketing.

However, as the cinematic spotlight on a film begins to dim with the passage of time, and its box office draw naturally tapers off, the revenue pendulum gradually swings, granting theaters a progressively larger slice of the remaining pie.

Also, large cinema chains frequently command more advantageous terms from studios, securing a greater portion of the revenue compared to their smaller, independent counterparts, who naturally possess less leverage at the negotiating table.

Despite the intricate ebb and flow of these percentages throughout a film's theatrical run, a common industry understanding suggests that, when the final credits roll on a movie's time in theaters, the cumulative revenue split often approximates an even 50/50 distribution between the studio and the theaters.

With Thunderbolts* carrying a $280 million cost for Marvel Studios, it needs to reach somewhere in the neighborhood of $500-$560 million just to break even (from theater ticket sales alone- home video and blu-ray sales, along with broadcast rights will ensure that the film recoups its costs, eventually).

Looking at the current projections for Thunderbolts*, it's unlikely to get there. Currently, box office tracking has Thunderbolts* running similarly to Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings ($432.2M worldwide) and The Eternals ($402.06M worldwide).

In fact, Thunderbolts* is currently running behind Captain America: Brave New World, which sat at $163.6 million domestically after its third weekend of release, while Thunderbolts is currently sitting at $155.4 million domestically. Globally, Brave New World sat at $341.8 million worldwide after three weeks while Thunderbolts* currently sits at $325.7 million.

The current narrative that Thunderbolts* is some sort of runaway smash hit is somewhat baffling, especially when the film that preceded it (which was painted as a big misfire) is currently outperforming it.

The only advantage that Thunderbolts* has over Brave New World, from a financial standpoint, was the fact that the SAG-AFTRA and WGA strike, and costly reshoots, ballooned the budget for Brave New World to a reported $380 million.

Thunderbolts* also have vastly superior review scores with an 88% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes, while Brave New World came in 'rotten' at 47%.

Still, what do you think a film studio would rather have- a film that has bad reviews but makes a lot of money, or a film that has great reviews but is going to put them in the red? Although neither Thunderbolts* nor Brave New World will turn a profit from ticket sales alone.

While $300 million worldwide is a significant number, Thunderbolts* still has a ways to go to be considered a major financial success for Marvel Studios, especially when compared to its production and marketing costs and its performance against a film with weaker reviews.

THUNDERBOLTS* Concept Art Reveals A Black Ops Take On Taskmaster; Update On Expected Final Box Office
Related:

THUNDERBOLTS* Concept Art Reveals A Black Ops Take On Taskmaster; Update On Expected Final Box Office

THUNDERBOLTS* Nears $370 Million Worldwide; LILO & STITCH, MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE 8 Reach Impressive Benchmarks
Recommended For You:

THUNDERBOLTS* Nears $370 Million Worldwide; LILO & STITCH, MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE 8 Reach Impressive Benchmarks

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 3 4
grif
grif - 5/18/2025, 1:23 PM
clown in a cornfield did well. could be the next terrifier

SuperCat
SuperCat - 5/18/2025, 1:29 PM
User Comment Image
epc1122
epc1122 - 5/18/2025, 1:30 PM
I don’t think thunderbolts is considered a hit from a financial standpoint, but people generally liked the movie which is a step in the right direction of getting back some goodwill from fans and the general audience. I feel like it’s been awhile since people in general liked a marvel movie since endgame.
TheVisionary25
TheVisionary25 - 5/18/2025, 1:34 PM
@epc1122 - not really true if you have seen the audience receptions for various films like Shang Chi ,NWH , Multiverse of Madness etc.

