“Mortal Engines,” co-written by Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh, grossed a paltry $7.5 million in its domestic debut over the weekend, from more than 3,100 screens. That only deepened the hole for the sci-fi fantasy spectacle, which has grossed $34.8 million overseas on a reported $100 million budget — meaning that the movie could lose more than $100 million after marketing costs are factored in.

AD

AD

Universal had largely been buoyed this year by “Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom,” which grossed $1.3 billion worldwide, and enjoyed good returns from “Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again” ($394 million worldwide), “The Grinch” ($374 million) and “Fifty Shades Freed” ($371 million).

The common denominator among all those hit films, of course, is that they are the latest entries in existing franchises.

Yet with the woefully reviewed “Mortal Engines” (a 43 average score on Metacritic; 28 percent “fresh” on Rotten Tomatoes), Universal was not only banking on launching a fresh franchise. The studio also seemed to be tempting fate with so many major decisions surrounding the movie.

AD

First, there was the director.

Yes, Jackson is attached to this project — and films he has directed, paced by his Tolkien-sprung stories, have grossed more than $6 billion worldwide. (His biggest directing hit for Universal, “King Kong,” was 13 years ago.)

AD

But the man who helmed “Mortal Engines” is Christian Rivers, making his feature directing debut. As a veteran of Team Jackson, Rivers is better known as an effects wizard and storyboard artist who shared a visual effects Oscar for “King Kong.”

Although it’s laudable to give Rivers a shot in the chair, the studio also signed off on “Mortal Engines” having almost no stars (Hugo Weaving being one of its biggest international names) and just as limited recognition in terms of source material.

AD

The film is adapted from Philip Reeve’s YA book series. Set in a post-apocalyptic steampunk world (and published beginning more than a decade ago, when a steampunk trend was still ascendant), the “Mortal Engines” novels don’t have the name clout of a “Hunger Games” or “Twilight” in the United States.

Then there’s the film’s story itself. “Mortal Engines” centers on hulking metropoli on wheels — a “city-eat-city world” — yet the marketing on Rivers’s movie did little to simplify the world-building tale for potential filmgoers, let alone offer a clear commercial hook to intrigue audiences. The promotion was a misfire on the order of Disney’s “John Carter” (2012), whose murky marketing doomed a decent movie ($284 million worldwide gross on a $250 million production budget).

AD

Lastly, Universal brazenly slotted “Mortal Engines” against a highly anticipated animated entry in a mostly beloved franchise: Spider-Man. Sony’s “Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse” grossed a strong $35.4 million in its domestic debut.

AD

Even if “Mortal Engines” had managed a mediocre opening weekend in North America, it quickly would have a cinematic-universe behemoth like “Aquaman” and a franchise blockbuster like “Bumblebee” to face this week.

Perhaps Universal was hoping to grab whatever it could at the holiday box office,

But the biggest takeaway is that the studio sought to launch a new sci-fi epic — a tall order to begin with — with so many factors working against its favor that the project appeared doomed even before it debuted.

Another sci-film this year, Paramount’s “Annihilation,” also sunk at the box office, but on “just” a $40 million budget.