5 Reasons Why Tron: Ares Flopped At The Box Office

It was a no good, very bad weekend for Disney at the box office, as the very expensive, flashy "Tron: Ares" flopped. Though these things are often viewed as marathons and not springs, it's crystal clear after the blockbuster's first frame in theaters that this is going to go down as a profound disappointment and, in all likelihood, a big money loser for the Mouse House. It's bad, and it may get much worse before all's said and done.

Directed by Joachim Rønning ("Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales"), "Tron: Ares" pulled in just $33.2 million in its opening weekend domestically. That was far below pre-release estimates, which had "Ares" opening in the $40 million range. Granted, a debut in that area would've still been on the low side for a franchise film that cost $180 million to produce (and that's before accounting for marketing costs). To make matters even worse, the latest "Tron" movie also had a soft overseas opening, pulling in $26.7 million for a global start of $59.9 million. That is, in a word, bad.

So, what went wrong here? How did Disney so gravely miscalculate the return of "Tron" after 15 years? Is there any hope for the movie on a longer timeline? We're going to look at the biggest reasons why "Tron: Ares" bombed at the box office during its opening weekend. Let's get into it.

Even dating back to the original "Tron" in 1982, this franchise has always been a bit of a special interest item. The other issue is that Disney tends to wait a long, long time between installments, so it's never built up a loyal, generational fanbase for the property. That being the case, "Ares" largely had to stand on its own two feet, relying on good buzz to fill seats. That didn't happen.

As of this writing, "Ares" boasts a 55% critical approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes. While the audience score is better (It's currently at 87%), that's not enough to move the needle for the average moviegoer. Even with a decent B+ CinemaScore, those are "wait to stream" numbers in the modern era. The bar to get people to leave the house and pay folding money for a ticket at a movie theater is higher than it's ever been, and this clearly didn't meet that bar for most people. Rousing "you need to see it to believe it" word-of-mouth might have gotten more folks off the couch. That's not what happened here, though.

In his review of "Tron: Ares" for /Film, Witney Seibold called it a "thoughtless sequel." Disney is now staring down the barrel of a massive flop, perhaps rivaled only by the colossal misfire that was "Snow White" ($205 million worldwide/$250 million budget) after the dust settles. As of right now, there's no good reason to believe that "Ares" is going to rebound in the coming weeks, with a finish in the $200 to $300 million range in the cards, depending on how it all shakes out.

While impressive visuals can be a driver for certain movies, such as Apple's "F1" or "Mission: Impossible — The Final "Reckoning," they still have to offer more than just style to get viewers interested, particularly with respect to a film's success beyond opening weekend. When it comes to "Tron: Ares," Disney really leaned into style over substance in the trailers. Style only goes so far, though. Yes, audiences were sold something that might look cool, but what else did it have going for it? That question wasn't answered well enough.

Sure, Jeff Bridges had a brief role returning once again as Flynn from the original "Tron," but to the vast majority of prospective ticket buyers out there, that means right next to nothing. Nine Inch Nails also did the soundtrack for "Ares," which was indeed a very cool idea that generated some buzz. But a good score is more of an added value element and not so much something that is going to meaningfully get people out of the house. Individual mileage will always vary, but for the masses, there just wasn't enough in terms of selling points in the marketing to make "Ares" matter.

"Tron: Legacy" hit theaters in 2010 and made $400 million against a $170 million budget. It was barely a hit, which is why Disney didn't rush to make a direct sequel, even though the studio still desperately wanted to turn this into a huge franchise. Rather crucially, 57% of that movie's money — $228 million, to be exact — came from overseas markets. That split already looks very different for "Ares," with 55% of its sales coming from North American audiences. In the here and now, Hollywood blockbusters such as this can't rely on international audiences to bail them out anymore.

In the pandemic era, robust overseas grosses have been harder to come by. That's a big reason why superhero movies have been struggling at the box office as of late. From the war between Russia and Ukraine to countries increasingly favoring homegrown titles, a growing number of factors have led to Hollywood tentpoles like "Ares" seeing diminishing returns at the overseas box offices since 2020.

China, in particular, is one of the most crucial factors. Along with the U.S., it's one of the biggest moviegoing countries in the world, and that used to mean big grosses for Hollywood. In recent years, though, it's become clear that Hollywood can no longer rely on China. The country is playing fewer American movies and is instead leaning on local fare, such as the massive smash hit "Ne Zha 2" ($2.1 billion). In another time, Chinese ticket sales might've come to the rescue for "Ares." But that's very unlikely to be the case this time around.

There are very few movie stars these days who, just because they are in a given film, can get people to show up to theaters. Tom Cruise is one. Dwayne Johnson often can be, though the failure of "The Smashing Machine" at the box office has proved that even The Rock's star power only goes so far. Really, star power alone generally can't turn a movie into a hit anymore, but it can help. One of the issues with "Tron: Ares," however, is that it didn't have a single, meaningful "butts in seats" movie star, despite boasting an impressive ensemble cast overall.

Case in point: The "Ares" cast includes Oscar-nominee Greta Lee ("Past Lives"), Gillian Anderson ("The X-Files"), Evan Peters ("American Horror Story"), Jodie Turner-Smith ("Queen & Slim"), Cameron Monaghan ("Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order"), and the aforementioned Oscar-winning Jeff Bridges. At the top of the call sheet was Oscar-winner Jared Leto, though, an actor who's increasingly seeming like a curse for a movie's financial prospects.

From the gigantic Marvel flop that was "Morbius" ($167 million worldwide) to his inclusion in the disastrous "Haunted Mansion" ($117 million worldwide/$150 million budget), Leto's misfires in recent years have been many, with virtually no hits to counteract them. So, as much as Leto is seen as an A-lister, audiences haven't indicated that they care about him in any way. If anything, he appears to be a deterrent at this point (and that's without even getting into the misconduct allegations against him). At the very least, he didn't help this movie's case any. That's unfortunate in light of the impressive, varied cast that Rønning and Disney assembled for this one. They largely deserved better.

Perhaps above anything else, the cold hard fact of the matter is that people, by and large, don't care about "Tron" as a franchise. Period. The original 1982 sci-fi film was ambitious and ahead of its time, but it also didn't meet Disney's expectations upon hitting theaters. Decades later, the studio believed it could turn the concept into a blockbuster. "Legacy" made just enough money to avoid being a disaster, but, relative to 2010 standards, it was far from a big success.

Rather, a combination of Daft Punk and impressive IMAX visuals allowed "Legacy" to skate by at a time when blockbusters were booming on the big screen. But that was then, and this is now. Frankly, Disney got away with one when it came to "Legacy." But that led the studio to believe that the "Tron" property could be the next big thing. Instead, "Ares" has now become a cautionary tale, not unlike "Blade Runner 2049," which also overestimated its potential audience en route to disaster (and co-starred Leto, no less).

Moreover, audiences are increasingly turning their backs on '80s nostalgia. Those moviegoers have aged out of caring and are content to stay home. What we're seeing instead is early 2000s nostalgia, as evidenced by the "Lilo & Stitch" remake making $1 billion and even "A Minecraft Movie" winning the day. This is just another example of thinking that worked 15 years ago polluting the waters of the present. Disney and Hollywood at large need to learn to let the past die to avoid future misfires such as this.

"Tron: Ares" is now playing in theaters.