PDA

View Full Version : Movies and TV John Carter (of Mars) trailer


keg in kc
07-14-2011, 03:37 PM
Brought to you by Disney, from the Edgar Rice Burroughs classics...

<iframe width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/6Rf55GTEZ_E" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Deberg_1990
07-14-2011, 04:20 PM
Looks interesting, kind of weird......i like that it appears it was shot on location instead of all CGI backgrounds.

tk13
07-14-2011, 07:21 PM
I don't know if I was blown away, but it'll be interesting to follow this one. It's directed by Andrew Stanton of Pixar fame... he directed WALL-E and Finding Nemo, and was a writer on the Toy Story films. Also, Peter Gabriel on the music there, it's a great cover of an Arcade Fire song "My Body is a Cage."

KcMizzou
07-14-2011, 07:46 PM
Riggins!

JD10367
10-01-2011, 11:52 AM
Hey, guess what? I just got my IMAX print of "Real Steel". Guess what it came with? Yup... a "John Carter" trailer. Not sure if it'll be 2D or 3D yet, I'll have to run the trailer and see what it says.

keg in kc
10-01-2011, 12:02 PM
I just got my IMAX print of "Real Steel".My condolences.

JD10367
10-01-2011, 12:12 PM
My condolences.

Eh, I'm sure it'll be okay. At least it looks like it has some neat action and special effects. It's "Rock Em Sock Em Robots", how bad can they fuck it up?

keg in kc
10-01-2011, 12:21 PM
That's sort of like a guy in a horror film saying "what could possibly go wrong?"

Deberg_1990
10-01-2011, 01:22 PM
My condolences.

Hey, guess what? I just got my IMAX print of "Real Steel". .

Believe it or not, its actually getting decent reviews.

keg in kc
10-01-2011, 01:33 PM
Believe it or not, its actually getting decent reviews.I think it'll be fine for what it is, a kids movie.

Won't catch me watching it in a million years, though. And that's fine, I don't think 37-year old dudes are the target audience.

Deberg_1990
10-01-2011, 01:38 PM
I think it'll be fine for what it is, a kids movie.

Won't catch me watching it in a million years, though. And that's fine, I don't think 37-year old dudes are the target audience.

heh, understood. Ill probably take my son.....although its another one of those "Transformers" quandries for me. I noticed its rated PG-13 and Hollywood feels like they have to add in language and adult situations to a kids movie. Meanwhile, anyone over 16 probably feels like this plays too young for them. I dont get why Hollywood does this??

mnchiefsguy
10-03-2011, 01:23 AM
John Carter looks intriguing. Here's hoping that it is good.

JD10367
10-04-2011, 09:14 AM
heh, understood. Ill probably take my son.....although its another one of those "Transformers" quandries for me. I noticed its rated PG-13 and Hollywood feels like they have to add in language and adult situations to a kids movie. Meanwhile, anyone over 16 probably feels like this plays too young for them. I dont get why Hollywood does this??

Per$onally it $eem$ to me like there'$ a few $pecific rea$on$.

By making it both a "kid's movie" and a "Transformers"-style FX film for nerds who remember playing "Rock 'Em Sock 'Em Robots", they double the market share.

If it were just a kid's movie, it'd make $40M. If it were a blood-and-guts FX fantasy, it might make $100+M. By doing both, it might not make for a better movie, but it'll probably make for $150+M. Which is all they care about.

Discuss Thrower
10-04-2011, 09:17 AM
Per$onally it $eem$ to me like there'$ a few $pecific rea$on$.

By making it both a "kid's movie" and a "Transformers"-style FX film for nerds who remember playing "Rock 'Em Sock 'Em Robots", they double the market share.

If it were just a kid's movie, it'd make $40M. If it were a blood-and-guts FX fantasy, it might make $100+M. By doing both, it might not make for a better movie, but it'll probably make for $150+M. Which is all they care about.

Wikipedia sez Real Steel is based off a 1950s short story, not RockemSockemRobots. Make of that what you will.

JD10367
10-04-2011, 09:36 AM
Wikipedia sez Real Steel is based off a 1950s short story, not RockemSockemRobots. Make of that what you will.

Well, RESER was introduced in 1964. That whole 50s-1980 era was when robots took off in pop culture. Robbie the Robot, "Lost In Space", all the cheap sci-fi films, Isaac Asimov's novels, etc.,.

BTW, I'm screening my print now. So far it's not too bad. Because it's a Disney film it's definitely working the father-son-dysfunction angle. The kid playing his kid is like an 11-year-old version of the annoying kid who played little Anakin in "Phantom Menace" (picture that kid with an 11-year-old's annoying smart-ass attitude). Jackman is playing the "likeable rogueish asshole", and you know eventually he and the kid will bond, blah blah blah. Still, compared to a lot of the dreck I've seen lately, it's fairly entertaining and has some nice cinematography so far.

Deberg_1990
10-04-2011, 09:43 AM
Well, RESER was introduced in 1964. That whole 50s-1980 era was when robots took off in pop culture. Robbie the Robot, "Lost In Space", all the cheap sci-fi films, Isaac Asimov's novels, etc.,.

BTW, I'm screening my print now. So far it's not too bad. Because it's a Disney film it's definitely working the father-son-dysfunction angle. The kid playing his kid is like an 11-year-old version of the annoying kid who played little Anakin in "Phantom Menace" (picture that kid with an 11-year-old's annoying smart-ass attitude). Jackman is playing the "likeable rogueish asshole", and you know eventually he and the kid will bond, blah blah blah. Still, compared to a lot of the dreck I've seen lately, it's fairly entertaining and has some nice cinematography so far.

Cool...let me know how you think it might play for an 8 year old kid. Thanks.

JD10367
10-04-2011, 09:56 AM
Cool...let me know how you think it might play for an 8 year old kid. Thanks.

Probably fine. It has the moral (everything has something good inside, it just needs to be brought out; we all get second chances to make good; etc.,.). It's got the "A Boy And His Dog-Robot" angle. The father-son dynamic. The unrequited-love angle (BTW, Evangeline Lily has tiny boobies but nice legs and a great minimal-makeup face). The movie's telegraphed from a mile away (everything is laid out simply and you pretty much know exactly what's going to happen and how), but that's okay. I don't think it's meant to be "Pulp Fiction" or "The Sixth Sense" in terms of storyline.

