...of Mars
- Thread starter @Li3n
- Start date
- Status
A summer blockbuster getting released in the dead of winter has me concerned.
S
Soliloquy
Taking out the "of Mars" thing is a horribly-thought-out decision, though.
If you don't know the source, a film called "John Carter" won't ring any bells or draw any attention. The title says nothing about the film, and certainly doesn't make it clear that it's a Sci-Fi epic.
I mean, a film called "John Carter" could be in the same Genre as Jackie Brown, Annie Hall, Jane Eyre, Donnie Brasco, Billy Elliot, Dolores Claiborne, Michael Collins, or Michael Clayton. I can understand not wanting to seem like a silly sci-fi, but that gets thrown out the window the moment you see a single preview involving fighting armies of aliens on Mars.
If you don't know the source, a film called "John Carter" won't ring any bells or draw any attention. The title says nothing about the film, and certainly doesn't make it clear that it's a Sci-Fi epic.
I mean, a film called "John Carter" could be in the same Genre as Jackie Brown, Annie Hall, Jane Eyre, Donnie Brasco, Billy Elliot, Dolores Claiborne, Michael Collins, or Michael Clayton. I can understand not wanting to seem like a silly sci-fi, but that gets thrown out the window the moment you see a single preview involving fighting armies of aliens on Mars.
Actually my mention of Supes was about Hugo Danner... i mean the ant and grasshopper thing in Action Comics #1 is straight from Gladiator.
From the summaries i read about John Carter he's more of the prototype for guys like Indy, and other pulp action guys that explore stuff...
But thinking about it the lower gravity thing certainly fits with Carter... and there's no reason to assume they drew from more then one source.
North_Ranger
Staff member
Just watched this in 3-D...
...and to be honest...
...I liked it
After hearing people bash it for a variety of reasons - the name, the style, the changes from the Princess of Mars - I have to say I got out of the movie what I came to see: a unique sci-fi film owing to the fact that its source material dates to the turn of the 20th century. The Tharks looked awesome, the cities were alien but oddly familiar, the plot gave an interesting twist to the staple fantasy plot of "one bare-chested man beats the living crap out of an evil empire". Don't get me wrong, Schindler's List this ain't, but I found it an enjoyable, fun film to watch.
My only two problems were
, but those are minor issues.
...and to be honest...
...I liked it
After hearing people bash it for a variety of reasons - the name, the style, the changes from the Princess of Mars - I have to say I got out of the movie what I came to see: a unique sci-fi film owing to the fact that its source material dates to the turn of the 20th century. The Tharks looked awesome, the cities were alien but oddly familiar, the plot gave an interesting twist to the staple fantasy plot of "one bare-chested man beats the living crap out of an evil empire". Don't get me wrong, Schindler's List this ain't, but I found it an enjoyable, fun film to watch.My only two problems were
just how easily John Carter went and gave Tal Hajus a Viking haircut and not enough scenes with Tharks kicking ass
I heard this was actually pretty good, but I'm not compelled to see it in theaters.
No kidding. The way the ball was dropped on this really pisses me off. I want to see the next books on the screen. It was a damn good movie.
Went and saw this last night on the only screen that is playing it in town, in 3D (meh). And like NR said, it's pretty good. The story itself is pretty interesting, the characters are quite likable, and there's a good mix of fight sequences and low points/comic relief. It was a bit confusing for a while after he gets to Mars - a bit 'who's on first'-ish, but they may also have been deliberate. Overall, I liked it and would whole-heartedly recommend it to sci-fi or fiction geeks. It reminded me a bit, at least in terms of style and costuming, of the B-list sci-fi movies of the 50's and I think that worked really well. And it was neat to see where some of today's stardard tropes may have originated from.
It was good, go see it, help this kind of movie be profitable.
Now I need to read the books.
It was good, go see it, help this kind of movie be profitable.
Now I need to read the books.
I think this has only lasted in my theater for so long because it was the only 3D movie for a while and it's a Disney film. Now Titanic 3D is dropping into theaters like a 15-year-old lump of shit, and this will likely be my last chance to see John Carter in theaters in 2D.
Wasn't going to, but when my wife and I went to The Hunger Games there was a projector problem after a fire alarm, so we got free tickets and got to see that movie anyway. She was planning to see The Hunger Games again anyway today and the movies are starting within 10 minutes of each other and have roughly the same run, so I figured, why not? It has a 50% on Rotten Tomatoes--I like that kind of divide. The Fountain used to have that and it's one of my favorites. Polarism for the win.
If it sucks, I'm blaming you guys. Sort of.
EDIT: Some interesting stuff in the meantime.
One, apparently it made its budget back. Sure, it took a while, and if there is a sequel it'll likely have a smaller budget, but that's good news. The DVD sales should cover ads and more, so don't lose hope about a sequel just yet (nor get hopes up). I find it interesting that it did so much better around the world than in the U.S. The domestic marketing really fucked up in this case.
On the subject of the DVD, Disney seems to think a silly-looking cover will help sell. And they're probably right. What's irritating is that if you want it on Blu-Ray, you're going to have to buy a 4-disc set that is the DVD, the Blu-Ray, the 3D Blu-Ray, and the disc that allows you to watch it via download (so why have a disc; I hate that shit). Might hurt sales, but who knows?
Movie's at 4:00, so... I should do something else.
Wasn't going to, but when my wife and I went to The Hunger Games there was a projector problem after a fire alarm, so we got free tickets and got to see that movie anyway. She was planning to see The Hunger Games again anyway today and the movies are starting within 10 minutes of each other and have roughly the same run, so I figured, why not? It has a 50% on Rotten Tomatoes--I like that kind of divide. The Fountain used to have that and it's one of my favorites. Polarism for the win.
If it sucks, I'm blaming you guys. Sort of.
