‘Melania,’ panned by some film critics, opens with strong ticket sales for a documentary

states with large Republican constituencies and among older women, who made up a disproportionate share of viewers, as evidence of a distinct niche appeal that translated into better‑than‑anticipated sales and pushed the film into the third spot at the domestic box office behind a pair of genre films, all the while sparking a mix of celebration among its backers and skepticism among critics and commentators who questioned both its artistic merits and the true nature of its box office strength given conflicting reports about empty auditoriums in major cities and anecdotal accounts of minimal advance ticket sales in some urban centers, where venues from New York to Los Angeles reportedly had very low attendance, and leading review aggregators gave Melania overwhelmingly negative ratings from critics, with some commentary describing it as overly flattering, staid, and lacking depth, while audiences awarded it high CinemaScore and audience ratings, illustrating a sharp divide between critical reception and viewer response that mirrors broader cultural and political splits in the United States; further complicating the narrative, global performance has been muted outside the U.S., with low ticket sales in markets like the United Kingdom where it debuted at number 29 at the box office with modest per‑screen averages, and some European screenings recorded extremely sparse attendance — including reports of only one or two tickets sold at certain showings — underscoring the film’s limited international appeal and foreshadowing a long road to profitability if additional revenue streams such as Prime Video streaming and ancillary rights do not significantly bolster earnings, and this mixed performance has ignited broader debate within entertainment circles and political media about the role of political documentaries released during an incumbent administration, the strategic value of such films as part of cultural or political messaging, and the ethics of substantial studio investment in what many observers characterize as a politically charged project that blurs the lines between documentary storytelling and promotional content, with some commentators noting that the film was not screened in advance for critics, leading to a barrage of critical panning, while others pointed out that director Brett Ratner’s involvement — his first major directorial effort since multiple sexual misconduct allegations surfaced against him nearly a decade prior — has further fueled controversy and social media reaction, with online discourse ranging from mockery and satire to conspiracy‑tinged speculation about bulk ticket purchases and claims of manipulated box office figures, and this polarized reaction reflects broader societal tensions over celebrity, politics, and media influence in contemporary culture, leaving the documentary’s legacy defined not just by its ticket sales but by the conversation it has generated nationwide.