Deberg_1990
10-04-2011, 10:17 AM
(BTW, Evangeline Lily has tiny boobies but nice legs and a great minimal-makeup face).

yea, always liked her on Lost. Definate girl next door quality, but hot.

JD10367
10-04-2011, 10:35 AM
yea, always liked her on Lost. Definate girl next door quality, but hot.

I would the whole thing, twice, and then again in the morning.

Movie's got about 40 minutes left. Incredibly silly and simplistic, and yet you can't help but smile and enjoy it even though you could've written the plot yourself on a bar napkin while half-drunk. I think one of the early reviews said it was "Rocky" with rivets, which applies. It's actually one of the few films I can remember seeing where the inability of the film to commit to one thing actually makes it better; most films, when they can't make up their minds, end up being lesser than if they'd gone more in one direction than another (e.g. "Super 8" as a horror film and a coming-of-age story). This one actually seems to work better because it's such a blend (Rocky, Boy And His Dog, redemption, "Rock 'Em Sock 'Em Robots", special effects, heartwarming Disney-ish tale, etc.,.).

JD10367
10-04-2011, 10:58 AM
Final review... There actually wasn't enough fighting for my tastes. Could've used more. But what there was, was well done. The product placements got a little annoying, but that's just the way it is nowadays in films, unfortunately. The film won't blow you away, but it's actually an enjoyable silly simply-done film that both dads and their kids can take something away from. Has it's cute parts, sentimental parts. And it looks good in IMAX and sounds good (and loud). It's really not an FX-robot film, it's a family (and family-bonding) film with a shiny robot cover to it.

Deberg_1990
12-01-2011, 10:32 AM
New John Carter trailer is out:




<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/l8I9eZGzNhM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Fish
12-01-2011, 11:01 AM
I want one of those cute little Martian puppies....

http://img851.imageshack.us/img851/7043/johncarter01.jpg

Deberg_1990
02-16-2012, 08:58 PM
Uh oh.....Hollywood smells a bomb. Im actually looking forward to this, but the marketing has been awful.



http://www.deadline.com/2012/02/john-carter-early-tracking-shockingly-soft-could-be-biggest-writeoff-of-all-time/


‘John Carter’ Tracking Shockingly Soft: “Could Be Biggest Writeoff Of All Time”



Hollywood is in a tizzy over the early tracking which just came online this morning for Walt Disney Studios‘ John Carter opening March 9th. “Not good. 2 unaided, 53 aware, 27 definitely interested, 3 first choice,” a senior exec at a rival studio emails me. Another writes me, ”It just came out. Women of all ages have flat out rejected the film. The tracking for John Carter is shocking for a film that cost over $250 million. This could be the biggest writeoff of all time.” I’m hearing figures in the neighborhood of $100 million. And the studio isn’t even trying to spin reports of the 3D pic’s bloated budget any more.

Now, to be fair, this very soft tracking has been expected. The studios’ private reports have shown for some time very soft awareness and very little wannasee. So what’s Disney’s explanation? “It’s the last leftover from the previous regime of Dick Cook,” an executive who works for successor Rich Ross reminds me. “We’re not running away from the movie. Our job is to sell it.” Then again, Cook also left Ross Alice In Wonderland to sell, too, along with other hits and a few misses.

Disney is nervous, really nervous, but trying to hold out some hope. ”We know that we have a long way to go. It’s still four weeks out, and the bulk of the media hasn’t hit yet. Our Super Bowl ad did what we intended it to do: have a pop of awareness. On Sunday we launch a full campaign with 90+% of all of our media ready to go.” Problem is, John Carter (formerly titled John Carter Of Mars) only has a two-week window before Lionsgate’s hotly anticipated The Hunger Games opens March 23rd.

Disney is still planning a gigantic worldwide day-and-date push for John Carter with all the frills no matter how dismal its prospects look. ”After all the movie has Andrew Stanton of Finding Nemo and Wall-E,” an insider explains to me.

keg in kc
02-16-2012, 09:00 PM
The marketing has been horrendous, and calling it "John Carter" instead of "John Carter of Mars" was a mistake from day 1. It's just a bland title.

Bowser
02-16-2012, 09:10 PM
From the trailers, it seems like they're trying really hard to catch Avatar in a bottle here.

Guru
02-17-2012, 04:55 AM
STill don't have a clue what this movie is about. The title sure doesn't tell you shit.

NewChief
02-17-2012, 06:25 AM
STill don't have a clue what this movie is about. The title sure doesn't tell you shit.

John Carter ends up on Mars. People on Mars are in a stargate-esque battle for their freedom and lives. He's the "chosen one" or something, and is a total badass on Mars (superman effect?). He fights baddies. End of story (or at least that's what I gather from the trailer and what I've heard).

It's based on an old pulp fiction sci-fi novel (or is it comic book?) by same dude that did Tarzan.

Guru
02-17-2012, 06:27 AM
John Carter ends up on Mars. People on Mars are in a stargate-esque battle for their freedom and lives. He's the "chosen one" or something, and is a total badass on Mars (superman effect?). He fights baddies. End of story (or at least that's what I gather from the trailer and what I've heard).

It's based on an old pulp fiction sci-fi novel (or is it comic book?) by same dude that did Tarzan.

That right there tells me I won't like it.

Deberg_1990
02-17-2012, 07:39 AM
STill don't have a clue what this movie is about. The title sure doesn't tell you shit.

They have done an absolutely wretched job explaining the concept and "selling" this movie. Odd considering its Disney, who usually markets very well.

listopencil
02-17-2012, 10:43 AM
John Carter ends up on Mars. People on Mars are in a stargate-esque battle for their freedom and lives. He's the "chosen one" or something, and is a total badass on Mars (superman effect?). He fights baddies. End of story (or at least that's what I gather from the trailer and what I've heard).

It's based on an old pulp fiction sci-fi novel (or is it comic book?) by same dude that did Tarzan.

It's based on a series of books by Edgar Rice Burroughs. They are Sci Fi classics, I've read them and they are great. If Disney handled this right then they could have a movie franchise that spanned decades.

