The 5 Biggest Box Office Gambles Of 2024, From Madame Web To Civil War

2023 was a banner year at the box office. For the first time since the pandemic, domestic ticket sales totaled more than $9 billion. Movies that weren't sequels or reboots dominated the landscape, with "Barbie," "The Super Mario Bros. Movie," and "Oppenheimer" bringing moviegoers out en masse. 2024 is going to be different as the release calendar is a bit sparse thanks to the WGA and SAG-AFTRA strikes. As for what is on the calendar, there are quite a few movies that have serious breakout potential. At the same time, some of those very same movies are risky propositions for the studios releasing them.

Can the guy who made "Ex Machina" help give A24 its first real blockbuster? Can Sony bounce back from the disaster that was "Morbius" and deliver another hit "Spider-Man" spin-off? Do audiences have nostalgic feelings about "Twister"? Is Kevin Costner's epic two-part Western going to be a double hit or a double miss? We're going to try and examine these key questions and more as we look at the five biggest box office gambles coming our way this year. Let's get into it.

A24 has become one of the most respected studios in Hollywood over the last decade. Much of that is due to the company's willingness to make the kinds of movies major studios often don't make anymore. Unfortunately, those movies are oftentimes not all that lucrative. Yes, the studio has produced hits like "Talk to Me" and "Lady Bird," but those are exceptions to the rule. A24 is now trying to make movies that have the potential to reach a wider audience. One of their first big bets? Alex Garland's "Civil War." With a reported $50 million budget, it's the most expensive movie A24 has ever made. It's instantly risky as arguably only one movie in the studio's history (the Oscar-winning "Everything Everywhere All at Once") would have justified a budget of that size.

The film appears to be a cutting bit of social commentary, envisioning a near-future America that is literally divided by politics. It stars Kirsten Dunst ("Spider-Man"), Cailee Spaeny ("Priscilla"), and Nick Offerman ("Parks and Recreation") giving it some instant credibility as this killer ensemble cast can help execute an intriguing premise. And yeah, the whole war angle is going to allow Garland to bring some blockbuster visuals to the screen that might help put meat in seats. But can this movie reach beyond the typical audience for an A24 movie and become a mid-sized blockbuster? There are no guarantees here.

Garland directed much-beloved sci-fi films such as "Ex Machina" and "Annihilation." He's also written big hits such as "28 Days Later." But his track record at the box office is a bit spotty and "Men," his most recent directorial effort, was a pretty sizable disappointment taking in just $11 million worldwide. Can Garland put a movie together that is more inviting to general audiences? And can A24 mount an effective marketing campaign that doesn't cost a fortune? If this pans out, A24 may have a truly viable path forward.

If 2023 taught us anything it's that audiences are ready for something new. Maybe not new in the sense that movies can't be based on something that already exists, but they at least are ready to embrace stuff outside of an endless string of remakes and/or sequels. That's what makes "The Fall Guy" such a unique prospect. Starring Ryan Gosling ("Barbie") and Emily Blunt ("Oppenheimer"), it is based on the '80s TV series of the same name. With David Leitch ("Bullet Train") at the helm, Universal Pictures is trying to turn this cult classic from the small screen into a silver screen blockbuster that will help kick off the summer movie season.

What's working against it? For one, the movie has a production budget in the $125 million range, meaning it has to make a fortune worldwide to justify its existence. We're talking at least $300 million worldwide to be considered an outright success. For non-franchise fare, that's a tall order in the pandemic era. The film may also have significant competition from "Civil War" (which will be in its second weekend of release by then), should the A24 movie prove to be a success.

At the same time, Leitch has several big hits under his belt, including "John Wick" and "Hobbs & Shaw." Meanwhile, Gosling and Blunt are coming off of the biggest successes of their respective careers, having both participated on opposite sides of last year's Barbenheimer craze. On top of that, there aren't any other major films on the release calendar until "Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga" and "Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes" both arrive three weeks later. A prime release date, star power, a lack of big movies, and a willingness to try new things could be just enough to give "The Fall Guy" a real chance.

