Amy Madigan has been acting in films and TV since the early 1980s, but she’s having a breakout year thanks to Weapons. Aunt Gladys anchors Zach Cregger’s complex tale with a reminder that pure evil can be found just about anywhere, even in the form of an aging relative passing through suburbia. Gladys’ distinctive style has spawned countless Halloween costumes—as well as Oscar buzz for Madigan. And if she gets a nod, know that she did the physical work necessary to make Gladys come to life, especially in Weapons‘ grueling final scene.
“‘Oh, no, I’m running,” she recalled telling Cregger about the scene, which sees Gladys frantically racing away from the kids she’s bewitched when the spell is broken and they all turn on her at once. She knows what they’ll do to her if they catch her, which they do in the movie’s most gruesome sequence.
“‘I’m definitely running. I’m doing it.’ So all of that, just revving it up that the payoff, I thought. was great. It’s like, yeah, just rip her apart. I think some people find it funny. Some people are like, ‘I don’t know about that ending.’ Some people find it justice has prevailed, so that’s good.”
She had “a blast” doing the scene, though she did take the time to make sure all the child actors weren’t actually scared of her. Considering how frightening she looks on screen, that probably was just as tough as all that sprinting.
Madigan also spoke a bit about how audiences have interpreted Aunt Gladys—and her delight that the character has resonated so deeply.
“People were pulling out threads of things and they interpreted it in a way, and that’s the fun about it. That’s what’s exciting about it,” she said, then referenced one fan theory in particular: that Elvis Presley’s mother, who was also named Gladys, helped inform the character. “I never would’ve ever thought of Elvis’ mom. So it’s like, yeah, go ahead and run with that. I’m not saying yes to that or no to that, but okay, that’s a theory.”
With one of the biggest horror movies of the year, Zach Cregger wants his upcoming prequel to Weapons to be its own beast.
The writer/director recently teased the spin-off about the mysterious Aunt Gladys (Amy Madigan), which he confirmed last month is in development, admitting he’s considered whether unpacking the villain’s origin story would ruin the movie’s mystique.
“It’s crossed my mind,” Cregger told TheWrap after Gladys was originally set for her own chapter in the first film. “But I think that the Gladys story is such an interesting story that I think it’s going to feel very separate and stand on its own two feet, and I don’t think it’s going to diminish Weapons.”
In Weapons, all but one child in Justine Gandy’s (Julia Garner) third-grade class goes missing when they each mysteriously wake up and run off into the night at exactly 2:17am. The truth of what happened to the kids unravels through the perspectives of multiple characters, portrayed by Madigan, Josh Brolin, Austin Abrams, Cary Cristopher and Benedict Wong.
Following the overwhelming fan response to Aunt Gladys, Cregger added, “The thrill of my life to see Amy and what’s been going on with all of this has been so great. I can only hope that there’s a lot of Halloween Gladyses out there.”
Amy Madigan as Aunt Gladys in ‘Weapons’
Warner Bros.
After Deadline confirmed in August that New Line is in early talks for a prequel to Weapons, Cregger said he “was ready” for the origin story. “I had it kind of in my pocket before the movie came out,” he said.
Weapons is one of those horror movies that lingers after you watch it, finding new ways to freak you out even after the lights come up. But the most indelible part of Zach Cregger’s haunting tale is its villain, Aunt Gladys, played by Amy Madigan. We’ve learned about the origins of the character, her style inspirations, and how Cregger calibrated the reveal of her sinister powers. But now Cregger is lifting the lid on how he came up with Gladys’ particular style of magic.
“That song is just an instruction manual on how to create a zombie,” he explained. “It’s no singing, it’s just someone explaining to you this ritual. I love it ’cause it’s a weird ritual where you soak a dollar bill in rum and set it on fire and arrange four mirrors for the four corners of the earth and get a shard of a human skull and all these things. I was like, ‘One day, I wanna make up my own crazy, evil recipe.’ This movie was my chance to do that.”
Weapons production designer helped Cregger fine-tune Gladys’ signature “bowl of water” ritual. “It needed to be simple and very digestible,” Cregger recalled. “I needed people to get it the first or second time they saw it.”
Head to EW for more from Cregger, including his detailed explanation of how he and Madigan collaborated on Gladys’ memorable final scene—a frantic foot chase with its own equally unexpected source material, including Raising Arizona and Point Break.