Barsoom series

Main article: Barsoom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barsoom)


A Princess of Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Princess_of_Mars) (1912) (Project Gutenberg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gutenberg) Entry: [1] (http://gutenberg.org/etext/62)) (LibriVox.org Audio Book (http://librivox.org/a-princess-of-mars-by-edgar-rice-burroughs/))
The Gods of Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gods_of_Mars) (1914) (Project Gutenberg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gutenberg) Entry:[2] (http://gutenberg.org/etext/64)) (LibriVox.org Audio Book (http://librivox.org/the-gods-of-mars-by-edgar-rice-burroughs/))
The Warlord of Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Warlord_of_Mars) (1918) (Project Gutenberg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gutenberg) Entry:[3] (http://gutenberg.org/etext/68)) (LibriVox.org Audio Book (http://librivox.org/the-warlord-of-mars-by-edgar-rice-burroughs/))
Thuvia, Maid of Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thuvia,_Maid_of_Mars) (1920) (Project Gutenberg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gutenberg) Entry:[4] (http://gutenberg.org/etext/72)) (LibriVox.org Audio Book (http://librivox.org/thuvia-maid-of-mars-by-edgar-rice-burroughs/))
The Chessmen of Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chessmen_of_Mars) (1922) (Project Gutenberg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gutenberg) Entry:[5] (http://gutenberg.org/etext/1153)) (LibriVox.org Audio Book (http://librivox.org/the-chessmen-of-mars-by-edgar-rice-burroughs/))
The Master Mind of Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Master_Mind_of_Mars) (1928) (Project Gutenberg Australia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gutenberg_Australia) Entry:[6] (http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks01/0100201.txt))
A Fighting Man of Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Fighting_Man_of_Mars) (1931) (Project Gutenberg Australia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gutenberg_Australia) Entry:[7] (http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks01/0100211.txt))
Swords of Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swords_of_Mars) (1936) (Project Gutenberg Australia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gutenberg_Australia) Entry:[8] (http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks01/0100221.txt))
Synthetic Men of Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_Men_of_Mars) (1940) (Project Gutenberg Australia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gutenberg_Australia) Entry:[9] (http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks01/0100231.txt))
Llana of Gathol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Llana_of_Gathol) (1948) (Project Gutenberg Australia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gutenberg_Australia) Entry:[10] (http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks01/0100241.txt))
John Carter of Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Carter_of_Mars_%28collection%29) (1964)

"John Carter and the Giant of Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Carter_and_the_Giant_of_Mars)" (1940) (Project Gutenberg Australia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gutenberg_Australia) Entry:[11] (http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks06/0600581.txt)) Actually written by Burroughs's son, John Coleman Burroughs.
"Skeleton Men of Jupiter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skeleton_Men_of_Jupiter)" (1942) (Project Gutenberg Australia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gutenberg_Australia) Entry:[12] (http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks06/0600591.txt))

listopencil
02-17-2012, 10:51 AM
Here's a synopsis of the first book from Wikipedia. I don't know if they are using this story for the first movie:

John Carter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Carter_of_Mars), a Confederate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederate_States_of_America) veteran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veteran) of the American Civil War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War), goes prospecting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prospecting) in Arizona (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona) immediately after the war's end. Having struck a rich vein of gold, he runs afoul of the Apaches (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apaches). While attempting to evade pursuit by hiding in a sacred cave, he is mysteriously transported to Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars), called "Barsoom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barsoom)" by its inhabitants. Carter finds that he has great strength and superhuman agility in this new environment as a result of its lesser gravity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity). He soon falls in with the Tharks, a nomadic tribe of Green Martians, as the planet's warlike, six-limbed, green-skinned inhabitants are known. Thanks to his strength and combat abilities, Carter rises to a high position in the tribe and earns the respect and eventually the friendship of Tars Tarkas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tars_Tarkas), one of the Thark chiefs.

The Tharks subsequently capture Dejah Thoris (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dejah_Thoris), Princess (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess) of Helium, a member of the humanoid red Martian race. The red Martians inhabit a loose network of city-states (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City-states) and control the desert planet's canals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canal), along which its agriculture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture) is concentrated. Carter rescues Dejah Thoris from the green men in a bid to return her to her people.

Subsequently Carter becomes embroiled in the political affairs of both the red and green men in his efforts to safeguard Dejah Thoris, eventually leading a horde of Tharks against the city-state of Zodanga, the historic enemy of Helium. Winning Dejah Thoris' hand, he becomes Prince of Helium, and the two live happily together for nine years.

However, the sudden breakdown of the Atmosphere Plant that sustains the planet's waning air supply endangers all life on Barsoom. In a desperate attempt to save the planet's inhabitants, Carter uses a secret telepathic code to enter the factory, bringing an engineer along who can restore its functionality. Carter then succumbs to asphyxiation, only to awaken back on Earth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth), left to wonder what has become of Barsoom and his beloved.

mnchiefsguy
02-17-2012, 03:39 PM
It's based on a series of books by Edgar Rice Burroughs. They are Sci Fi classics, I've read them and they are great. If Disney handled this right then they could have a movie franchise that spanned decades.

Barsoom series

Main article: Barsoom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barsoom)


A Princess of Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Princess_of_Mars) (1912) (Project Gutenberg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gutenberg) Entry: [1] (http://gutenberg.org/etext/62)) (LibriVox.org Audio Book (http://librivox.org/a-princess-of-mars-by-edgar-rice-burroughs/))
The Gods of Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gods_of_Mars) (1914) (Project Gutenberg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gutenberg) Entry:[2] (http://gutenberg.org/etext/64)) (LibriVox.org Audio Book (http://librivox.org/the-gods-of-mars-by-edgar-rice-burroughs/))
The Warlord of Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Warlord_of_Mars) (1918) (Project Gutenberg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gutenberg) Entry:[3] (http://gutenberg.org/etext/68)) (LibriVox.org Audio Book (http://librivox.org/the-warlord-of-mars-by-edgar-rice-burroughs/))
Thuvia, Maid of Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thuvia,_Maid_of_Mars) (1920) (Project Gutenberg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gutenberg) Entry:[4] (http://gutenberg.org/etext/72)) (LibriVox.org Audio Book (http://librivox.org/thuvia-maid-of-mars-by-edgar-rice-burroughs/))
The Chessmen of Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chessmen_of_Mars) (1922) (Project Gutenberg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gutenberg) Entry:[5] (http://gutenberg.org/etext/1153)) (LibriVox.org Audio Book (http://librivox.org/the-chessmen-of-mars-by-edgar-rice-burroughs/))
The Master Mind of Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Master_Mind_of_Mars) (1928) (Project Gutenberg Australia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gutenberg_Australia) Entry:[6] (http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks01/0100201.txt))
A Fighting Man of Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Fighting_Man_of_Mars) (1931) (Project Gutenberg Australia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gutenberg_Australia) Entry:[7] (http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks01/0100211.txt))
Swords of Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swords_of_Mars) (1936) (Project Gutenberg Australia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gutenberg_Australia) Entry:[8] (http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks01/0100221.txt))
Synthetic Men of Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_Men_of_Mars) (1940) (Project Gutenberg Australia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gutenberg_Australia) Entry:[9] (http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks01/0100231.txt))
Llana of Gathol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Llana_of_Gathol) (1948) (Project Gutenberg Australia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gutenberg_Australia) Entry:[10] (http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks01/0100241.txt))
John Carter of Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Carter_of_Mars_%28collection%29) (1964)