People have generally liked the films even if few have permeated pop culture much
epc1122
epc1122 - 5/18/2025, 1:53 PM
@TheVisionary25 - ugh, had this long nicely written response and the site booted me off lol ok, it’s been awhile since I saw reviews and scores from those movies and admittedly I didn’t think the movies were fantastic but they were generally liked. So I’m wrong about that. Been on here too much and from some people’s comments, you would think those movies were bombs. While they weren’t monster hits like movies from previous phases, guess they weren’t as disliked as I thought. But in general, I don’t think marvel has the lore that it once had and thunderbolts was a step in the right direction, even though financially it’s not as profitable. I think in general, between the marvels and captain America: brave new world, and the tv shows, marvel has some making up to do bc the fans and general audience aren’t liking the output.
MyCoolYoung
MyCoolYoung - 5/18/2025, 2:03 PM
@epc1122 - I would say Multiverse of Madness, No Way Home
, Deadpool and Wolverine, and I'd even say Love and Thunder were monster hits. Multiverse of Madness and Love and Thunder did not have China releases. I'm not sure which others didn't. The Shang-Chi releases were day-and-date because of COVID. Evaluating the MCU after *Endgame* is hard because of COVID.
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 5/18/2025, 8:24 PM
@MyCoolYoung - All of thise you mentioned were big hits financially. Even Love and Thunder.

This is what people seem not to understand. When they make movies of characters people are invested in, the people are still showing up to them.

This is why Marvel needs to just stick to the characters that work for a while. Dr Strange w and Thor weren't even particularly good movies. Dr Strange was decent, but Thor 4 is one of the worst Marvel movies to date. And they both made big money. Because people like and are invested in Thor and Strange.

Marvel has put out too many disappointments over the past 5 years. They dont have the good will of the fans anymore to be willing to go see anything with Marvel in the names.

So they need to just focus on the characters people care about and put out bangers.

The problem is the damage might already be done. Thor 4 was awful and there have been too many other bad movies. It might be hard to get people in the theatre for a Thor 5 now. And they definitely cant be taking chances with no name characters anymore.
MyCoolYoung
MyCoolYoung - 5/18/2025, 8:51 PM
@CorndogBurglar – Honestly, I don’t agree. It’s not like characters such as Thor, Doctor Strange, Iron Man, or even Captain America were exactly Marvel’s A-List. It’s the movie’s job to make people care about them just like they did with Guardians of the Galaxy.

Comic book movies need to adjust like the rest of the world. Box offices haven’t recovered since COVID, and they probably never will. People would rather watch films at home. So, while there will still be billion-dollar movies, there will also be good films like Thunderbolts that don’t make bank at the box office, but can make up the difference through home media and streaming. That’s where the new age is headed.

I don’t think Love and Thunder or Doctor Strange 2 were bad movies, and I don’t believe the MCU has as many disappointments as everyone around here says. But that’s just a matter of opinion, and I’m not really interested in changing anyone’s mind about it.
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 5/19/2025, 12:18 AM
@MyCoolYoung - In the beginning, no, Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, and Dr Strange weren't their A-list. Thats 100% true. But they became their A-listers very quickly.

By the time Guardians of the Galaxy came out the MCU already had a sizeable following. Avengers had already made a billion. People were not only invested on those 4 characters, they were invested in the MCU as a whole.

So it made ot easier for Guardians to be successful.

When you look at all the top money makers since Endgame they are all characters from the Infinity Saga that people love and are invested in.

Dr Strange. Spider-Man. Deadpool and Wolverine. Guardians. Thor. They all made great money.

When you look at the others that havent made great money, they are almost all characters that people aren't invested in.

Wakanda Forever that didnt have T'Challa. The Marvels. Thunderbolts. Sam Wilson Captain America. Eternals.

Black Widow didnt make good money for obvious reasons.

Shang Chi making money was the outlier.

And Ant-Man making next to nothing is the other outlier.

But there's an obvious pattern here.

The main thing is that people are 100% still willing to go to the movies if its about something they are interested in. They are less likely to go now when its something they aren't interested in, thats true.

But all those movies I listed above made great money. Barbie. Top Gun 2. Oppenheimer. Minecraft. There are more.

This proves without a doubt that people still want to go to the movies. But they are more cautious now, probably because of how expensive it is these days.

