Three movies, three dogs, probably. Let me tell you why.
Armored opens in December. I've seen the preview at least 10 times since August; two versions, actually. They give away the entire movie in the preview - armored car drivers plan to hijack their own cargo, a newbie driver develops a conscience, something goes wrong, then there's a car chase using armored cars. Much like my complaints about 12 Rounds, it's tough to maintain suspense when they show you the resolution. In addition, they have Matt Dillon at his smarmiest and Laurence Fishburne as the opposite of Morpheus. Armored may well be a good action movie but given how early they started pumping it and how much they are giving away in the preview, I'm expecting it to bomb.
Amelia is a bio-pic about Amelia Earhart, opening tomorrow. The preview looks fine. What makes me doubt this movie is an interview Hilary Swank gave to promote the movie. In it she talked about what she wears to bed (nothing) and how she doesn't cover up in front of her boyfriend's six-year-old son. It's all probably innocent but given that most Americans have a fairly prudish regard to nudity and that even a nudist will do a double-take after hearing about an adult and an unrelated six-year-old, I can only conclude that two-time Academy Award (r) winner Swank is playing the controversy card because the movie is a dog. I'll follow up after we see some numbers.
Brothers is a whole different kettle of fish. With Natalie Portman, Jake Gyllenhaal and Tobey Maguire, Brothers is probably pretty good. Problem is, the preview gives away everything - Portman is a war widow, gets involved with her husband's brother, oops - husband isn't dead after all. Good luck getting people into the theater with a downer of a story like that.
Brothers may well be a good movie and I may go see it, but I'm skeptical about its chances.