"John Carter and the Giant of Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Carter_and_the_Giant_of_Mars)" (1940) (Project Gutenberg Australia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gutenberg_Australia) Entry:[11] (http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks06/0600581.txt)) Actually written by Burroughs's son, John Coleman Burroughs.
"Skeleton Men of Jupiter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skeleton_Men_of_Jupiter)" (1942) (Project Gutenberg Australia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gutenberg_Australia) Entry:[12] (http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks06/0600591.txt))






Yeah, I read many of these as a kid. Was really excited that it was going to make it to the big screen, but am now preparing myself for disappointment.

keg in kc
02-24-2012, 04:20 PM
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/6xBaGv5bx0Q" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Deberg_1990
02-24-2012, 04:31 PM
Theres still a review embargo, but alot of the geek crowd thats seen it have been hinting that its good. Im down.

FAX
02-24-2012, 04:32 PM
Good stuff, Mr. keg in kc.

These were/are great books. ERB was kind a cross between Charles Dickens and Stan Lee. It looks like Disney is staying true to the character. I mean, Carter's powers on Mars were basically obstinance and leaping real high.

I have to admit, though, that John Carter had phenomenal good fortune. Nobody's that fortunate. He made millions and got to go to Mars. Nowadays, a guy is lucky to find a clean, public restroom.

FAX

keg in kc
02-24-2012, 04:34 PM
I've never read the books, but I'm going to go see it. If we don't go see the classic works done on the big screen, all we're going to end up with is more Twilights. I respect the fact that they're even trying it, even if they can't figure out how to market it.

Deberg_1990
02-24-2012, 04:42 PM
I've never read the books, but I'm going to go see it. If we don't go see the classic works done on the big screen, all we're going to end up with is more Twilights. I respect the fact that they're even trying it, even if they can't figure out how to market it.

Heres another story about how Disney has basically screwed the pooch marketing this thing.

They dropped the "Of Mars" off the title because they thought it would scare off women. ROFL



http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/02/21/john-carter-disney-s-quarter-billion-dollar-movie-fiasco.html

FAX
02-25-2012, 02:26 AM
Is this going to be a 3D movie?

So far, I have been pretty unimpressed with the 3D movies with the exception of Avatar which was darn good, I thought. It looked as though that entire movie was shot with 3D in mind, though. Like that scene when the main guy and his squad or whatever first landed on the planet of the blue people ... before he was transformed into a blue guy and all by the lady who used to battle alien eggs and the mother alien badass with the acidic, green blood. That scene was shot down the length of the transport ship with tons of depth-of-field and it really worked. I like that sort of thing better than having hubcaps thrown at me. Also, I went to a special 3D movie in an IMAX theater in some museum one time that was a documentary about the wonders of the deep sea. At one point, the entire audience was swimming in 3D shrimp sperm. I could not stand that deal one bit. To this day, I shudder to think of what those poor fish have to put up with.

Anyhow, I was wondering if this was 3D? And, if so, are they going to do it right?

FAX THE INQUISITIVE

Fishpicker
02-25-2012, 03:52 AM
I'm tempted to see this but I probably wont unless it gets stellar reviews. I love the concept and the Frazetta paintings, but I can't take another CGI driven movie taking a dump on something that I used to think was cool.

The Iron Chief
02-26-2012, 05:02 PM
Aside from the novels John Carter also made it into comic books.

I've collected comics for nearly 35 yrs now and though John Carter was never one of my Favorite Marvel comics(published in the late 70's)it did give you something Different to read from the typical super hero stuff.

I went thru my collection and pulled out a stack to reread to remember what the character was all about.
Character could be fun with todays special effects but still its such an unknown to so many people wtf invest in the attempt.

To anyone interested heres a link to a few of the old comics covers.
It was the art and covers that often jumped out at you back in those days.

http://www.comicvine.com/john-carter-warlord-of-mars/49-2907/

tk13
02-29-2012, 11:23 PM
Saw it tonight in 3D. I have not read the books, but I thought it was really good. Absolutely an epic adventure movie. That may be the only thing that hurts it really... people don't know what it's about, and there are a lot of characters in this entirely foreign world to keep up with, but I think Stanton balances it out pretty well, and adds in enough humor and action to keep it moving. Honestly I felt like it could've been longer, but you can't have a 3 hour movie. I want to say I enjoyed it more than Avatar, but it's probably too early to make a judgment like that. Not sure it's worth seeing in 3D though, but I'm not really a 3D fan.

Deberg_1990
02-29-2012, 11:28 PM
Saw it tonight in 3D. I have not read the books, but I thought it was really good. Absolutely an epic adventure movie. That may be the only thing that hurts it really... people don't know what it's about, and there are a lot of characters in this entirely foreign world to keep up with, but I think Stanton balances it out pretty well, and adds in enough humor and action to keep it moving. Honestly I felt like it could've been longer, but you can't have a 3 hour movie. I want to say I enjoyed it more than Avatar, but it's probably too early to make a judgment like that. Not sure it's worth seeing in 3D though, but I'm not really a 3D fan.

Awesome! How did u see it early?

Count Alex's Losses
02-29-2012, 11:34 PM
Word of mouth around the internet is very positive.

The director is a huge John Carter fan so that bodes well.

Excited for this.

Count Alex's Losses
02-29-2012, 11:35 PM
That may be the only thing that hurts it really... people don't know what it's about, and there are a lot of characters in this entirely foreign world to keep up with,

LMAOLMAO

Oh god forbid someone puts out something FRESH.

Count Alex's Losses
02-29-2012, 11:44 PM
AICN all fanboy squee up in here

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/53943

Fruit Ninja
02-29-2012, 11:46 PM
Wow, thats Riggins! nice. imma watch.

tk13
02-29-2012, 11:47 PM
Oh no, I agree... I was going to say I really hope this does well at the box office for that reason. This material will be absolutely fresh for most people in the audience. I'm glad Disney spent the money to bring an entirely new sci-fi world to the big screen. I guess Avatar was that way too... but I just felt this movie was more complex.