Zach Cregger was far from home throughout Weapons’ storybook run this past summer. The writer-director was 6,000 miles away in Prague, prepping his next film, Resident Evil, which found itself in a hard-fought bidding war just like Weapons did in 2023. When the dust settled on New Line/Warners’ $38 million purchase of the latter, the betterment of its highly in-demand script was only just beginning.
A reference to a tray of hot dogs and assorted junk food became a tray of seven hot dogs, which served as a touching, esoteric tribute to Cregger’s late dear friend and longtime The Whitest Kids U’ Know collaborator, Trevor Moore. The mere act of writing Weapons began as a way for Cregger to process Moore’s August 2021 death.
Other improvements were made such as a scene in which Josh Brolin’s Archer takes ownership of his grief-stricken blunders at one of his company’s construction sites. Originally, the script had him lash out at his foreman for mistakes made by their crew. Character names were also changed so there weren’t at least four people with capital-A first names.
But perhaps the most consequential revisions happened during Alex Lilly’s (Cary Christopher) chapter of the nonlinear narrative. The young boy was the only third grader in Justine Gandy’s (Julia Garner) class to not run away from home in the wee hours of the morning before a school day, and it’s eventually revealed that he contributed to the disappearance of his 17 fellow classmates. But this wasn’t always the case.
When Alex’s mysterious Great Aunt Gladys (Amy Madigan) comes to stay with him and his parents under the pretext of her deteriorating health, he returns home from school one day to find his parents in a catatonic state. Gladys is actually an ailing witch who cast a spell in order to drain them of their life force and reinvigorate herself in the process. However, Gladys’ recovery is short-lived. So she asks Alex to retrieve personal effects from his 17 classmates, and Alex, not realizing the full extent of Gladys’ forthcoming design, agrees to help based on her promise that she’ll leave him and his parents alone afterwards.
In early versions of the script, Alex actually played no part in Gladys’ second spell that brought the 17 schoolkids to his doorstep so that Gladys could try once more to fully recuperate. Instead of stealing cubby-hole box name tags from his classroom, Alex received Valentine’s Day cards from each one of his classmates. Gladys then pocketed those items in the middle of night to cast the fateful spell.
Cregger later received a note from one of his friends that suggested the idea of directly involving Alex in Gladys’ spell. Thus, having Alex snatch the name tags not only made him more active in hopefully rescuing his parents, but it also reinforced his rationale for not telling the truth to law enforcement.
“Bill Hader is a buddy of mine. We would talk about the script, and I think it was his idea. He was like, ‘You should figure out a way to implicate [Alex] so he feels implicated.’ So it was through a conversation with him that I had the idea of Alex stealing something [for Gladys],” Cregger tells The Hollywood Reporter. “It was a way to give him some culpability so that we could further believe that maybe he wouldn’t tell [the authorities], because he felt like he was responsible and just as guilty [as Gladys], even though we know he wasn’t. But, to a degree, he is guilty.”
Below, during a recent spoiler conversation with THR, Cregger also discusses the practical reason for why he did away with Alex’s Valentine’s Day cards, as well as the current status of his Aunt Gladys prequel.
***
Weapons receivedrave reviews and was the number-one movie in August, grossing $264 million against $38 million overall. Its script was a part of a hotly contested bidding war that may have altered a couple careers. [Editor’s Note: Jordan Peele reportedly parted ways with his managers after losing the Weapons sweepstakes.] Your follow-up, Resident Evil,also had its ownbidding war. How does it feel to be the belle of the ball right now?
(Laughs.) I’m in Prague, and I’ve been in Prague since before Weapons came out, so I don’t feel like the belle of the ball. I feel like a stranger in a strange land, and I’m so happy to be here. I get to work every day toward making a movie [Resident Evil], so it’s awesome. But I haven’t had any experiences where I walk into a restaurant and somebody says, “Hey, there’s the guy who made [Weapons].” So maybe this is the best place for me to be so that my head isn’t exploding or whatever I’m trying to say. It’s just good to be in the Czech Republic.
Writer/Director Zach Cregger on the set of Weapons.
Quantrell Colbert/Warner Bros.
