THUNDERBOLTS* Will Fail To Break Even At The Box Office - Is Marvel Studios Planning A Strategy Change?

THUNDERBOLTS* Will Fail To Break Even At The Box Office - Is Marvel Studios Planning A Strategy Change?

It's now been confirmed that Thunderbolts* will not break even at the global box office, but could the movie's underperformance lead to a renewed focus on established MCU heavy-hitters? Check it out...

By JoshWilding - Jun 12, 2025 12:06 PM EST
Filed Under: Thunderbolts
Source: Variety

Deadpool & Wolverine broke box office records last summer. However, after Captain America: Brave New World underperformed in February (which wasn't helped by pricey reshoots), the hope was that Thunderbolts* might right the ship. 

Disney CEO Bob Iger hailed it as the "first and best" example of Marvel Studios' return to quality over quantity following overwhelmingly positive reactions—it remains one of the MCU's best-reviewed movies—and, six weeks later, it's made only $371 million worldwide. 

According to Variety, the studio intentionally reined in spending on Thunderbolts*. Executives were conscious that its leads were part of the pandemic-era Black Widow (which bypassed theaters for Disney+'s short-lived Premier Access service) and streaming series The Falcon and The Winter Soldier

Marvel Studios typically spends $200 million - $250 million to produce a blockbuster, and $120 million - $140 million to market it. In the case of Thunderbolts*, it was filmed for $180 million with a $100 million marketing spend.

However, "Thunderbolts* needed to make $425 million worldwide to break even, a figure that seems unachievable." It's not all bad news, though, as "Marvel is unique because it isn’t as encumbered as rivals by the profits or losses of single films. The company can recoup some costs through Disney+ and other home entertainment markets." Merchandise is also a factor.

The trade points out that 19 of Marvel Studios' 22 Infinity Saga movies grossed over $500 million worldwide. For the Multiverse Saga, it's been 6 out of 13, and this story indicates that there's now "a new ceiling for superhero movies that aren’t based on marquee characters...a diminished global marketplace and oversaturation of superhero stories on the big and small screen are partly responsible for the decline."

Exhibitor Relations analyst Jeff Bock adds, "These lower-tier comic book movies aren’t cinematic slam dunks anymore. 'Thunderbolts*' wrapping up after just a month in theaters is also a concern. These films aren’t legging out like previous iterations."

While not confirmed, the report suggests that, moving forward, Marvel Studios could focus on safer bets and bigger franchises: 

After July’s 'The Fantastic Four: First Steps,' another cinematic introduction of sorts, Marvel seems to be embracing a go-big-or-go-home mentality. The upcoming calendar is populated only by heavy hitters with hefty budgets: 'Avengers: Doomsday' and 'Spider-Man 4' in 2026 and 'Avengers: Secret Wars' in 2027. An untitled film is set for July 2027, and 'X-Men' and 'Black Panther' movies are in the works. But other projects that focus on one character, like 'Blade,' have been stuck in protracted limbo.

Did you watch Thunderbolts* in theaters? Let us know in the comments section below.

THUNDERBOLTS* Gag Reel And BTS Featurette Focusing On Lewis Pullman's Sentry Released
Related:

THUNDERBOLTS* Gag Reel And BTS Featurette Focusing On Lewis Pullman's Sentry Released

David Corenswet Wants To See An R-Rated SUPERMAN Project; James Gunn Talks Bollywood Influence
Recommended For You:

David Corenswet Wants To See An R-Rated SUPERMAN Project; James Gunn Talks Bollywood Influence

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
OptimusCrime
OptimusCrime - 6/12/2025, 12:34 PM
They already did.
Its just that these characters are far from populair enough to pull people to the theater.

