18/72.

30/140
if they can show this trailer on some big movie coming up(happy feet would be smart) and start getting tv spots up then this could do well

There's a new international trailer with some extra voice over and shots in it...

http://www.shurtugal.com/content/mandm/ ... lowwmv.php

The official poster has Rachel Weisz's name on it. That could mean she is the voice of Saphira.
I think that would be a great choice.

Best trailer so far, I acually wouldnt mind seeing it now

It will pass 100m.

the opening week should be around 28-35m.

Oh! and I liked that int'l trailer

Rumors flying around that Rachel Weisz is doing the voice of Saphira, sounds kewl eh, if true it gives me some more hope.

Latest trailer is bril, but honestly at this point I don't think anybody knows or cares enough about this movie, and it will do badly.

Seriously though if they played that trailer in front of like POTC2, where people could actually see it, this would be 200 mil+ like Narnia. Unfortunatley they dropped the ball.

Exactly four weeks left. I wonder whether the studio is going to put money into a sizeable TV-ad campaign, or whether they are simply going to let this film sink.

The TV ads suck. "Set the world. On fire." It's not getting sold like a big fantasy flick, it's getting sold as another dragon film. BOMB. 16/64

I think I will go against the grain here. At first I lowered my predictions drastically because they kept withholding the trailers so late but Ive been seeing alot of the trailers on tv for weeks now. It looks like Fox was doing a late marketting for the movie and dumping all its campaign money into such a brief period. Night at the Museum seems to go with the early marketting route but no commercials yet for that film even if it opens just days after Eragon.

Ill go with a 38 million prediction and 180 million total.Im pretty sure it will do more than Night at the Museum like I mention that it seems as though Fox is concentrating mainly on Eragon but probably wont have ample time to market NATM well enough.I do think it will appeal to alot of children and preteens. I may regret my prediction later

Fox has already screened Night at the Museum for exhibitors who are pretty positive on it from a commercial viewpoint, is going with that film for IMAX treatment and chose to start its campaign with PIRATRES OF THE CARIBBEAN 2. Can't say the same for ERAGON.

It is traditional for TV campaigns to focus on the soonest to launch studio release especially when both are 100+ million budget releases and one is targeting male tweens and teens.

A big amount of TV-spots isn't enough. The TV-spots actually need to be GOOD. So are they? I haven't seen them.

The TV campaign is decent. They're exciting and stylish.

The TV spots really haven't impressed me much. But I've seen enough to create awareness, so at the very least some people will know about the movie. I think the film could pass 100 depending on WOM, but the WOM would have to be stellar for anything beyond around 115/120.

Hrm. Anyone buying this?:)

Im sticking with 37million/180 million total. I mean there really isnt some sort of popcorn movie this winter that gears towards those 10+ and older. The ads I dont think look as bad as most of you are saying . I think Night at the Museum should be the one Fox should be worrying about at this stage since theres hardly any advertising on tv. They did a great campaign earlier in late summer but it seems to have died dow nfor NATM. That movie I think will have a maximum of 120 million but nothing over

15/45. I might be overpredicting, thought. The WOM should be awful, so the legs are gonna be short.

Oh, and why do some people assume that this film is going to have good legs?

I mean, there hasn't been even one screening of the film so far, and it's coming out in two weeks. Big releases always have preview screenings, unless the movie is absolutely awful. Nobody has seen this movie yet, which speaks for the confidence the studio has for it.

Also they never released a proper trailer for the film. The reason? Because obviously the film is awful that they couldn't edit a proper trailer out of it. That's why they are trying their best to not show any acting or dialogue from the film, because those were absolutely terrible in the the preview we saw during the summer.

They are taking a "take the money and run" approach with this film. They can cut 30-second TV spots with lot's of CGI dragon footage (and zero story & acting & dialogue) to raise some interest, but once the film is out, WOM will kill it. I wouldn't be surprised if the studio would refuse to show the film to critics. In fact it would probably be smart of them to not to.

I'm not sure about legs. If it does happen to be a decent film, they should be strong. If it's as cheesy and lame as most people believe it will be... well, in the words of Borat, not so much.

Also, I'll admit that the dragon CGI shots looks good in the marketing. But the drawing power of cool dragon effects is limited. It certainly didn't help Dragonheart and Reign Of Fire much. And LOTR:ROTK had lot's of big fell beast scenes, and HP4 had big dragon action scenes.

The point is: If you want to draw in the audiences with SFX shots, you need something new and fresh. Flying CGI dragons have faced the same inflation as big CGI armies marching around, or big CGI tidal waves.

Oh dear. Did you guys see the sneak peeks of Eragon they showed this weekend on ABC Family (how in the *world* did Fox manage *that*?) during Harry Potter?

I don't know how many were shown; I saw two. Saturday night, there was a long clip of Eragon and Saphira, showing a really boring transition of Saphira from baby to adult. Then last night they had a clip of Eragon trying to ride Saphira.... boring.

Honestly, the only people who'd get hyped with those clips are the fans of the books. I still don't understand why they'd play those clips during Harry Potter -- Eragon is the "competition" (hate using that word, 'cause it really is not competition at all compared to JK's work).

Yeah, it's a cool-looking dragon. But there's only one dragon. At least in DnD, they had two whole *armies* of dragons fighting. A single dragon isn't very impressive... expect in Dragonheart, but that's partially due to Sean Connery's performance, and the story was a LOT more interesting.

Joy

http://www.shurtugal.com/imageviewer.ph ... FX-174.jpg
http://www.shurtugal.com/imageviewer.ph ... FX-180.jpg
http://www.shurtugal.com/imageviewer.ph ... FX-202.jpg

Some nice shots of dragon.

About the legs: it's December. Multiplier of 3 is almost impossible.

Star Trek: Nemesis did finish with a multiplier of 2.3, so while that did have much more going against it, I'm not convinced this will have a multiplier above 3.5.

Despite what some say, I don't think the fanbase is going to help frontload this film much, and with a PG rating, it's definitely a family-friendly film. I doubt it's under 3.5x.