EDIT: Some interesting stuff in the meantime.
One, apparently it made its budget back. Sure, it took a while, and if there is a sequel it'll likely have a smaller budget, but that's good news. The DVD sales should cover ads and more, so don't lose hope about a sequel just yet (nor get hopes up). I find it interesting that it did so much better around the world than in the U.S. The domestic marketing really fucked up in this case.
On the subject of the DVD, Disney seems to think a silly-looking cover will help sell. And they're probably right. What's irritating is that if you want it on Blu-Ray, you're going to have to buy a 4-disc set that is the DVD, the Blu-Ray, the 3D Blu-Ray, and the disc that allows you to watch it via download (so why have a disc; I hate that shit). Might hurt sales, but who knows?
Movie's at 4:00, so... I should do something else.
North_Ranger
Staff member
I... don't find that particularly funny.
But then again, it might be because most other films and series I've enjoyed have gotten f***ed by the executives like a fourteen-year-old prostitute in Tijuana.
But then again, it might be because most other films and series I've enjoyed have gotten f***ed by the executives like a fourteen-year-old prostitute in Tijuana.
Back from it + dinner.
I am in the defender camp*. Loved it. The stuff John was doing was probably better than we'll see in the Superman movie next year. I questioned it before despite enjoying Finding Nemo and Wall-E, but hiring an animation director was a brilliant idea for doing this. Loved the politics, good characters, the stuff with the Therns was fantastic. Tharks were my favorite.
*If I had anything bad to say, it's firstly on the title change, because at the start of the credits, they title the movie John Carter of Mars. Derp. Secondly, the opening 20 minutes of this movie probably had a lot of people walking out and giving bad reviews without seeing it, because they are a clumsy 20 minutes. First you have an admittedly great scene on Mars. Then you have the nephew. Then you have this gold-hunting stuff. And THEN we're on Mars, for real. I'm not sure how to fix this, because while the scenes themselves are good, and certain stuff sets up for a clever ending, it feels like a bit of work to get to the real movie. One way to fix it would be to cut all that and the ending... Or at least cut down some of the stuff with the gold-hunt, despite the funny stuff with him and the colonel.
One plot problem though, maybe someone can answer:
I am in the defender camp*. Loved it. The stuff John was doing was probably better than we'll see in the Superman movie next year. I questioned it before despite enjoying Finding Nemo and Wall-E, but hiring an animation director was a brilliant idea for doing this. Loved the politics, good characters, the stuff with the Therns was fantastic. Tharks were my favorite.
*If I had anything bad to say, it's firstly on the title change, because at the start of the credits, they title the movie John Carter of Mars. Derp. Secondly, the opening 20 minutes of this movie probably had a lot of people walking out and giving bad reviews without seeing it, because they are a clumsy 20 minutes. First you have an admittedly great scene on Mars. Then you have the nephew. Then you have this gold-hunting stuff. And THEN we're on Mars, for real. I'm not sure how to fix this, because while the scenes themselves are good, and certain stuff sets up for a clever ending, it feels like a bit of work to get to the real movie. One way to fix it would be to cut all that and the ending... Or at least cut down some of the stuff with the gold-hunt, despite the funny stuff with him and the colonel.
One plot problem though, maybe someone can answer:
Why was a Thern just appearing in Arizona at that time? Did they get a warning that someone had entered the cave and was messing with stuff? Otherwise it doesn't make sense for one to leave Mars at such a crucial time in their slow planet death plan.
Maybe he had some vacation time saved up? I'm assuming it was a social visit, though solely because that amuses me.
I can't remember the last time I've been on the side of a movie that so many people are dismissing with "It sucks" when they haven't seen it.
Hey, why form your own opinion when someone else can do it for you?
--Patrick
Charlie, is that you?
Charlie won't see John Carter, and he won't read the reviews, but he will skim them and pretend it's his own opinion.
There is a Two Disc Blu-Ray/DVD Combo that will be available. That's what I'll be getting, even though I haven't seen the movie yet, because I really don't like seeing most movies in theaters because of the lack of courtesy that exists there. And all (read both) my local theaters suck in this regard, and yes I know it's the patrons and not the theater.
Thanks; I'll get that as well. As far as not seeing it in theaters, it makes sense. I only ended going out of curiosity and to see it big screen--not too many people were at my screening and I doubt my few dollars is doing to matter. I do wish I'd gotten a chance to take my 9-year-old cousin; he would've had a blast.
I'm looking at reviews online such as from Nostalgia Critic, Red Letter Media, Cinema Snob... a lot of people get this movie. I think had the advertising been better, it would've found an audience today and not be dismissed as "sucking" so readily. Most people who saw it seemed to like it outside of the critics. I think RLM and Cinema Snob got it best when they mentioned this would be an appropriate double feature with an 80s sci-fi or sword and sorcery film.
To me, and I haven't done any extensive research, most of the negative talk about it was "It didn't make $200 million in the first day! It's a flop!" I don't like that they dropped the "of Mars" part of the title in almost all the latter publicity, since the early teasers had it there, and has been noted that it's in the movie title in the film itself. Personally, I would have gone with something along the lines of...
Based on the beloved works of Edgar Rice Burroughs, creator of Tarzan, the science-fiction epic that inspired generations: John Carter of Mars.
While typing that I had the weird idea of a spoof... John Carter: Princess of Mars. Yep, all the way that way, all transgender actors.
I think I need more sleep.
Based on the beloved works of Edgar Rice Burroughs, creator of Tarzan, the science-fiction epic that inspired generations: John Carter of Mars.
While typing that I had the weird idea of a spoof... John Carter: Princess of Mars. Yep, all the way that way, all transgender actors.
I think I need more sleep.
Yes.
That's hilarious.
- Status