I personally feel that the marketing attempts on this movie were abysmal even compared to Prince Caspian's. I know non-internet savvy Narnia fans that had NO IDEA that Dawn Treader was in the movie theater until after I had told them. They also seemed to be focusing on marketing more towards the Christian community (which is pretty much the most likely group that's going to go see these films) rather than family audiences or any other demographic. I was displeased they stuck the "there I have another name" line in a commercial that aired during that Sarah Palin thing, and some of the "controversy" that happened during the film's release with Liam Neeson's comments was something that was fabricated by the marketing team (suddenly Glenn Beck's talking about it a week later as if it were relevant) as a last-ditch effort to get people talking about Narnia. I was lucky to see a commercial here or there, sandwiched between Tron/Tangled/Potter commercials.

I don't think whether or not some people thought the movie was good or not was a contributing factor. Also I don't believe the demographic for this movie is particularly motivated or suited to piracy.

Yes, Raticus you are right about the marketing, and about the theology as well. I think that LWW was bound to be successful, not only because it was a classic in its own right but also because the central Christianity in it is close to familiar Christmas and Easter stories. I don't know so much about PC, but in VDT's case, the emphasis on temptation, shortcomings, fear and redemption is both a more prominent feature of the movie and a more controversial facet of the story.

I can't say how it is in other parts, but none of my friends are very keen on seeing it, and I never hear it mentioned by anyone around here.

I would be surprised to learn that your friends are of an age group that would willingly say they have visited a movie directed at primary school children, as well as their escorting parents, but who liked the movie nonetheless. Especially when having seen it yourself, you clearly told them you didn't like it. I agree that the teenage/young adult moviegoer wasn't catered for.

I thought the marketing for VDT was well done, when it comes to marketing on the Internet. As for offline marketing attempts, they were few and far between. I saw the trailer several times on TV, before the movie was released and maybe the occasional small poster here or there, but that's about it.

Yes, Raticus you are right about the marketing, and about the theology as well. I think that LWW was bound to be successful, not only because it was a classic in its own right but also because the central Christianity in it is close to familiar Christmas and Easter stories. I don't know so much about PC, but in VDT's case, the emphasis on temptation, shortcomings, fear and redemption is both a more prominent feature of the movie and a more controversial facet of the story.

I can't say how it is in other parts, but none of my friends are very keen on seeing it, and I never hear it mentioned by anyone around here.

I would be surprised to learn that your friends are of an age group that would willingly say they have visited a movie directed at primary school children, as well as their escorting parents, but who liked the movie nonetheless. Especially when having seen it yourself, you clearly told them you didn't like it. I agree that the teenage/young adult moviegoer wasn't catered for.

I agree with that. If I as a Narnia fan tell my friends I don't like VDT, then any chance they are going to go see it will disappear. Let's not forget several other factors that have had an effect on VDT. I think one big reason we are overlooking, though it pry has been mentioned on other threads, is the space between the movies. Non of the budding franchises I can think of take so long imbetween films. The public in general have a very short attention span. They forget easily. Also they never really marketed the kids. They never tried to make them well known. We never saw them in the news imbetween movies etc. To start a really successful franchise, this is needed. Those are just a few thoughts on why this franchise has not lived up to its full potential in my opinion.

I would be surprised to learn that your friends are of an age group that would willingly say they have visited a movie directed at primary school children, as well as their escorting parents, but who liked the movie nonetheless. Especially when having seen it yourself, you clearly told them you didn't like it. I agree that the teenage/young adult moviegoer wasn't catered for.

I didn't tell them actually. They saw it before I did. And they are all different ages ranging from 7 years old to 45 years old.

~Riella

Although I'm not sure about piracy, there's definitely some outside reasons. For one thing almost every film underperformed this season, the only possible exceptions I can think of being HP, Tangled, and True Grit. This season has not been doing well at all... so is whatever reason that's causing it's "problems"? Well yes and no, it's a reason, but it ain't the only one...