Fantastic four should do better, but the fact that previous f4 outings hasnt been that good can hurt the box office.

dragon316
dragon316 - 6/12/2025, 1:54 PM
@OptimusCrime - captain marvel first movie made billion while sequel sucked has nothing do with characters falcon was in avengers end game look at his movie Harrison ford couldn’t save it be successful yeah some of it is character’s popularity not always
OptimusCrime
OptimusCrime - 6/12/2025, 1:57 PM
@dragon316 - you make no sense at all...
YonnyLayna
YonnyLayna - 6/12/2025, 3:48 PM
@dragon316 - yep it has to do with the character, her character is not astetically cool or eye candy, and the space opera angle was already done on Guardians she has nothing to survive the post endgame phase
BrainySleep
BrainySleep - 6/12/2025, 12:35 PM
Not surprised but disappointed as it was a good movie. Far more watchable than Cap 4.
THEKENDOMAN
THEKENDOMAN - 6/12/2025, 12:36 PM
With all that [frick]ing hype.

“Ohh, Marvel is back, they are back”.

“It hasn't been this good since Endgame”

The [frick]ing numbers say different, innit?

What a load of [frick]ing bollocks

For [frick]s sake

Comicmoviejunki
Comicmoviejunki - 6/12/2025, 1:30 PM
@THEKENDOMAN - calm down buddy. It was a good movie
THEKENDOMAN
THEKENDOMAN - 6/12/2025, 2:46 PM
@Comicmoviejunki - Well, I'm glad you [frick]ing enjoyed it.

Too [frick]ing bad the numbers [frick]ing didn't.



Comicmoviejunki
Comicmoviejunki - 6/12/2025, 7:35 PM
@THEKENDOMAN - sheesh! Ever think about medication? Or even illegal hard drugs? Or is that what is the problem?
THEKENDOMAN
THEKENDOMAN - 6/12/2025, 7:39 PM
@Comicmoviejunki - I’ll [frick]ing let you [frick]ing decide mate.
JDL
JDL - 6/13/2025, 2:30 PM
@THEKENDOMAN - My vote ia medication.
THEKENDOMAN
THEKENDOMAN - 6/13/2025, 3:27 PM
@JDL - Where the [frick] did you [frick]ing come from??
KennKathleen
KennKathleen - 6/12/2025, 12:38 PM
User Comment Image

User Comment Image

User Comment Image

User Comment Image

User Comment Image
TyrantBossMedia
TyrantBossMedia - 6/12/2025, 12:39 PM
Marvel killed itself with the direction they took in Phase 4.

1) They went too big and too final with Endgame.

2) They should never have killed Tony Stark AND aged out Cap. You lost two anchor heroes that way.

3) They should have gone either Galactic or Grounded in Phase 4. But they lost James Gunn and I heard the original plan was to go Galactic with him at the helm of that Phase.

4) They followed the model of the comics that destroyed their comic book business and force them to go bankrupt in the first place. They went woke with the MSheU.

They are going to be hard pressed to recover from this.
ObserverIO
ObserverIO - 6/12/2025, 12:53 PM
* 4) They followed the model of the comics that destroyed their comic book business and force them to go bankrupt in the first place. They kept the continuity going for the older fans and alienated all new audiences.


Stan Lee's Marvel was woke from the get-go. The idea that woke killed the MCU is an online fallacy. Even the MCU was woke during the Infinity Saga. Their wokeness netted them billions.
Huskers
Huskers - 6/12/2025, 1:06 PM
@TyrantBossMedia - yea it was a huge mistake to lose Tony and Steve. They’re the heart and soul of the Avengers. A mistake they’ve only compounded by bringing RDJ back as a completely different character with the stunt casting of him as Doom. Plus they decimated the original team. Hulk and Thor are a joke now.
HistoryofMatt
HistoryofMatt - 6/12/2025, 2:50 PM
@ObserverIO - This is a lie. Liberal does not equal Woke. Woke is the opposite of liberal.

I don't know why we keep having to explain this.
ObserverIO
ObserverIO - 6/12/2025, 3:06 PM
@HistoryofMatt - I never mentioned liberal. You said the word woke.
TyrantBossMedia
TyrantBossMedia - 6/12/2025, 3:20 PM
@ObserverIO - No, You are trying to conflate Liberalism with Woke politics.