There are absolutely elements that are similar to Avatar or Star Wars... but you also have to remember those movies took those elements from this story and not the other way around.

SomeRandomGirl
03-01-2012, 10:22 AM
Last year my husband and I got a rare chance to take in a movie without the ol' kiddos. We walked in as the previews were starting. About midway up the aisle, my husband stops dead and just stares at the screen. Then he leans into me and whispers "It's John Carter!". I reply "Huh?". "John Carter is the reason I started to read for enjoyment. I read all his books when I was a kid."

So that evening I went home and picked up the first book. My husband and I normally have a differing opinion on what makes a good read. He can read through history after history, while I tend to like more light reading, and things that have happy endings (hey, what can I say, I'm a girlie-girl sometimes). I read the first book in about 2 nights of reading. I thoroughly enjoyed the book and immediately went onto the next and then the next. Great reads if you ask me.

As for the upcoming movie, we both are a bit concerned and excited. Exciting because we both like the stories and who doesn't like to see their favorite books come to life. Concerned because we can already see some major discrepancies and fallacies from just the previews. I mean, you can never expect the movies to get all the details, and usually you just go in knowing there will be some stuff that is left out, but this seems like they are going to "hollywood" it up way too much. Oh and that is not at all how I pictured the creatures of Mars to look. Tars Tarkas and his fellow green men look way too Jar-Jar Binks for my taste.

Regardless, I will be going to see it and I am still very excited. I just hope that I don't walk out feeling let down.


Oh and you guys should read the book. It's worth it and a quick read.

SomeRandomGirl
03-01-2012, 10:29 AM
There are absolutely elements that are similar to Avatar or Star Wars... but you also have to remember those movies took those elements from this story and not the other way around.

And this bears repeating. These books were on the forefront of science fiction.

Count Alex's Losses
03-01-2012, 04:08 PM
Two reviews

http://whatculture.com/film/john-carter-review-lovingly-made-pulp-fantasy-with-boring-human-characters.php

http://www.mattsmoviereviews.net/john-carter.html

Count Alex's Losses
03-03-2012, 12:13 AM
Weak competition. I bet it does good.

http://i44.tinypic.com/dnhp5f.jpg

tk13
03-05-2012, 12:40 AM
Disney has put a 10 minute clip from the beginning of the movie online. If you're on the fence, watch this.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/4HaE5Zs8dAY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Deberg_1990
03-05-2012, 08:46 AM
Its getting some pretty strong reviews now. Especially from the "geek" crowd. Ill bet it builds up steam as we head towards the weekend.


http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/john_carter/

Deberg_1990
03-05-2012, 03:45 PM
Disney has put a 10 minute clip from the beginning of the movie online. If you're on the fence, watch this.



This clip was great. I cant wait.

keg in kc
03-05-2012, 03:50 PM
I'm pretty sure I'm seeing it on Friday. Like I said somewhere else in the thread, if we don't fill the theaters for stuff like this, all we're going to get is more Twilights, more remakes and "reimaginings" and probably less science fiction in general. Go see this. Go see Prometheus. It's the only way to get Hollywood to make the stuff we want them to make.

Count Alex's Losses
03-06-2012, 12:19 AM
Disney has put a 10 minute clip from the beginning of the movie online. If you're on the fence, watch this.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/4HaE5Zs8dAY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Going in spoiler free for 12:01 AM Thursday!

JD10367
03-06-2012, 06:26 AM
Watching my digital print in one hour from now.

Deberg_1990
03-06-2012, 07:28 AM
Watching my digital print in one hour from now.

NIce...is this going to be in IMAX? Give us a report when done!

JD10367
03-06-2012, 09:54 AM
I have it in digital, although it is also on film for those Imaxes who so choose.

I enjoyed it, although most will find it derivative--even though, as mentioned here, it's actually the other way around. Dances With Wolves, Avatar, Stargate, the low budget fantasy from the 70s/80s (Krull, Beastmaster, Conan, etc.,.) all owe it to this material.

And, for the record, I want to cover Lynn Collins in chocolate syrup and lick until I die from diabetes. Just watching her is worth the price of admission.

Setsuna
03-06-2012, 10:00 AM
I have it in digital, although it is also on film for those Imaxes who so choose.

I enjoyed it, although most will find it derivative--even though, as mentioned here, it's actually the other way around. Dances With Wolves, Avatar, Stargate, the low budget fantasy from the 70s/80s (Krull, Beastmaster, Conan, etc.,.) all owe it to this material.

And, for the record, I want to cover Lynn Collins in chocolate syrup and lick until I die from diabetes. Just watching her is worth the price of admission.

Sooo you're just going to let that chick in your avatar sit there and watch? That's cruel.

JD10367
03-06-2012, 08:16 PM
Sooo you're just going to let that chick in your avatar sit there and watch? That's cruel.

My avatar is a fun appetizer. Lynn Collins is a four-course meal. She's reminiscent IMO of Olivia Munn mixed with Shannon Doherty and topped off with a little Dita Von Teese. I would suck her meat curtains until I died of terminal chapped-lips.

listopencil
03-06-2012, 08:48 PM
Disney has put a 10 minute clip from the beginning of the movie online. If you're on the fence, watch this.

<iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/4HaE5Zs8dAY" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" width="560"></iframe>

Wow, I really want to go see this.

FAX
03-06-2012, 09:34 PM
As a general rule, I dislike movies that screw around with the origin stories. That 10 minute deal seems to take some liberties, but it's darn close and ERB could certainly have written it that way, I guess.

Anyhow, I think they're doing justice to Carter's attitude (which is his coolest attribute). This might be really good.

FAX

listopencil
03-06-2012, 09:38 PM
As a general rule, I dislike movies that screw around with the origin stories. That 10 minute deal seems to take some liberties, but it's darn close and ERB could certainly have written it that way, I guess.

Anyhow, I think they're doing justice to Carter's attitude (which is his coolest attribute). This might be really good.

FAX

Yeah. I was thinking the exact same thing.

FAX
03-06-2012, 09:48 PM
Yeah. I was thinking the exact same thing.

I don't know how to use the spoiler button thing, so beware ... some may feel that this post contains spoilers ... as well as really poor grammar and completely gratuitous and unnecessary references to female body parts ...

....