So studios need to be more careful about what projects they green light and they need to he more careful with their budgets.
Batmangina
Batmangina - 5/19/2025, 8:37 AM
@CorndogBurglar - The damage is DEFINITELY done. IDGAF what they put out, I'm not going to the theater.

I highly doubt that I'm the only one with this stance.
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 5/19/2025, 8:45 AM
@Batmangina - Yeah, what I meant by that is whether or not its irreversible damage.

For example, if Doomsday, Secret Wars, and possibly most importantly X-Men all come out and do really well and people love them, will people start becoming more willing to go back to theatres for the lesser known characters?
DarkTanicus
DarkTanicus - 5/19/2025, 12:16 PM
@CorndogBurglar - That's if they're all stand-alone movies that you don't need to watch multiple TV series / 2 or more movies to understand what's going on. And considering Kang was being built up as the Big Bad, I don't see how that's going to happen.
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 5/19/2025, 12:38 PM
@DarkTanicus - I think the problem with Quantumania was it just wasnt good. Like you said, it had the new big bad of the MCU as the main villain, but it still bombed, or barely made any money at best. You didnt really need to watch anything for that.

I still think they just need stop making all these projects. Just stick to your tried and true characters and include everyone else in those.

There can be a few new films, but only after they've proven to be well liked after appearing in other films.
Batmangina
Batmangina - 5/19/2025, 4:29 PM
@CorndogBurglar - That's possible, not probable - we live in an era of atomized attention - Marvel was THE go to brand for event movies - those days are long gone and the trust has evaporated.

Nobody gives a [frick] about any of those characters anymore. The days of a packed theater losing their shit when Cap picks up Mjolnir are history, never to return.
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 5/19/2025, 4:40 PM
@Batmangina - Yeah, I cant disagree with this.
DarkTanicus
DarkTanicus - 5/20/2025, 11:29 AM
@Batmangina - 100%
jackbauer884
jackbauer884 - 5/18/2025, 1:33 PM
Its still below Brave New World, and will finished lower.
JurassicClunge
JurassicClunge - 5/18/2025, 1:39 PM
James Gunns DCU might just be successful due to people's MCU fatigue 👀

Do I think the DCU will get to the heights of the MCU? No....but I do think it can serve as a mcu alternative just by being the MCU in DCU universe paint.🧐

Could actually be perfect timing 🤔


Or the dcu could flop 😅
dragon316
dragon316 - 5/18/2025, 2:18 PM
@JurassicClunge - there is no mcu fatigue how many zombie vampire movies get released every year people still see them same with horror movies and kids movies
DarkTanicus
DarkTanicus - 5/19/2025, 12:22 PM
@dragon316 - Lol that's because you don't have to watch so many TV series / movies to know what's going on in those movies.
TheVisionary25
TheVisionary25 - 5/18/2025, 1:43 PM
Me trying to do all this B.O math:

User Comment Image

Even though I enjoyed Brave New World and thought Thunderbolts was solid , neither film felt truly like events or must sees like Sinners that would make people spend their money when they could just wait to see them in the comfort of their homes due to shortened theatrical windows.

It will be interesting to see how the next films from Marvel like Fantastic Four ,Avengers & Spider Man do since those are bigger marquee names.
GeneralZod
GeneralZod - 5/18/2025, 1:59 PM
And Fantastic Four featuring the Silver Surfer (she/her/hers) will be the third MCU flop to complete a natural hatrick for Marvel Studios in the same year. FF will struggle to cross $500MM.
sully
sully - 5/18/2025, 4:28 PM
@GeneralZod - It's plausible but it might hit 500mm simply because everyone has seemed to hop on Pedro Pascal's nutsack lately for whatever delusional reason.
JacobsLadder
JacobsLadder - 5/18/2025, 6:51 PM
@GeneralZod - you are correct sir.
CreateNowSlpL8r
CreateNowSlpL8r - 5/18/2025, 8:10 PM
@sully - 500m could still be a flop depending on what the actual budget is. They are doing reshoots now which wont count towards the initial budget numbers and they never include marketing. I think this one is in big trouble. THe people who would have showed up are so pissed about SS, they aren't going.