They are not the same thing.
Conveying a message in the comics is very different from forcing an agenda.
When Marvel went full on Woke with the new Ms. Marvel, the lesbian parents of America Chavez, Ironheart being the new Tony Stark, etc.
And forcing their agenda they lost their audience.

Then they lost sales, went bankrupt, had to sell off a ton of their IPs and Perlmutter ended up buying what was left in order to save Marvel from decimation.
Perlmutter was trying to keep Marvel Studios from making the same mistake with Feige's desire to create the MSheU...but Feige went crying to Iger. Iger got rid of Perlmutter and Feige was free to destroy the brand......which he did.
YonnyLayna
YonnyLayna - 6/12/2025, 3:55 PM
@TyrantBossMedia - The problem is that they didnt created a proper clear starter point after endgame and tried to insiste on use the TV shows to carry the earth plot but people didnt care
HistoryofMatt
HistoryofMatt - 6/12/2025, 4:27 PM
@ObserverIO - No, you said they were always Woke.

They most certainly were never Woke. They were liberal. Always liberal. Woke and liberal are not the same, they are opposites.

Woke is Captain Marvel and RiRi Williams.

Liberal is Ellen Ripley and Sarah Connor.
JDL
JDL - 6/12/2025, 4:42 PM
@TyrantBossMedia -
"Marvel killed itself with the direction they took in Phase 4."
"1) They went too big and too final with Endgame."

I don't think any thing else was possible.

2) They should never have killed Tony Stark AND aged out Cap. You lost two anchor heroes that way.

Those actors indicated they wanted out of those roles

3) They should have gone either Galactic or Grounded in Phase 4. But they lost James Gunn and I heard the original plan was to go Galactic with him at the helm of that Phase.

I can see Galactic and frankly would have preferred it but grounded won't sell well in too many places outside of US/Can.

"4) They followed the model of the comics that destroyed their comic book business and force them to go bankrupt in the first place. They went woke with the MSheU."

I can't speak to the comics but agree to fair level on the MSheU.
TyrantBossMedia
TyrantBossMedia - 6/12/2025, 4:55 PM
@YonnyLayna - That's one of the many problems.

As I posted yesterday, all they had to do was drop a post credits scene after Endgame so it was clear at that the story would continue and Endgame didn't feel so final.

Then focus on the aftermath of the 5 years after the snap, and the chaos of the return of all of the people who were dusted.
With Ronin killing so many of the crime lords it left an open season for Kingpin to really seize power.
With the chaos of the fallen governments it left an opening for Dr. Doom to seize power from Latveria.

They missed so many golden opportunities.

That and some galactic after effects would have been great in Phase 4. Captain Marvel trying to fix intergalactic threats.
Nova showing up to avenge the destruction of his planet by Thanos before the snap.
Thor trying to find a planet to be the home for Asgard since they can no longer stay on earth as a result of the people returning.

There is SO much they could have done, but chose not to.

I am thinking about making a YouTube video on all of the missed opportunities....or several videos. Just need the time
TyrantBossMedia
TyrantBossMedia - 6/12/2025, 4:59 PM
@JDL -

1) They didnt' have to go THAT big. All you really needed was the original six Avengers fighting side-by-side since they were conveniently the ones that the infinity stones did not dust after the snap. That meant that those six were destined to beat Thanos and get back the gauntlet and bring back everyone else.

2) They can go into semi-retirement as characters. Stark decides to step away and be with his family. Cap decides to go back into hiding and live a life of anonymity being Nomad.

3) Grounded would have worked very well, with part of Phase 4 being galactic. Grounded shows the problems that everyone has in their own backyards. It's very relatable.

4) Agreed.
ObserverIO
ObserverIO - 6/12/2025, 5:48 PM
@HistoryofMatt - I said woke too. He said woke first.
Captain Marvel, Riri Williams, Ellen Ripley and Sarah Connor are all woke because they are strong female leads.