I don't really understand why they made the changes, though. I mean, it wouldn't cost any more to shoot it they way it was written. In fact, it would probably cost less.

Maybe they thought this immediate conflict with the army and the trading post dudes helped establish the character a little faster?

One touch they left out that I really missed were the instructions to ERB regarding the crypt or tomb. I always thought that was a cool idea ... kind of set the tone, if you will.

EDIT: Awesome! You learn something every day. Today, it was spoiler things!

FAX

tk13
03-06-2012, 09:56 PM
I don't know how to use the spoiler button thing, so beware ... some may feel that this post contains spoilers ... as well as really poor grammar and completely gratuitous and unnecessary references to female body parts ...

....

I don't really understand why they made the changes, though. I mean, it wouldn't cost any more to shoot it they way it was written. In fact, it would probably cost less.

Maybe they thought this immediate conflict with the army and the trading post dudes helped establish the character a little faster?

One touch they left out that I really missed were the instructions to ERB regarding the crypt or tomb. I always thought that was a cool idea ... kind of set the tone, if you will.

FAX

Mr. FAX I don't want to spoil any aspect of the movie, so:

That clip is not the first 10 minutes of the movie. I won't ruin it but there is stuff that happens before this scene.

All you do is put spoiler with brackets around it, with a slash in the second bracket before the word spoiler.

FAX
03-06-2012, 10:01 PM
Mr. FAX I don't want to spoil any aspect of the movie, so:

That clip is not the first 10 minutes of the movie. I won't ruin it but there is stuff that happens before this scene.

All you do is put spoiler with brackets around it, with a slash in the second bracket before the word spoiler.

Thanks, Mr. tk13. That was pretty easy ... no wonder I was clueless.

FAX

listopencil
03-06-2012, 10:14 PM
I don't know how to use the spoiler button thing, so beware ... some may feel that this post contains spoilers ... as well as really poor grammar and completely gratuitous and unnecessary references to female body parts ...

....

I don't really understand why they made the changes, though. I mean, it wouldn't cost any more to shoot it they way it was written. In fact, it would probably cost less.

Maybe they thought this immediate conflict with the army and the trading post dudes helped establish the character a little faster?

One touch they left out that I really missed were the instructions to ERB regarding the crypt or tomb. I always thought that was a cool idea ... kind of set the tone, if you will.

EDIT: Awesome! You learn something every day. Today, it was spoiler things!

FAX

Yeah I was looking forward to that as I am re-reading the first book right now, but I understand that different medias require slightly different stories. As long as it is faithful to the author and treats the characters with integrity I will be pleased.

listopencil
03-06-2012, 10:16 PM
Mr. FAX I don't want to spoil any aspect of the movie, so:

That clip is not the first 10 minutes of the movie. I won't ruin it but there is stuff that happens before this scene.

All you do is put spoiler with brackets around it, with a slash in the second bracket before the word spoiler.

I get that, but that's a different relationship then I expected between Powell and Carter. Still very cool though.

listopencil
03-06-2012, 10:17 PM
I have to admit, I was cracking up at the scenes of him in confinement in the 10 minute teaser.

JD10367
03-07-2012, 07:57 AM
I haven't read the books but the two other projectionists who watched the IMAX screening said that the film was pretty faithful as far as they recalled, although it did go into more detail and explanation than the books and included stuff from more than one book. I think films naturally call for a simplification of storytelling, as you only have 2 hours to tell the tale. However, even though I'm a book reader and a sci-fi buff, I still had to pay attention to follow the plot. It's definitely not "kiddied down", despite the fact that it's Disney.

I have to watch the film again. I'm not sure I paid enough attention to Lynn Collins. :whackit:

Count Alex's Losses
03-08-2012, 04:09 PM
Reviews are 50/50

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/john_carter/

Demonpenz
03-08-2012, 04:56 PM
I think this was going to be about Sean Carter.

Frosty
03-08-2012, 07:24 PM
I'll probably wait and catch this on BR (like most movies). However, I noticed that some of the books are free on Amazon, so now I have some reading to do before it comes out. :thumb:

Deberg_1990
03-09-2012, 07:32 AM
Reviews are sort of mixed, but the "Geek" crowd seems to love it.

Ultra Peanut
03-09-2012, 03:02 PM
Riggins!BIG TIM RIGGINS~!

Fish
03-09-2012, 04:13 PM
LMAO.. I'm already seeing CAM versions of the movie popping up on my AppleTV....

Braincase
03-10-2012, 04:00 PM
Reviews are sort of mixed, but the "Geek" crowd seems to love it.

Took my son to the 1:15 show. That was a lot of fun, and Lynn COllins look slike she walked out of a Frank Frazetta portfolio. All of it. Twice.

listopencil
03-10-2012, 09:47 PM
I took my two teens to see if this afternoon. A 16 year old girl (who thought she wouldn't like it) and a 14 year old boy. The three of us enjoyed it. I had forgotten about the 3D, but it didn't take away from the movie. I would have rather that they stayed closer to the source material, but I wasn't disappointed by the movie's story.

listopencil
03-10-2012, 09:48 PM
Took my son to the 1:15 show. That was a lot of fun, and Lynn COllins look slike she walked out of a Frank Frazetta portfolio. All of it. Twice.


Smoking hot.

FAX
03-10-2012, 09:50 PM
I took my two teens to see if this afternoon. A 16 year old girl (who thought she wouldn't like it) and a 14 year old boy. The three of us enjoyed it. I had forgotten about the 3D, but it didn't take away from the movie. I would have rather that they stayed closer to the source material, but I wasn't disappointed by the movie's story.

So ... did you watch it in 3D?

The last movie I saw in 3D was Thor (I think) and I kinda regretted that. I felt as though it detracted from the movie, to be honest.

I'd be willing to watch this in 3D if it's a good idea, though.

FAX

listopencil
03-10-2012, 09:59 PM
So ... did you watch it in 3D?

The last movie I saw in 3D was Thor (I think) and I kinda regretted that. I felt as though it detracted from the movie, to be honest.

I'd be willing to watch this in 3D if it's a good idea, though.

FAX

I did watch it in 3D. We were on a time crunch and made the one o'clock show, so no choice on the 3D. I saw some occasional blurriness but I wear Rx glasses for near sightedness and didn't wear them because of the 3D glasses. The story actually lends itself to wide open spaces and lots of stuff flying around so the 3D wasn't intrusive. And the glasses were made like over sized Ray Charles sunglasses. I guess the kids at our High School have been wearing them around as a goofy new trend.