Right after Weapons came out, my YouTube algorithm sent me down a rabbit hole of Newsboyz episodes, and it didn’t take long for me to see why the loss of Trevor Moore prompted you to write Weapons as a way to cope. I wasn’t privy to your Whitest KidsU’ Know collaboration. It somehow never entered my orbit. Anyway, was Trevor aware of these solo ambitions you had for yourself? Did he know you were trying to reinvent your filmmaking career? [Writer’s Note: Cregger and Moore co-directed a couple films in 2009 and 2011. Newsboyz was also a pandemic-era live stream that they co-hosted on YouTube/Twitch. They discussed the week in news and swapped entertaining stories from their lives. Their final episode took place a handful of hours before Moore’s tragic accident.]
Well, I shot Barbarian before he died, and he died while I was in the edit of Barbarian. So he knew I was making a movie, and I think he knew I always wanted to be a [solo] filmmaker. Yeah, he definitely knew that, but he didn’t know much about Barbarian. He was going to see it when it was ready, but he never got to. So I don’t really know how much he understood about what I wanted to do solo, but I don’t think that’s significant. It’s not something I talked about all the time.
The internet decoded that the platter of seven hot dogs was a nod to Trevor and the Whitest Kids sketch, “Hot Dog Timmy.” The draft of the script I read referenced hot dogs, but it didn’t say how many hot dogs were assembled. So did you come up with that specific tribute of seven hot dogs closer to filming?
Yeah, when we were putting it together, it was like, “What should be on the tray?” We then arranged the tray, and it was definitely thought out weeks in advance with the props people. So it was somewhere between the script and rolling camera.
When Josh Brolin’s character’s son, Matthew, is revealed to be Alex’s bully, I thought you were paving the way for the entire class to laugh at Alex for something Matthew instigated. Gladys would’ve then offered Alex a means of revenge without him fully understanding how extreme her intentions were.
That’s interesting.
Did you ever go down that bullying path?
No, I didn’t, but it makes a lot of sense. It just never occurred to me. That totally tracks.
In the earlier script, Gladys casts the 2:17 AM spell using Valentine’s Day cards that Alex’s classmates gave him, only he didn’t supply them to her. She just took them from him in the middle of the night.
Right.
Was the method of having him remove the name tags from the cubby-hole boxes a way to make him more active in potentially saving his family?
It was, yeah. It was also a way to give him some culpability so that we could further believe that maybe he wouldn’t tell [the authorities], because he felt like he was responsible and just as guilty [as Gladys], even though we know he wasn’t. But, to a degree, he is guilty. He probably had an inkling of an idea that whatever Gladys was going to do was probably pretty bad, and I don’t think he let himself imagine what was really coming. But, yes, it was to dirty his hands.
Cary Christopher as Alex in Zach Cregger’s Weapons
Courtesy of Warner Bros. Pictures
Compared to Valentine’s Day cards, were the cubby-hole box name tags just a cleaner, more streamlined way for Alex to get personal objects to Gladys?
It felt like the montage that would be necessary for him to get one little thing from every kid would be unbelievable and boring. The Valentine’s Day cards felt like a quick cheat. I was talking to a teacher friend of mine, and I was like, “Well, how could a kid come home with something from every other kid?” And she was like, “Valentine’s Day.” And I was like, “Brilliant!” However, we were shooting in the dead of summer, and the movie would never look like February. So that’s why I was like, “I’ve got to think of something else.”
Bill Hader is a buddy of mine. We would talk about the script, and I think it was his idea. He was like, “You should figure out a way to implicate [Alex] so he feels implicated.” So it was through a conversation with him that I had the idea of Alex stealing something. And when we were scouting on location, I saw these cubby boxes that were in a real classroom. So I was like, “That would do it.”
Two of my THR colleagues broke the potential Gladys prequel story. What’s your temperature on that idea at the moment?
I had the idea for this Gladys story before Weapons came out, so I was secretly hoping Weapons would work. I was like, “If it works, I have this other really fun story to tell about Gladys.” So I was like, “Please let it be a hit,” because I didn’t want to go to the studio [about it] unless Weapons did business. So it was one of those things where I already had it, and I wasn’t just like, “How can I cash in?” I was like, “Please God, let me be able to go do this again.” So we’re talking now, and while I can’t say too much obviously, it’s real and I’m pumped. I think it’s great.
I was surprised to hear that, because, when we spoke for Barbarian, you weren’t too interested in a prequel, especially one about your antagonist Frank (Richard Brake). But I suppose Gladys’ showmanship is a bit more fun to be around.