Reasons Why VDT maybe underperforming (You're not gonna like some of these but I feel they are true)

- Disappointment with LWW/PC
- Shift in Crew/ Cast
- Anger among the fanbase over plot changes
- Too much time between installments
- Shifts in what audience the movies aim at
- the box office x factor which is harming all movies right now
- the stereotype among teens/preteens that Narnia's a kid's series and therefore stupid (half of them haven't even seen the movies! I mean PC, a kid's film, really?!)
- the fact that people only really know about LWW
- Horrible advertising (for both PC and VDT)
- To many scene cuts/ too short of a runtime
- lack of consistency with the first two films
- bad reviews
- new cameras
- lots of competition
- economy
- bootlegging
- weather

(there's more that I haven't thought of, and those are in no particular order)

Pretty good list, wolfloversk. I would agree with a number of those as I believe there were multiple factors as well.

It's just a mediocre film, plain and simple.

I would respectfully disagree with that statement. I liked it and didn't find it mediocre at all. Now as far as an adaptation goes, I would have more sympathy with that sentiment.

Of 17 people I know who saw VDT, the like to dislike ratio would be 13 (like) to 4 (dislike). So I believe a majority of people are liking VDT which indicates other factors affecting its USA performance.

Prince Caspian's opening day was $19,397,743 and VDT's was $8,255,202; less than half. That tells me that there was more going on than bad word of mouth since VDT recovered somewhat and overcame its bad start.

Too bad we can't know precisely but I guess we can guess.

could the 3D also have made it unappealing to audiences? I heard on here(I have only seen it in 2D myslef) that there is very little actual 3D so maybe the non mega fans who see it in 3D are saying the 3D isnt that good therefore making people not see the movie?

no need to agree with me, just throwing out ideas

I'd disagree with that 3D argument as well. I do think that too many movies are 'doing' 3D's and the extra charges involved might make movies unaffordable, especially for families. I don't think VDT had bad 3D effects at all. I thought they were quite good, and that people don't always remember to choose more appropriate seating in the theatre, such as at the back to make their viewing more comfortable.

If the audience wanted them any better, they might not be able to distinguish the 3D film effects from Real Life which is what happened in Bathurst the other day, when a storm brought the theatre roof down during a screening of VDT.

I disagree that PC's reputation hurt VotDT. In fact, even fans I know who hated PC said they thought "It was a good movie, but not a good adaptation." VotDT was not just a bad adaptation, but it wasnt even a good movie. It was mediocre. And it was hardly advertised.

I think they should have high quality scriptwriters and a new director for Silver Chair. Thats the only way this series can go anywhere.

I don't think VDT had bad 3D effects at all. I thought they were quite good, and that people don't always remember to choose more appropriate seating in the theatre, such as at the back to make their viewing more comfortable.

I'm going to have to agree with georgiefan1 about the 3D making it unpopular. That's the the number one complaint I've heard from other people who have seen it, and I thought it looked terrible as well. And I had a very good, comfortable view from my seat.

~Riella

Nah... People had the option of seeing it in 2D... I saw it in 2D... I just don't think people really cared. It didn't have a breakout opening. If it was the 3D problem, it would have had a big opening and then a noticeable drop after word of mouth got out that the 3D was bad. It had a putput opening which would indicate 3D was not the problem. People just didn't care to start with.

Instead, the movie has actually had pretty good legs which means WOM has been positive and getting people to the theatres despite poor 3D. Plus there were tons of movies with horrible 3D and they still did well despite being average movies at best. If people are interested, people will go regardless...

I agree. I think not enough people care to watch this film compared to the previous two. My sister who saw the first one, didn't bother to see VDT and neither did my friend who I went with when LWW first came out. The need to see VDT wasn't as pressing as with LWW.

I also go back to the argument where some people didn't really know there were more books after LWW. I spoke with my cousin before the holidays and she did not know there were more books after the first one, after which I suggested that she take her kids to VDT and definitely read the book to them.

This film has good quality 3D and I don't think that aspect would drive a current moviegoer away. Just watching trailers for upcoming movies today I'm reminded just how much mindless dreck is produced by Hollywood that people rush out in droves to see.

I think a big part is people not going back for a second viewing. I saw it once in 2D and intended to see it again with my mom, but I was so disappointed that I haven't pushed to go a second time at all. Not from complete dislike, since I want to see it again for fix reasons, but I am not inclined to go out of my way to see it again.