FAX
03-10-2012, 10:15 PM
I did watch it in 3D. We were on a time crunch and made the one o'clock show, so no choice on the 3D. I saw some occasional blurriness but I wear Rx glasses for near sightedness and didn't wear them because of the 3D glasses. The story actually lends itself to wide open spaces and lots of stuff flying around so the 3D wasn't intrusive. And the glasses were made like over sized Ray Charles sunglasses. I guess the kids at our High School have been wearing them around as a goofy new trend.

Ah ... thanks, Mr. listopencil.

So, basically, what I'm hearing (or reading, actually) is that it's okay in 3D?

I've seen several 3D movies that simply weren't all that great, to be honest ... Alice comes to mind ... and the 3D in Thor was very distracting and pointless. Avatar, on the other hand, was good. I have this theory that, if the director doesn't shoot with 3D in mind throughout the production, the result can suck. It's like an IMAX film that wasn't shot in IMAX.

To be effective, they need scenes with lots of depth-of-field, for example. Not just shots of falling objects and car parts and birds and things flying toward your face. In my opinion, when they shoot with lots of depth-of-field and/or engaging, active backgrounds, 3D is actually very interesting and can contribute to the story telling. If they don't ... well ...

FAX

Valiant
03-11-2012, 12:03 AM
Saw it, loved it. We paid for 3d, but the movie was not in 3d so all of us got free passes.

Loved the dialogue actually, it was generic, but funny. Like the slap to the back of the head. JC did well other then flexing in awkward situations while talking and trying to be John Wayne..

Buck
03-11-2012, 03:36 PM
I have no interest in the movie really, but is the book worth a read? I know its really old. Does it hold up well?

listopencil
03-11-2012, 05:08 PM
I have no interest in the movie really, but is the book worth a read? I know its really old. Does it hold up well?

It's a period piece. Definitely a different style of writing than you would find today. The phrasing and word choices are distinctly not modern. I enjoy it myself. I recommend that you download the e-book for free, "A Princess Of Mars". Give it a shot.

Brock
03-12-2012, 12:19 AM
ROFL Great opening weekend.

listopencil
03-12-2012, 12:37 AM
ROFL Great opening weekend.

?

listopencil
03-12-2012, 12:42 AM
I met my four kids in a nearby town Saturday. We were commemorating something so it had to be that day. I took them all to lunch but the older ones couldn't make the movie with us. The only movie I considered other than John Carter was The Lorax. Kind of funny that they were #1 and #2 this weekend with a big drop off afterwards:

http://boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/

listopencil
03-12-2012, 12:45 AM
The theater was FULL of little Lorax fans, by the way.

Brock
03-12-2012, 12:55 AM
?

30 mil

keg in kc
03-12-2012, 01:31 AM
If I remember right, the last projected opening numbers were around $25 million, and some people thought that was generous, so it exceeded expectations. Be interesting to see what the drop-off is next week.

Deberg_1990
03-12-2012, 08:24 AM
30 mil

If I remember right, the last projected opening numbers were around $25 million, and some people thought that was generous, so it exceeded expectations. Be interesting to see what the drop-off is next week.

Heh, it's funny, 30 mil is a lot of money and probably one of the biggest openings of the year so far. But because the movie cost so much to make, it's viewed as a flop. That's still quite a few tickets sold. There was a time when 30 mil would have been blockbuster status. Another interesting stat I saw was that a large percentage of ticket buyers were older or over 40. I guess the premise didnt appeal much to younger audiences.

JD10367
03-12-2012, 08:54 AM
Heh, it's funny, 30 mil is a lot of money and probably one of the biggest openings of the year so far. But because the movie cost so much to make, it's viewed as a flop. That's still quite a few tickets sold. There was a time when 30 mil would have been blockbuster status. Another interesting stat I saw was that a large percentage of ticket buyers were older or over 40. I guess the premise didnt appeal much to younger audiences.

There's no way the movie gets even close to making its money back. If it tops $100M I'd be surprised but not shocked, but I doubt it goes over $120M total. All things considered, though, given how badly the movie was thought of (I get the feeling the studio just finally facepalmed and threw it out there), I think they'd be pleased if it made $70M.

Deberg_1990
03-12-2012, 09:35 AM
There's no way the movie gets even close to making its money back. If it tops $100M I'd be surprised but not shocked, but I doubt it goes over $120M total. All things considered, though, given how badly the movie was thought of (I get the feeling the studio just finally facepalmed and threw it out there), I think they'd be pleased if it made $70M.


Overseas money is a big factor now in Hollywood.
Posted via Mobile Device

Brock
03-12-2012, 10:34 AM
John Carter opened to an estimated $30.6 million from 3,749 locations. That’s lower than practically any similar movie, beginning with those that came out around the same time of year. It was obviously way off from 300 ($70.9 million) and Watchmen ($55.2 million)—what’s more concerning, though, is that it was even a tad below 10,000 B.C. ($35.9 million) and Battle: Los Angeles ($35.6 million), both of which were modest movies in comparison..

Bowser
03-12-2012, 10:43 AM
Does a movie company account for future DVD sales and rentals when predicting what a film will do in its lifetime, or is it strictly numbers from the theater? I ask because this looks like one of thos emovies that could potentially do well with in home rentals and such.

keg in kc
03-12-2012, 11:31 AM
They really dropped the ball with the marketing on it, starting right from the beginning leaving mars out of the title. Why would anybody who doesn't know what it is go to a movie called "John Carter". Just the name sounds boring. Which is why if it did skew older, I'm not all that surprised. You're not going to draw in teenagers with something that seems vanilla, whether the movie itself actually is or not. Still, it was not nearly as soft an opening as I expected. The question now will be the drop over the next few weeks. That all depends on word-of-mouth. In the end, though, I'd also be surprised to see over 100m domestic, too. Which might cover their panicked marketing blitz from the last month or so.

Disney's in a bit of a tailspin right now at the theaters.

underEJ
03-12-2012, 06:07 PM
I've seen several 3D movies that simply weren't all that great, to be honest ... Alice comes to mind ... and the 3D in Thor was very distracting and pointless. Avatar, on the other hand, was good. I have this theory that, if the director doesn't shoot with 3D in mind throughout the production, the result can suck. It's like an IMAX film that wasn't shot in IMAX.


FAX

That's no theory. It's pretty near fact. Conversions are bad, even the expensive ones done by Disney for Alice and John Carter. I pay the premium only for content created at a premium like Avatar and Hugo (live action 3d in them, shot in 3d.)

