In of critical reception, Warfare can be considered a success. On Rotten Tomatoes, the movie has matching 93% critic and audience scores, with reviewers praising its skillful, pared-back depictions of violence and the horrors of war. However, when it comes to the box office, the movie didn't fare quite as well. With a budget of $20 million, the movie has only grossed $17.8 million, preventing it from breaking even. Though there is still time for Warfare to rake in more money, the film may just have to accept its wins and its losses.

How Much Warfare Has Made At The Box Office Compared To Civil War

Warfare Will Never Catch Up To Civil War Financially

Warfare's box office becomes more disappointing when compared to that of Garland's previous movie, Civil War. Warfare's total box office earnings are $17.8 million, while Civil War earned $127 million. While it is true that Warfare has only been out for two weeks, Civil War's opening weekend gross was far better than Warfare's. In its debut weekend, Civil War made $25.7 million. Warfare only brought in $8.3 million. In this way, Warfare has started off on a much weaker foot than Civil War, and doesn't seem to be picking up enough momentum to meet its predecessor.

What this means is that Warfare will probably not catch up to Civil War financially. Oftentimes, good reviews can help bring a movie more attention following its first weekend, but this won't be enough for Warfare. The movie has only grossed $17 million after its second weekend, while Civil War had already made $44 million at this point. Clearly, Warfare does not have the same power as Garland's previous release, despite having a smaller budget, a fairly star-studded cast, and an interesting premise. There are several elements at play that led to Civil War's success and Warfare's underwhelming follow-up.

Civil War's Box Office Was Bolstered By Great Marketing & Political Commentary

How Warfare Compares To Civil War's Marketing & Premise

To get to the bottom of Civil War's success, it is imperative to look at what made it so intriguing in the first place. The main draw was its politically relevant premise. Following a group of journalists trying to make it to Washington D.C. before rebels overtook the capital, Civil War was dystopic and felt frighteningly close to reality. It was framed as a horrifying peek into America's future, which made audiences invested in seeing the movie. Additionally, A24 provided plenty of marketing through thrilling trailers so that viewers would be aware of the film long before its release.

Unfortunately, Wafare did not have the same advantages. Although the movie is also about war and the flaws of the American government/military, it lacks the widespread relatability of Civil War. Warfare is about soldiers and a real event that happened to them, whereas Civil War focuses more on regular people and their experiences with a crumbling government. It's easier to get pulled in by Civil War's fictional yet possible story than Warfare's singularly true story. On top of that, Warfare didn't get nearly as much advertising as Civil War did.

Why Warfare Has Made So Much Less At The Box Office Than Civil War

The Controversy Of War Movies

Marketing and story definitely made a big impact on Warfare making less at the box office, but there are other small details that likely played a role as well. For example, Civil War boasted highly established stars like Kirsten Dunst, Jesse Plemmons, and Cailee Spaeny, who had just come off of playing Priscilla Presley in Priscilla. Meanwhile, Warfare's cast is full of talented actors, but they are more like rising stars rather than well-known A-list celebrities. Plus, Warfare had to compete with other films like The Amateur and Sinners, which definitely affected its box office numbers.

Related

Warfare Avoids A Common War Movie Mistake With One Very Clever Touch

Warfare's focus on the experience of war over any specific thematic throughline allows the film to avoid some potentially problematic elements.

Posts 1

Another issue that may have hurt Warfare is the divisiveness of war movies. Generally, war movies fall into one of two camps: glorifying or condemning war. Movies that are the former often get criticized for glossing over the atrocities of war, and using patriotism in a gross or unfair way. Warfare is definitely a film that condemns war, but based on marketing alone, audiences may not have recognized that. In this way, fewer viewers may have gone to see Warfare because they assumed it stood for a cause that they didn't agree with.

Warfare Not Matching Civil War's Box Office Isn't A Problem

Garland Will Make Up For This Box Office Soon Enough

It is disappointing that Warfare didn't reach the same heights as Civil War, but it isn't that big of an issue. A24 likely put less money into marketing Warfare because it was never intended to be the big hit Civil War was. In fact, Civil War needed to recoup its $50 million budget, whereas Warfare's $20 million was far more doable. In the coming weeks, it will likely earn this budget back. Arguably, Warfare did its job by garnering strong reviews and making an impact on its viewers. Far from being a box office bomb, Warfare did just fine.