5 Reasons Why Gladiator II Killed It At The Box Office

The biggest box office showdown of the year is in the books. Paramount's big-budget historical epic "Gladiator II" went up against Universal's musical Broadway adaptation "Wicked," making for a huge double bill, the likes of which we just don't see all that often. It's easily the biggest one-two-punch since "Barbie" and "Oppenheimer" both hit theaters on the same weekend last year. This time around, things played out similarly, as "Gladiator II" had to settle for second place at the domestic box office. However, life is still looking pretty darn good for the blockbuster, all things considered.

Director Ridley Scott's long-awaited "Gladiator" sequel opened to an estimated $55.5 million domestically. "Wicked," meanwhile, absolutely decimated expectations with a $114 million opening. But context is important here. Second place be damned, this still ranks as the second-best opening of Scott's huge career, trailing only "Hannibal" ($58 million) more than 20 years ago. It's also a stellar debut for an R-rated, non comic book movie. To that end, it's the third-biggest R-rated opening of 2024, behind only "Deadpool & Wolverine" ($211.4 million) and "Bad Boys: Ride or Die" ($56.5 million). This to say, there's nothing to be disappointed about.

Paramount also has a big hit internationally on its hands. The sequel has already pulled in $165.5 million overseas through two weekends, giving the $250 million budgeted epic a $221 million running total. With a budget that big, it needs to keep the momentum going, but this is a damn fine start. So, what went right here? What contributed to the film's success in the early going? Let's look at the biggest reasons why "Gladiator II" is killing it at the box office.

No big movie can succeed without an effective marketing campaign. To that end, Paramount Pictures did its job in that regard with "Gladiator II." Did it perhaps spend too much money on the film? Sure, but that's another argument entirely. So far as selling this movie to the masses goes, the studio did right by Ridley Scott and this long-awaited sequel.

The trailers for "Gladiator II" promised epic action made for the big screen, while also making it clear that the impressive cast will be doing things that are probably going to be fun to see. Who doesn't want to watch Pedro Pascal duking it out in the arena? The man behind "The Mandalorian" in the glory days of the Roman Empire! It would have been easy to over rely on the legacy of the original film in trying to sell its sequel more than two decades later. Instead, Paramount just tried to sell a movie that looks awesome and is worth seeing in a theater. It just so happens to be a sequel to one of the most roundly-beloved Best Picture winners of the last 30 years.

There is often a much larger focus in the U.S. on the domestic box office. That's understandable; people in North America want to know what's going on here. The U.S. is also right there with China as the biggest moviegoing marketplace in the world. That said, this is a global theatrical marketplace and big, expensive movies are designed to play for audiences all around the world. While "Wicked" won the day in the U.S., "Gladiator II" remained dominant overseas, which is a very good sign for Scott's pricey epic.

"Gladiator II" got off to a great start overseas last weekend with an $87 million haul in 67 markets. The sequel retained its status as the top-grossing movie internationally this past weekend, taking in $50.5 million, while "Wicked" pulled in $50.1 million. It was a narrow victory, but winning or losing isn't the point here. What matters is that this movie is clearly appealing broadly to audiences across the globe, which is key to its early success and will be crucial going forward. For now at least, things are looking good.

It might be painfully obvious to say, but Denzel Washington is a very popular movie star. He's also one of the rare movie stars whose name alone can still increase interest in a given project. It's actually shocking that the man hasn't been pulled in a $1 billion grosser at this point in his career. In any event, audiences love him and that undoubtedly helped "Gladiator II." When we talk about an actor adding value to a movie, this is truly the high watermark in terms of that panning out at the box office. Washington's presence here helped sell tickets. Period.

/Film's Chris Evangelista called Washington the best part of "Gladiator II" in his review. To that end, the movie has a merely so-so B CinemaScore and isn't nearly as roundly praised as the original. So, in some ways, this movie actually had to overcome a relative lack of must-see buzz. Having Denzel Washington firing on all cylinders certainly doesn't hurt its case in that regard.

It may be a bit of an understatement, but "Gladiator" is a really popular movie. It won the Best Picture Oscar, it was a huge box office hit in its day, and it turned Russell Crowe into one of Hollywood's biggest stars for a time. Not for nothing, but sports commentator Stephen A. Smith has proudly declared it his favorite film ever. He's surely not alone. People straight-up love this movie and its audience has only grown in the 24 years since its release.

That being the case, "Gladiator II" had a sizable built-in audience. There was never any guarantee that audience would show up, but they sure as heck did. Oddly enough, the sequel made about 62% more than the original's $34 million opening weekend haul from 24 years ago. Accounting for inflation, the sequel sold nearly as many tickets on opening weekend. Considering what the pandemic did to moviegoing habits and everything that has changed in the industry over the last couple of decades, that's solid audience retention.

Much was made in the media of the box office showdown between "Wicked" and "Gladiator II" that transpired over the weekend. It was compared an awful lot to the Barbenheimer phenomenon last year when "Barbie" and "Oppenheimer" opened on the same weekend, and rightfully so. The internet dubbed this particular showdown as Glicked. Did it generate the same level of straight-up fever that Barbenheimer did last summer? No, but it still brought an awful lot of extra attention to both movies. It also got people wondering: Could something similar to Barbenheimer happen again? Could two movies this big succeed at the same time?

The answer proved to be yes. More importantly, I would argue that "Gladiator II" was the less sure bet between it and "Wicked." It needed every bit of help it could get to justify that wild huge $250 million budget, and it still has a long way to go before it will break even. Even so, "Wicked" wasn't going for the same audience, so it's not as though this film would have made $75 million without the showdown. Rather, the extra attention all those Barbenheimer comparisons brought probably benefited Paramount and Mr. Scott, in this case.

"Gladiator II" is in theaters now