@TyrantBossMedia - All of your examples (new Ms Marvel, America Chavez, Ironheart, etc) happened LONG AFTER Marvel almost went bankrupt. That was in 1996. And long after they sold the movie options to different studios. Long after they were forced to sell up to Perlmutter and Arad.
The examples you mentioned not only happened long after 1996 but also quite some time after the MCU even.
ObserverIO
ObserverIO - 6/12/2025, 5:49 PM
@TyrantBossMedia - Also are you saying that your definition of woke is "Forcing an agenda"? Because that's not what woke is. Make up a new term if you will. Will DEI do?
ObserverIO
ObserverIO - 6/12/2025, 5:50 PM
Or maybe you can just actually say "Forcing an agenda" because then we'll all know what you mean. As long as you tell us exactly what that agenda is of course.
HistoryofMatt
HistoryofMatt - 6/12/2025, 6:01 PM
@ObserverIO - No, AGAIN, that's a lie. You are conflating and continue to conflate Woke with liberal as has been explained here for years that they are not the same. They are literally opposites. Liberal is a colorblind society where character matters more than anything. Woke is a society that judges you differently based on the color of your skin, conveying virtue to some and villainy to others no matter how good or poor their character.

There's well-written, strong female leads like Ellen Ripley ad Sarah Connor.

Then there's STRONG FEMALE LEADS like Captain Marvel ad Riri Williams.

If you think the former share anything with the latter other than genitalia, you are sadly and sorely mistaken.
ObserverIO
ObserverIO - 6/12/2025, 6:11 PM
@HistoryofMatt - I never said they shared anything other than genitalia. The fact that they are all strong female leads is the very thing that makes them woke.

"Woke is a society that judges you differently based on the color of your skin, conveying virtue to some and villainy to others no matter how good or poor their character."

My dude, that is not what woke is.
ObserverIO
ObserverIO - 6/12/2025, 6:15 PM
Get woke. Don't judge a person based on the color of their skin.
JDL
JDL - 6/12/2025, 7:00 PM
@TyrantBossMedia -
"1) They didn't' have to go THAT big. All you really needed was the original six Avengers fighting side-by-side since they were conveniently the ones that the infinity stones did not dust after the snap. That meant that those six were destined to beat Thanos and get back the gauntlet and bring back everyone else."

I don't think it would have changed anything. Covid has changed everything.

2) They can go into semi-retirement as characters. Stark decides to step away and be with his family. Cap decides to go back into hiding and live a life of anonymity being Nomad."

Stark and Cap would still be gone.

"3) Grounded would have worked very well, with part of Phase 4 being galactic. Grounded shows the problems that everyone has in their own backyards. It's very relatable."

Grounded will.not.sell.overseas.
Radders
Radders - 6/16/2025, 9:02 AM
@HistoryofMatt - @ObserverIO - you're both kind of right Woke did mean being aware of social and racial injustice, so Marvel comics regularly addressed those sorts of issues.
However, language changes and Woke is now used as a pejorative to mean many things such as Cultural Marxism and the performative pushing of ideology through authoritarian means.

So to claim Marvel Comics were always "Woke", in the original sense is correct, however its also disingenuous to draw that comparison to current, intersectional obsessed, comics and their creators.

I ask the same question I always do in these situations: if Marvel Comics have always been like this then why do people who didn't have a problem before, have a problem now?
ObserverIO
ObserverIO - 6/16/2025, 5:09 PM
@Radders - I think my main question about that definition would be how does Marvel fit that description? What is the authoritarian means and what is the ideology and how are they pushing it?

Also, I just googled 'Cultural Marxism ' and that sounds like a hell of a can of worms all it's own. Are you saying that the new definition of woke is a conspiracy theory? It's still ill-defined and vague and therefore you can change the meaning of 'New Woke' to fit whatever it is you want it to mean.

Without a proper definition for this New Woke, I think I'll stick to the meaning it's had over the last few decades or so.
Radders
Radders - 6/19/2025, 9:10 AM
@ObserverIO - Sorry for the delay in replying.
Yep Cultural Marxism was a conspiracy theory, however it is also a field of academic study and is defined in the Oxford Enlish Dictionary as:
A political agenda advocating radical social reform, said to be promoted within western cultural institutions by liberal or left-wing ideologues intent on eroding traditional social values and imposing a dogmatic form of progressivism on society. Later also more generally: a perceived left-wing bias in social or cultural institutions, characterized as doctrinaire and pernicious.