Like me, for example, and I am a big FF fan. Plus Pedro. What a stupid casting.

@GeneralZod
GeneralZod
GeneralZod - 5/18/2025, 9:55 PM
@CreateNowSlpL8r - Finally saw Thunderbolts today (which is an average MCU film (at least it's not a trainwreck)). The last trailer before the film began was Fantastic Four. Seeing Silver Surfer (she/her/hers) on the big screen is just an absolute abomination to behold. Feige (either with the backing of the neo-feminist politburo at Disney or at the direction of such politburo) has utterly wrecked the MCU. Very hard to get excited by their offerings with the constant, never-ending reminder in seemingly every Phase 5 film that half of the lead cast is composed of women, or leading men are emasculated.

@sully
NinnesMBC
NinnesMBC - 5/19/2025, 12:51 AM
@GeneralZod - "Very hard to get excited by their offerings with the constant, never-ending reminder in seemingly every Phase 5 film that half of the lead cast is composed of women, or leading men are emasculated." The fact you're actually bothered by comic book movies being led by actresses is absolutely and hilariously pathetic.
Qizaar
Qizaar - 5/19/2025, 9:13 AM
@GeneralZod - Not everything is political. Fantastic Four doesn't take place in the 616 universe where Silver Surfer is a guy. So it makes since that it's his wife who's in the comic ,and not some random gender swap like most people seem to think
GeneralZod
GeneralZod - 5/19/2025, 9:34 AM
@Qizaar - Nowhere did I say "everything is political." But you're being a bit naive to think that the average viewer is going to know what the 616 universe is and that, technically, Shalla-Bal is comic accurate because it's an original character (not really). In any event, there is only Norrin Radd appearing in Fantastic Four 48 to 50 (vol. 1) (the three-issue epic "The Coming of Galactus" story arc), which is what this 2025 movie is obviously about. At the end of the day, it is a 100% gender swap. You know. One of the 20 or so Feige has effected on the big screen. It's so old.

But ask critically, "why is it a gender swap?" Because there is only one woman (Sue) among the six protagonists and antagonists if you stay true to the comics and not infuse neo-feminism/DEI/whatever-you-want-to-call-it nonsense. So that made Surfer she/her/hers to make it two women among the six. Almost 50% gender balance, is how they look at it. Insanity.
GeneralZod
GeneralZod - 5/19/2025, 9:40 AM
@NinnesMBC - The fact that you are a Marvel Studios simp is absolutely and hilariously pathetic.
CreateNowSlpL8r
CreateNowSlpL8r - 5/19/2025, 10:08 AM
@GeneralZod - Yep. As a Silver Surfer fan I was almost offended watching that trailer. My son, who is a normie and doesn't even read comics said, "why is Silver Surfer a girl?" and walked out of the room. Thats when I had a feeling this was DOA.

Also the last part of what you said. It appears to me that Sue will go around half this movie reassuring Reed. Notice how when not Silver SUrfer asks who the protectors of the world are its pregnant Sue that answers. You go girls!

Without me and I suspect a lot of others.

Seriously, I think Doomsday could be in trouble. A stupid RDJ casting and the heroes all the ones people already didn't support. Spidey would help it for sure but most of those x-men are over 50! If FF bombs are they are a big focus, I dont know man.
CreateNowSlpL8r
CreateNowSlpL8r - 5/19/2025, 10:15 AM
@Qizaar - No, it doesn't. Stop referencing things you didn't read. I have those comics. Shes in like 5 panels and dies and he also becomes the SS by Franklin/Galactus. Its and elseworlds story. Its not canon. She has never been SS in 616.

