The weekend did not go as planned by Blumhouse and Universal. With the release of director Leigh Whannell’s “Wolf Man,” studios may have thought they had a slam dunk hit on their hands. Unfortunately, that’s not how things panned out. Whannell’s latest has not fared too well, falling short of expectations. Instead of topping the charts, it was slated to take third place in the surprise debut of 2025.

“Wolf Man” opened to $10.5 million domestically, which was even less than the opening weekend. International audiences are no help here either, as the film had a soft opening worldwide with just $4.8 million. Blumhouse likes to make movies on the cheap, but this one has a price tag of $25 million before you buy it. Now, the monster flick is facing an uphill battle towards profitability.

As the weekend approached, “Wolf Man” was initially looking at $20 million. That would be an unfair victory. So, what went wrong? Why hasn’t the latest Whannell lived up to expectations? Is there any chance of recovery? We’ll look at the big picture, and break down the five main reasons why this movie was such a disappointment. Let’s get into it.

First of all, the reviews for “Wolf Man” were not very good, to put it mildly. The film currently has a 52% approval rating from critics Rotten Tomatoesgo with 58% of the audience. Worse, it got worse C-CinemaScorewhich is among the lowest of almost any horror film from 2020. This does not bode well for its prospects in the coming weeks. /Filmmaker Jeremy Mathai called “Wolf Man” “horrific fun” in his comments 6 out of 10. In short, positivity was hard to come by.

The reboot of the werewolf mythos centers on Blake (Christopher Abbott), who inherits his childhood home in Oregon after his father disappears. Blake convinces his wife Charlotte (Julia Garner) to take a break from the city and visit the house with their daughter Ginger (Matilda Firth). When they arrive, they encounter a mysterious monster and are forced to lock themselves in and hide. As the night goes on, Blake begins to act strangely.

Whannell previously released a new update to another monster version in 2020 with “The Invisible Man,” so expectations were high for this one. Right or wrong, it seems to contradict his recent post.

There is no moving that the design of the creature in “Wolf Man” did not help the film. Universal cleverly tried to hide the final design of the werewolf in advertising. However, there was a nasty snafu now that there was another one dressed as a Halloween Horror Nights creaturewhich entered the virus and poisoned the well.

It would be unfair to say that the costume was an accurate representation of the film’s content. It would be nice to say that Whannell did something unique, which is always confusing. If what happened at Halloween Horror Nights didn’t happen, who knows? But the way things shook out, at least a certain number of people seemed to think they had been baited and changed.

One of the biggest surprises of the weekend was Sony’s “One of Those Days,” which topped the charts with an estimated $11.6 million. The best-reviewed drama ever to match Disney’s “Mufasa: The Lion King” ($11.5 million) on the charts. While both are horror movies, it shows that audiences had other crowd-pleasing options to choose from if they were dead set on going to the movies. Why go to see a bad word movie when there are other things to do?

For them he was start watching a horror movie, Robert Eggers’ “Nosferatu” is still out there doing business. This could be a great way for viewers who have been dragging their heels to watch it for the past few weeks. If word of mouth had been strong for Whannell’s latest, we might have had another discussion. But when there’s so little noise, it’s hard to move forward.

January movies don’t usually represent Hollywood studios releasing their A games. January is often considered a “lost month” for studios. Although it’s not always true, movies like “Bad Boys for Life” are changing the story, it’s still a thing. Part of that has to do with the fact that NFL games often fly during this time, which can be difficult to compete with. To that end, this past weekend featured matchups between the Houston Texans and Kansas City Chiefs as well as the Washington Commanders and Detroit Lions on Saturday. We also had the Los Angeles Rams and Philadelphia Eagles along with the Baltimore Ravens and Buffalo Bills on Sunday.

The game determined which of the four teams would advance to the Super Bowl. As it was, most of the ticket buyers were at the table. Then again, if the sound of “Wolf Man” was strong, some of these people might have found a way to pencil in some movie time. Who knows? If Ryan Gosling looked at it, as it was beforethings may be different. As it is, for most people in the US, football has won.

Perhaps more than any other group of moviegoers, horror fans are more aware. They are loyal and show when they are cared for. They are hungry and looking for things. That said, they also aren’t the ones to fall into the “double fooling” camp most of the time. If so, it is difficult to question whether Blumhouse’s worst at the box office in 2024 it was a thing here.

Blumhouse is a horror name that fans know, with “The Purge,” “Get Out,” the recent “Halloween” movies, and “Five Nights at Freddy’s,” among many other hits, to their name. But last year he released “Night Swim,” “Imaginary,” and “Fear,” all of which weren’t given much credit. The only winner was the studio remake of “Speak No Evil.” Even in 2023, the studio faced the failure of “Exorcist: Believer.” So it’s possible that an attentive audience is waiting and watching. Blumhouse probably won’t get a license right now. “Wolf Man” has a “waiting at home” problem. This doesn’t help the ending at this point, nor does it help change Blumhouse’s story.

“Wolf Man” is in theaters now.