Marvel would fit into that by race, gender, and sexuality swapping characters, Intersectionality and gender politics, DEI hiring practices (it happened whether you agree with it or not) and the somewhat segregationally nature of their allocation of work (as highlighted by Christopher Priest) self inserts, overt bias in their writing, preaching a one sided ideology then insulting and attacking fans, removal of dissenting voices following organisational capture, and probably worst of all, this lead to frankly awful comics.

The authoritarian methods go from cancellation, physical assault and direct action to silence any critical voice as well as changing language - even to the stuff we see on here, where you are called one ist or another if you say you don't like something. Its about silencing dissent because no one wants to be called those things, so they don't speak up. Its all very Big Brother.

Now you may think all that is nonsense but take it from the horses mouth, given creatives have described various forms of media such as Star Trek as "platforms"
This also has to be viewed within a broader societal context, because people who say its just comics or just movies, don't get it - this extends to over 3000 people in the UK being arrested for having the wrong opinion - And I don't mean for actually being an ist.

It does cover a broad spectrum but as I say, when people say something is "Woke", everyone who hasn't signed up, which is the vast majority of people, know exactly what it means.

But yep, that's fin for you to stick to the original meaning, but you know its not want people mean when they use it now
ObserverIO
ObserverIO - 6/19/2025, 2:15 PM
@Radders - Okay, so the Oxford definition makes it sound just as paranoid as wikipedia did.

But it seems to boil down to people using art to promote a left-wing bias.

Left wing, like right wing is a broad spectrum also. There's a lot of give and take on both sides. It is more left to be in favor of diversity over straight white males all day every day. But that doesn't mean that if you are right-leaning that you strongly disagree with that. If you're staunchly far-right then sure. But women and black people have led movies and been superheroes for decades upon decades now. In society women have almost equal rights. Since the Civil Rights movement a persons color and creed doesn't makes them second class citizens.

You might disagree with these kinds of left-wing ideologies, but you can't stop other people from having them or putting them into the art they make. And not every right-leaning person has a problem with all of these ideologies.

Marvel also put right-wing viewpoints in their movies. Tony Stark, a rich, white, straight male was proven correct about his right wing ideologies regarding the protection of the world. He didn't care for the libertoes of the people, he wanted to survey everyone and register everyone and put weapons in space, etc. etc. "Whether it affects your precious freedoms or not!" he says.
All very right wing and then Thanos came and they were caught with their pants down. He was proven right and he made sure Cap and the rest of the dissenters knew that he had told them so and they didn't listen.

Also Victoria Alonso was fired for essentially being too progressive.

Like in most things there is a give and take. Art imitates life, because of the natural organic process of artistic collaboration. The people working on these films are not hive-minded stepford zombies despite what the conspiracy theories suggest.
Radders
Radders - 6/29/2025, 12:13 PM
@ObserverIO - You’re hanging your hat on “conspiracy theory” and ignoring everything else aren’t you lol

The idea that art and media is used to indoctrinate and manipulate society can’t exactly be defined as paranoid because it happens all the time. It’s why there’s a word for it “propaganda”
Add to that people from multiple media companies, not to mention other organisations, have literally said they’re doing it. So it’s pretty hard to deny. But yep, it’s a possibility that them all singing from the same hymn sheet is purely coincidentally.

Shame you're falling back to the “you’re an ist”, sure you worded it nicely but the implication was there.

Ah the myth of the left lol
Yep diversity exists, no one objects, women and black people, every minority, have led movies for years and no one cares because the vast majority of people are decent human beings who want equality and just get on with it, whilst the Left can't help but tell you about how righteous they are lol

If you want an example – Compare the leadership history of the Conservative Party (right) in the UK and the Labour Party (left). And only one of them have been found guilty of racism by the Equalities and Human Rights Commission, guess which.

Is it right wing to want to protect the world? What you’re talking about authoritarianism, which isn’t an exclusively right-wing trait by any means, as history has shown – and as I pointed out in my other comments.