@NinnesMBC - the fact that hes right and Marvel can't get anyone to watch their shows or turn a profit on their movies is pathetic. You do realize that 4 out of the last 6 MCU lost money, right? You guys can only run that misogynists, racist or whatever game so long. If all 3 movies fail, this studio is in big trouble. It is already honesly. Thats why they aren't tieing the shows to movies anymore. They can't get people to watch.

@GeneralZod
GeneralZod
GeneralZod - 5/19/2025, 12:11 PM
@CreateNowSlpL8r - FF is going to bomb. It pains me to say that, but i'm not in denial. I don't see this passing $600MM -- $500MM will be face-saving. I went yesterday with my normie GF to watch Thunderbolts, she was watching the FF trailer for the first time, and she whispered to me, "so they need the woman to be the leader?" referring of course to Sue Storm.
CreateNowSlpL8r
CreateNowSlpL8r - 5/19/2025, 12:32 PM
@GeneralZod - and you know they are trying to hide that its basically a Sue movie. Even the normies know it. So they will be going into Doomsday with 5 out of the last 7 MCU movies as bombs and I couldn't name the last successful D+ Marvel series. I think Wonderman is coming out this year and no one is watching that either. What a mess.

On top of it, I think Superman will crush at the box office whether its good or not. People are being critical of the dog, guess what woman and children like?
GeneralZod
GeneralZod - 5/19/2025, 2:29 PM
@CreateNowSlpL8r - When you say 5 out of 7, i would throw out Deadpool Wolverine, which is basically a Fox legacy movie. So it's really 6 out of 7 that have underperformed or outright crashed.

I agree about Superman. I think it's going to hit $800+MM, which would be a good start for the DCU's world-building efforts. It has flaws, but it feels like it has a lot of possibilities.
CreateNowSlpL8r
CreateNowSlpL8r - 5/19/2025, 6:05 PM
@GeneralZod - I did count that and only went so far back. If you look at the post Endgame list, its pretty rough if you take the Sony and Deadpool movie out.

Black Widow
Spider-Man: Far From Home - Sony
Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings
Eternals
Spider-Man: No Way Home - Sony
Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness
Thor: Love and Thunder
Black Panther: Wakanda Forever
Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3
The Marvels
Deadpool & Wolverine
Captain America: Brave New World
Thunderbolts*

Guardians, BP2 and Deadpool made money. It came out later when the financials leaded that Dr Strange lost money. So the rest are bombs with some pretty big ones in there. You can blame Shang Chi on Covid if you want. Its still a rough list. Like what studio would survive this? The one taking all that investment money..,
NinnesMBC
NinnesMBC - 5/19/2025, 8:59 PM
@GeneralZod - I'm a simp for calling out your clear insecurities about female characters from the comics leading their own movies? LMAO, I don't know why I expected a much smart reply from you. My bad, from now I'll lower my expecations regarding your ability to give a thoughtfulM valid response.
GeneralZod
GeneralZod - 5/20/2025, 12:06 AM
@NinnesMBC - "I'm a simp for calling out your clear insecurities about female characters from the comics leading their own movies?" No. Read again: you're a simp for simping for Marvel Studios, which is absolutely and hilariously pathetic.

Funny how you can dish it out, but you can't dish it in.
NinnesMBC
NinnesMBC - 5/20/2025, 1:07 AM
@GeneralZod - Reading comprehension is completely lost in you if that's really what you read. Nowhere did I defend Marvel Studios, instead I made a case of how comic book films led by female heroines upset you so much and the best you can do is throw around the word. But you know what's actually and truly absolutely and hilariously pathetic? Not just predicting what movies will fail two months in advance, but also your denial of your own flaws. Dish it or don't dish it in, you're a lose case.
GeneralZod
GeneralZod - 5/20/2025, 7:59 AM
@NinnesMBC - I might well be a "lose case" -- but denying that you're a Marvel Studios simp is absolutely and hilariously pathetic.
1 2 3 4

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.

View Recorder