Kevin Costner may be leaving "Yellowstone" but he's not done with cowboys and guns just yet. The acclaimed filmmaker is returning to the director's chair for the first time in a long time with "Horizon: An American Saga." This is an ambitious, two-part blockbuster Western that represents a passion project for Costner. With an A-list cast and Warner Bros. backing the two-parter as a major summer release, this is a very unique situation — and a costly one at that. Both films, which release on June 28 and August 16, respectively, carry a $100 million budget. That means the whole thing costs a whopping $200 million. Granted, the studio is getting two movies for that but the success of the second wholly relies on the presumed success of the first. That's the real tricky thing here.

Costner was at the helm of "Dances With Wolves" ($424 million worldwide), which still ranks as one of the biggest Westerns ever made. But it's been a long time since a movie in this genre made money anywhere near that big, with Quentin Tarantino's "Django Unchained" ($425 million worldwide) serving as the most recent example, and that was more than a decade ago at this point. Are general audiences going to turn up in big enough numbers to justify a Western of this scale in 2024? That is a big, expensive question mark. And if the first movie doesn't perform very well, WB will be left holding the bag for the second as well. If the first movie does well, the second movie could, in theory, do even better as audiences will have had the chance to catch up with the first installment before the sequel arrives.

In both cases, the films face stiff competition as part one is opening directly against "A Quiet Place: Day One," while part two is opening against Fede Alvarez's new "Alien" movie. If this works, Warner Bros. is going to look brilliant. If it doesn't, the losses could be substantial.

Nearly 30 years ago, director Jan da Bont's "Twister" became a massive global hit taking in a hugely impressive $494 million worldwide. If we adjust for inflation, that total balloons to just shy of $1 billion. When we think about how much money the film has made on home video and cable over the years, Warner Bros. and Universal Pictures have assuredly made a fortune on this disaster flick. Now, after all these years, they're bringing back the franchise with a new installment aptly titled "Twisters." Yes, they're doing the "Alien"/"Aliens" thing here. But are moviegoing audiences of today going to care? Does the "Twister" name carry any weight in 2024, especially with a new cast? Universal is very much banking on that being the case.

While the official budget has yet to be revealed a report last summer from The Oklahoman stated that it's going to be in the $200 million range. That would be deeply concerning and one can only hope that is before tax credits, or just straight-up wrong. The problem with disaster movies is that they tend to be expensive to make and they rarely work out. With a cast that includes big-time breakout stars such as Daisy Edgar-Jones ("Where the Crawdads Sing") and Glen Powell ("Top Gun: Maverick"), there are pieces in play that could be alluring to general audiences.

Can this go the distance and become the summer hit Universal needs it to be? Is Powell a butts-in-seats movie star? Is this an example of a reboot nobody asked for? Or are we looking at a "Top Gun: Maverick" situation? These are questions with very big price tags.

Not to lump movies together needlessly but Sony is really facing the exact same issues with both "Madame Web" and "Kraven the Hunter." Both of these films are superhero movies based on secondary characters from the "Spider-Man" universe. Both of them are hoping to recapture the magic that helped make "Venom" an $853 million global hit in 2018. However, both of them also run the risk of pulling a "Morbius," a film that made just $167 million worldwide and was roundly rejected by both critics and audiences. The gap between the hits and the misses with these "Spider-Man" spin-off films is vast, making both of these titles risky propositions.

Not that it always matters but neither of these characters are A-listers from the Marvel Comics canon and general audiences are probably not all that familiar with them. Kraven has a bit more cache thanks to the "Kraven's Last Hunt" storyline, but is that enough to justify a standalone? We shall see. The bigger issue here is the fact that 2023 was very, very unkind to live-action superhero movies, with only "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3" becoming an outright success. All four DC movies — "Shazam! Fury of the Gods," "The Flash," "Blue Beetle," and "Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom" — flopped. "The Marvels" also tanked. The tide has seemingly turned for comic book movies.

The big hope here is that Sony was thrifty with the budgets. "Morbius" was made for around $75 million. If these movies are brought in for around that amount, the studio's risk is greatly reduced. Even so, this could be a make-or-break year for Sony's larger plans in the "Spider-Man" universe. If one (or both) of these movies bombs the studio may have to rethink its strategy going forward, not to mention having to eat the losses in the short term. Here's hoping people really want to see Sydney Sweeney's Spider-Woman.