Since you kind of bought up Endgame, that’s a clear example:
When Wanda takes on Thanos, she nearly defeats him, only stopped when he rains fire – a great scene that no one complained about. It was a natural progression of her story, and a moment built to with a fantastic character.
Then you have the Female Superhero selfie scene – very much complained about: it was a scene included purely for intersectional reasons, its contrived, unearned, made no sense, was ripping off a better scene in Infinity War (again, a scene no one complained about) and just takes you out of the movie because its that unsubtle and incongruous.

So why did one get complaints but the other didn’t?

And I'll ask the question again, if people had no problem with inclusion and diversity in media before, which is absolutely the case (as you have indicated), why do they have a problem with what’s happening now? Because clearly by that logic, you espouse yourself, it’s not the inclusion and diversity.
ObserverIO
ObserverIO - 6/29/2025, 2:36 PM
@Radders - Yes it is. Or at least it seems to be.

Tell me, what exactly is your particular problem if not diversity in movies? You've told me that it's propaganda, but what idea or 'agenda' is being propagated? Because to me it seems to be the idea of equality which you've just said that you're all for.

If you're not then that's bigoted, racist, sexist, etc. I've no problem using those words because that's what it is. I'm not subtly implying it. It sees to me that anyone who is anti-woke is by definition bigoted.

If you take that as an insult, that's a good thing. I would too. It just means that you don't want to be racist/sexist/bigoted. Or at least that you don't want to be thought of as being those things. That's good. At the very least it's a start.

The condemned scene in question, the A-Force scene was very obviously forced. It was A-Forced, lol. It wasn't very subtle at all. It was a way to say to audiences 'Look at all the female superheroes we've got! Aren't we progressive?" It was virtue signalling.
The reason probably being to have all the women and feminists in the audience cheer. The movie was built on cheer-moments. Not many of them if any of them were subtle.
The motivation for putting moments into a movie that you think the audience might cheer for is to get a bigger box office. Money is the key motivator here, I would surmise, rather than promoting an agenda.

But lets say I'm wrong and the whole point of this scene was to promote an agenda. What is the agenda? It seems to me to be pro-women.
Now are you adamantly against this scene (so much so that you're talking about about it on the internet 6 years later) because it wasn't subtle or because of the message it's promoting?

You don't need to tell me that. You've gone on at length to tell me that the thing you don't like about these movies is the propaganda. Therefore the reason you don't like it is because of the pro-women message it promotes. That actually does make you sexist.

So what was the point of telling me that the reason you didn't like it was because it was unsubtle and contrived? If that's the only reason that you didn't like it then it's got nothing to do with what we're talking about. But that's not the reason you disliked it.

You compared it to another scene of female-empowerment to give me an example of the kinds of female empowerment that you're okay with and to let me know that you're not in fact a sexist bigot but you're simply trying to guard against unsubtlety.
People do this all the time. They'll say they're not sexist because they like Terminator with Sarah Connor or Aliens with Ripley or Titanic with Rose, lol. But that they don't like any other female leads because of... other reasons.

That would be fine if people were calling you sexist for not like that scene in Endgame and you were trying to convince us all that you're not sexist. But that's not the case. You're saying that you don't like the message that you see as being promoted by means of propaganda.

So that's kind of disingenuous.

And it makes me wonder who you're trying to convince, me or yourself?
I hope it's yourself because you're not convincing me at all. And also because it would mean that you don't like to think of yourself that way. Which is good.
Nomis929
Nomis929 - 6/12/2025, 12:40 PM
It felt like an unfinished movie.
McMurdo
McMurdo - 6/12/2025, 12:40 PM
It's too bad they didn't re-focus on making a comic accurate Fantastic Four. I can't see that film not getting bad online press when it comes to some of Shakman's creative choices, but I've been wrong before.
Nomis929
Nomis929 - 6/12/2025, 12:46 PM
@McMurdo - I agree. I think it going to get massacre by the press and fans online.
1 2 3

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.

View Recorder