Frank’s whole world is disgusting, and having already told a story in that world, I don’t necessarily enjoy the aspects of Barbarian that are about women in captivity. That was just more of an interesting kind of backstory and plot device. With Gladys, I feel like there’s a whole rainbow of things that Gladys gets to interact with and participate in, so they’re very different things.
You opted not to explain the meaning of Weapons during your press tour, and I don’t blame you. These are fraught times. Thus, I’m going to subject you to my own reading of the movie.
(Cregger smiles.) Okay.
To me, the movie’s most enduring image is the schoolkids chasing after the old witch, and I interpreted that as the younger generations finally turning the tables on the older generations for passing on all their trauma and imposing harmful policies/legislation time and time again.
I love it.
I’ll take the compliment.
It’s great.
You deleted a scene where Alden Ehrenreich’s character, Paul, visits the doctor after his prickly run-in with the homeless addict, James (Austin Abrams). Did you ever decide what the result of Paul’s blood test would’ve been?
Oh, great question. No, I didn’t. But that’s such a good thing to think about. I thought that the not knowing was just as damning of his character as if he did have a result. The fact that he was willing to just play Russian roulette with [Julia Garner’s Justine] and her biology [via fornication] is heavy-duty. So I didn’t think we really needed an answer. He did it anyways, and that’s pretty fucked-up.
Austin Abrams’ James in Zach Cregger’s Weapons
Warner Bros. Pictures
Austin Abrams was the one main actor who stayed on the film after its strike-related cast reshuffling. He didn’t go off and shoot something else. How much did that loyal gesture factor into him leading Resident Evil?
I didn’t reward him for his loyalty; I rewarded him for being a spectacular actor. I cast him in Resident Evil because he’s so well-suited for this part. We just had a completely amazing experience together [on Weapons], and we really connected, creatively. So when it was time to get this one going, I didn’t have to think too hard. If he wasn’t in Weapons, if he’d bailed and gone and done another movie, yeah, I probably wouldn’t have been doing [Resident Evil] with him. So I guess it’s a karmic reward, but it wasn’t like I was thinking that way.
Are you about to roll camera on Resident?
We’re going to start shooting the second week of October.
(L-R) Josh Brolin and Writer/Director Zach Cregger on the set of Weapons
Quantrell Colbert/Warner Bros.
Is the biggest screenwriting lesson from Weapons to not name four characters with the same first letter? You originally had Archer (Josh Brolin), Alex (Cary Christopher), Anthony (who became Abrams’ James) and Andrew (who became Benedict Wong’s Marcus).
(Laughs.) Yeah, I think there could have been even another. Dude, that is only evidence of how stupid I am when I’m writing. I try to turn my brain off. I try not to think. I try to just go, go, go, go. So I make idiotic mistakes like that, and that’s what happens.
Earlier, when I listed your recent achievements, I forgot to mention Companion, which counted you as a producer. Drew Hancock told me the whole story of how it was originally going to be your Barbarian follow-up until you offered him the directorial job instead. He then surprised you with his brief indecision. Were you trying to pay it forward in the same way people did for you on Barbarian?
It was a combination of things. I was seriously considering directing it, but I felt like I should do an original next. That just became clear to me. As great as that script was and as excited as I was about it, I felt like I should do an original. And I could just tell from my conversations with Drew that he had a point of view and that he understood the story at the atomic level. He’d also directed [TV] before, so I was just like, “Why not, man? I think he can do it.” He just smelled like a [movie] director.
So before I offered him that, I called all the producers and was like, “I think Drew should direct it. Do I have your blessing to broach this with him?” And everyone was down. I thought he was going to do cartwheels on the phone with me when I said it, and I was genuinely surprised by his reaction, which was like, “I don’t know. I’ve got to think about this.” And I was like, “Well, why don’t you call me back tomorrow and tell me.” (Laughs.) I was like, “Weird.”
I think it took him two days to call me back, but that’s a testimony to how thoughtful Drew is. He respected the, dare I say, enormity of the job. It is a job that requires a hundred percent of you and a hundred percent of your time for over a year, at least. And not everybody is down to be like, “Yeah, I’ll put my entire life on pause to do this thing that is going to drain me.” So I get the hesitation.
Do you see yourself creating your own banner and being a shepherd for more movies that other people direct? Do you see yourself going further down that producorial path?
