Warner Bros. can't catch a break—fans roast as ‘Mickey 17’ is projected to lose $100M

Mickey 17 was meant to be a huge victory for Warner Bros.—after all, it had Bong Joon Ho behind the camera and Robert Pattinson at the helm. But rather than blowing up the box office, it stumbled out of the gate.

The film debuted to a meh $19.1 million in the US and $53.3 million worldwide, and sources talking to Puck News argue that the studio may be facing losses of more than $100 million.

Of course, the internet didn't waste any time before going into full roast mode on Warner Bros. Fans essentially roasted the studio for flopping once again, stating that they should just give up on trying to make billion-dollar blockbusters and just make some good mid-budget movies for a change.

Others noted that the marketing was almost nonexistent, making it painfully clear that Warner Bros. didn't have much confidence in the film to start with.

One user (@YngJackieAprile), with zero filters, straight up said:

"The blame's gotta be on Warner Bros cuz the movie is fantastic."

It’s almost like they have a secret committee dedicated to sabotaging their own films.

Another user (@The_Real__Adam) added:

"Horrible advertising on their part; I didn't hear about this film until someone posted about it being good. Now I plan on seeing it."

Even viewers were not spared, with one user (@albrechp) roasting:

"Moviegoers: 'We want more original titles instead of all these sequels and comic book movies." Also moviegoers: "I am not familiar with this movie. I'll wait till it comes out on streaming in case it sucks."

We call it the eternal paradox of modern cinema.

Meanwhile, this one user found a perfect opportunity to slide in an irrelevant meme.

A user (@hungry87) suggested:

"Cant they make cheaper movies instead of being so expensive to make."

WB would rather set money on fire than figure out how to make a good film for less than a small country’s GDP.

A user (@AdvocaciaMvf) went on to say:

"I’m happy WB is losing Money, but I’m sad Mickey 17 is bomb ing."

Okay. This has to be the most conflicted movie take ever.

This user (@ali_lefty) declared:

"Never let WB handle your film adaptations."

WB adapting a franchise is like a cursed monkey’s paw—you’ll get your wish but in the worst way possible.

---

Background and box office performance of Mickey 17

Mickey 17 is an adaptation of Edward Ashton's novel Mickey7 and was greenlit on a budget of around $118 million, which was later bumped up because of reshoots.

The advertising cost another $80 million, and the overall investment came close to $200 million.

Even though it led the domestic box office in its opening weekend, Mickey 17 did not live up to expectations. The worldwide box office of $53.3 million is short of the projected $275 million to $300 million required to break even, according to Variety.

The domestic opening of $19.1 million, while leading the weekend, was not enough to cover the cost of production and marketing.

---

Critical reception and audience response

While Mickey 17 got generally favorable reviews, with a 78% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes, it did not get the broad critical acclaim that typically fuels box office success.

The audience score was also good at 72%, but not quite enough to generate a "must-see" buzz required for an original movie without a pre-existing fanbase.

On top of that, Warner Bros. experienced internal strife over the editing process of the movie.

Bong Joon Ho had complete control over the final cut, turning down other options offered by the studio, according to Puck News.

Also, the doubt the studio had about Mickey 17 was visible through the shifts in release date. First booked for 2024, it got shifted to January 2025 before actually getting released in March.