That’s not a huge priority for me, only because making movies is just so demanding. I am a person where my battery dries up real fast. I like to play video games. I like to unwind. I like to have me time. That’s so precious to me right now, and the idea of producing a lot of stuff — and sapping all of that free time — is not appealing. So, no, it’s just selfish. I would rather be monastic about this and just make movies.
Decades from now, when you’re reminiscing about the making of Weapons, what day will you likely recall first?
The three days the children were ripping Gladys apart. It was just devastatingly stressful and chaotic. When I’m making a movie, I feel very in control at all times. So I felt like I was in complete control of what was on camera, except for the kids ripping apart Gladys. I felt like I was drowning, and I was like, “Just shoot!” I had two cameras going, I had kids screaming and I couldn’t tell who was shooting what. I couldn’t communicate. It was awful. We had to shoot it three times, but I think we got it. I’m really happy with it. It was just incredibly stressful, so that’s what’s seared in my brain.
*** Weapons is now available on digital ahead of its 4K UHD release on Oct. 14.
Last month, we learned Zach Cregger had another project on his hands: Henchmanfor DC. Once again written and directed by him, the movie would star a low-level goon that moves up in the crime world after apparently taking down Batman, similar to the Batman: The Animated Series episode “The Man Who Killed Batman.”
Henchman was just a script at the time, but you can imagine Cregger would get to actually pitching it once he had some free time. Now, it sounds like we’ll be waiting a while, as he told ScreenRant he’d keep it to himself for now. His reasoning comes down to the growing amount of Batman projects, which includes The Batman Part IIand Clayface. “I love that script, but Gotham City IP is the most coveted,” he explained. “Right now, there’s a lot of people that have their own kind of flavor. It’s a very kind of crowded playing field, and my movie, I don’t think it really fits into any of that.”
Cregger assured he’s not put out by fellow creators like Matt Reeves and James Gunn. But with so many “hurdles” around Batman at the moment, he’s going to “leave [things] to the universe” before approaching Gunn and DC with Henchman. Optimistically, he called the script “a great story, I think it’s awesome. When that door opens, I’ll happily step through it.” Just maybe don’t expect it for at least two or three years.
Until then, we’ve got Weapons, which recently came to digital, and his Resident Evil movie on September 18, 2026.
The busy actor, who appeared this summer in such films as Naked Gun and The Fantastic Four: First Steps, will star alongside previously confirmed castmember Austin Abrams in Sony Pictures‘ new take on the franchise. The feature hits theaters Sept. 18, 2026, and adapts the popular video game series about an elite task force battling zombies.
Cregger, who had a hit this summer with Warner Bros.’ Weapons, will helm Resident Evil from a script he is co-writing with Shay Hatten. Plot details have not yet been disclosed for the project that hails from Constantin Film.
Producers include Robert Kulzer for Constantin Film, Roy Lee for Vertigo Entertainment and Asad Qizilbash and Carter Swan for PlayStation Productions. TriStar Pictures president Nicole Brown oversees the movie for the studio.
Based on the Capcom video games, the Resident Evil film franchise launched with Sony’s original 2002 feature that starred Milla Jovovich. The movie series has surpassed $1.2 billion at the global box office.
During an interview last month with The Hollywood Reporter, Hauser explained why he tends to be choosy about his projects. “I feel way too competitive and way too hungry to eat garnish and pretend it’s a meal,” the actor said about waiting for interesting roles. “I would rather hold out for the right thing. On the day, I’m just going to be all hungry, and then I’m going to look stupid, and then I’m going to feel awkward.”
Zach Cregger’s Weapons is still crushing at the box office, but apparently, it’s time for a little boost. So, after months and months of keeping the character a secret, New Line has finally started uploading clips of Aunt Gladys, played by Amy Madigan. In fact, it actually posted one of her best and most revealing scenes in full.
We’re guessing most people who want to see Weapons probably already have, but just in case you still plan on checking it out, we’ll give a final spoiler warning.
The scene in question isn’t from the end of the movie, unfortunately. No, those are still only living in theaters (and probably via pirated clips on TikTok.) No, this is Gladys’ second scene, which also happens to be the one where we finally start to see the depth of her evil. It’s when she visits Marcus (Benedict Wong) and his husband just as they’re about to sit down for an afternoon of hot dogs and cookies. Gladys comes in, makes some very weird requests, and, well, now you can watch it again.
Unfortunately, the clip is located on X (ugh, we know) and is age-restricted so embedding won’t work. But if you click right here, you can log in and watch the scene the New Line social person cleverly calls “Do you have a bowl of water?” That request still creeps me out too. “A bowl of water.”
When you first meet Gladys, in the scene teased here, there’s obviously a lot of unease. We’ve seen her pop up a few times earlier in the movie, but never long enough to understand who or what she is. So, that first scene at the school is creepy but the second scene in the house is just completely terrifying. Fortunately, the clip cuts before things get really, really gross with all the headbutting, but it’s in this moment we know Gladys took those kids.
LOS ANGELES (AP) — It’s August, and horror and humor came to play.
In a month that’s long been known to let edgier movies thrive, Zach Cregger’s highly anticipated horror film “Weapons” did not disappoint, topping the box office during its debut weekend with $42.5 million domestically from 3,202 theaters. It made $70 million internationally.
The film’s success also handed its distributor, Warner Bros. Pictures, the seventh No. 1 opening of the year, and became the studio’s sixth film in a row to debut with over $40 million domestically.
“Freakier Friday,” Disney’s chaotic sequel to the 2003 classic, “Freaky Friday,” took the second spot during its premiere weekend, earning $29 million in 3,975 North American theaters. Lindsay Lohan and Jamie Lee Curtis return, this time for a double body-swapping between the mother-daughter duo and Lohan’s teen daughter and soon-to-be stepdaughter.
This image released by Warner Bros. Pictures shows Cary Christopher in a scene from “Weapons.” (Warner Bros. Pictures via AP)
This image released by Warner Bros. Pictures shows Cary Christopher in a scene from “Weapons.” (Warner Bros. Pictures via AP)
Viral marketing tactics, coupled with strong social media word-of-mouth, boded well for both films’ success, said Paul Dergarabedian, senior media analyst for the data firm Comscore.
“The top two films could not be more different, and that’s what makes this weekend so appealing for moviegoers,” Dergarabedian said. “Both are perfectly tailored for their audiences to react in real time over the weekend to these films and then post on social media.”
“Weapons” transports audiences to the small town of Maybrook, where 17 kids up and leave their homes at 2:17 a.m., leaving bewildered parents in their wake. The town is left to navigate the lingering effects of trauma through horror, paranoia and a touch of existential humor.
The film is Cregger’s follow-up to his solo directorial debut with the 2022 genre-bending horror, “Barbarian.” That critically-acclaimed film had a slower start and smaller budget, but still topped the charts during its premiere with $10 million domestically and made a splash in the genre.
“Weapons” generated a lot of buzz for its strong reviews (95% on Rotten Tomatoes).
This image released by Warner Bros. Pictures shows Cary Christopher in a scene from “Weapons.” (Warner Bros. Pictures via AP)
This image released by Warner Bros. Pictures shows Cary Christopher in a scene from “Weapons.” (Warner Bros. Pictures via AP)
“The internet’s exploding right now between Friday and today. You just see that people are having a great time with it,” said Jeffrey Goldstein, president of global distribution for Warner Bros. “It starts with an exceptional movie, an exceptional marketing campaign, and the date was exceptional too.”
“The Bad Guys 2,” which got a healthy start at the No. 2 spot during its premiere weekend, came in fourth place, earning $10.4 million domestically. “The Naked Gun” had a similar fate, reaching the fifth position with $8.4 million in North American theaters.
Warner Bros. started off slow this year, but made a comeback with the box-office hit, “A Minecraft Movie,” which opened with $157 million domestically. Since then, movies like “Sinners,” “Superman” and now, “Weapons,” have found success.
This image released by Warner Bros. Pictures shows Cary Christopher in a scene from “Weapons.” (Warner Bros. Pictures via AP)
This image released by Warner Bros. Pictures shows Cary Christopher in a scene from “Weapons.” (Warner Bros. Pictures via AP)
The studio set “a blueprint to how to create a perfect summer lineup,” Dergarabedian said.
With final domestic figures being released Monday, this list factors in the estimated ticket sales for Friday through Sunday at U.S. and Canadian theaters, according to Comscore:
1. “Weapons,” $42.5 million.
2. “Freakier Friday,” $29 million.
3. “The Fantastic Four: First Steps,” $15.5 million.