Deberg_1990
03-13-2012, 08:43 PM
So i finally saw this today. My overall thoughts are it was good, but nothing great. The story and characters just fell sort of flat for me. I liked the action, and thought it was pretty well made overall, it just was missing something. Whatever something is.


Id give it a B. Not even close to Avatar or Dances with Wolves.

Fishpicker
03-15-2012, 03:02 AM
just saw this the other day. pretty good. I can't say it was great but its definitely worth the price of admission and the price of a 8 dollar soft drink with a 12 dollar bag of popcorn. And I ate about $20 worth of high powered weed so that helped.

actually... $50 seems a bit high. the trailers showed off all of the worthwhile effects anyway. I don't regret seeing it but it could have been so much more. Still, it was 100's times more entertaining than the Conan movie that came out last year.

i'd give it 6/10

JD10367
03-15-2012, 06:24 AM
So i finally saw this today. My overall thoughts are it was good, but nothing great. The story and characters just fell sort of flat for me. I liked the action, and thought it was pretty well made overall, it just was missing something. Whatever something is.


Id give it a B. Not even close to Avatar or Dances with Wolves.

I'd agree. I don't think it was great, and I'm not even sure it was good. But it was enjoyable. Likewise, when I think of the sword-and-sorcery of my youth (Krull, Beastmaster, etc.,.), none of it was good but it was enjoyable. :)

I think the plot/writing could've used a little work, to get us more involved in Carter's character. There were some hints tossed (he doesn't believe in war, his wife was obviously killed while he was out fighting, etc.,.) but they could've gone into it in a little more depth. Also, since none of the leads were "name" actors, it was probably a little harder for the viewing audience to get into them (despite how much I'd like to get into Lynn Collins). And, while the effects may have been costly, some of them still looked a bit cheesy. Honestly, the film gets extra credit for being what it is (the ERB story that started it all). If it were "just a fantasy film" I'd give it a 6/10, but because of where it came from it gets bumped to a 7.5/10.

Deberg_1990
03-15-2012, 07:29 AM
I'd agree. I don't think it was great, and I'm not even sure it was good. But it was enjoyable. Likewise, when I think of the sword-and-sorcery of my youth (Krull, Beastmaster, etc.,.), none of it was good but it was enjoyable. :)

I think the plot/writing could've used a little work, to get us more involved in Carter's character. There were some hints tossed (he doesn't believe in war, his wife was obviously killed while he was out fighting, etc.,.) but they could've gone into it in a little more depth. Also, since none of the leads were "name" actors, it was probably a little harder for the viewing audience to get into them (despite how much I'd like to get into Lynn Collins). And, while the effects may have been costly, some of them still looked a bit cheesy. Honestly, the film gets extra credit for being what it is (the ERB story that started it all). If it were "just a fantasy film" I'd give it a 6/10, but because of where it came from it gets bumped to a 7.5/10.

yea, it did remind me of all the cheesy stuff i used to enjoy as a kid....Buck Rodgers, Flash Gordon, etc.....

They probably could have sped it up more....there were a few scenes of expository dialouge that just dragged the thing down.......But i loved the action and adventure. It was old fashioned which i liked. None of the modern day quick cutting, slow mo, sped up camera work that gets annoying.

mikeyis4dcats.
03-19-2012, 08:44 PM
Disney announced today they expect to LOSE $200 million on the movie, placing it among the worst busts of all time.

Count Alex's Losses
03-19-2012, 08:46 PM
So, probably no sequel. :(

Brock
03-19-2012, 08:49 PM
yea, it did remind me of all the cheesy stuff i used to enjoy as a kid....Buck Rodgers, Flash Gordon, etc.....

Jesus, how old are you?

Deberg_1990
03-19-2012, 09:09 PM
Jesus, how old are you?

just turned 83

ThaVirus
03-19-2012, 10:39 PM
So, probably no sequel. :(

Ya think?

Ultra Peanut
03-21-2012, 01:08 AM
Poor, star-crossed Riggins.

WV
03-21-2012, 01:11 AM
They are losing a shit ton of $$ on this thing. Guess the whole section of the population that never heard of this was bigger than they thought.

Hawk
03-21-2012, 10:14 AM
Saw it, it was okay. I enjoyed it but it was not particularly special or anything.

I guess I don't really understand how it could have cost $250 million to make. That's what did them in.

Deberg_1990
03-21-2012, 11:55 AM
I guess I don't really understand how it could have cost $250 million to make.

I wondered that as well?? It didnt look anymore expensive than your typical summer CGI blockbuster.

Its not a bad film, it certainly doesnt deserve all the negativity its gotten, but i guess thats what happens when something expensive flops.

JD10367
03-21-2012, 10:09 PM
It is what it is: a fairly entertaining cheesy sword-and-loincloth film that happens to be the original of the genre. It's already made $180M worldwide in 3 weeks; it's not the film's fault it cost so much to make.

DaneMcCloud
11-19-2012, 12:54 AM
Watching it now. I've heard that it's bad and know it lost upwards of $200 million. It's one of the main reasons that Disney bought Lucasfilm.

Also, I have a new personal interest. Something about the trailer they showing on Starz.

:D

Silock
11-19-2012, 01:03 AM
You made this post 9 minutes ago.

I can only assume you've turned it off by now.

DaneMcCloud
11-19-2012, 01:10 AM
You made this post 9 minutes ago.

I can only assume you've turned it off by now.

LMAO

It's still on because I had to pause for a beer and a shot of whiskey.

:D

Bump
11-19-2012, 01:45 AM
Tim Riggins should retire

Deberg_1990
11-19-2012, 07:43 AM
Watching it now. I've heard that it's bad and know it lost upwards of $200 million. It's one of the main reasons that Disney bought Lucasfilm.

Also, I have a new personal interest. Something about the trailer they showing on Starz.

:D

Its not outstanding, but neither is it as bad as the media would have you believe.

htismaqe
11-19-2012, 09:23 AM
It wasn't a bad movie. It wasn't great, either.

But it served one purpose - it exposed another generation of young readers to ERB.

My daughter saw this movie with me after I begged her. "I read all the books when I was your age! It's a Disney movie, too!"

Immediately after seeing the film, she started downloading books to her Kindle. She's read 5 or 6 of them in total now and wants to read more.

DaneMcCloud
11-19-2012, 02:11 PM
I fell asleep shortly after I turned it back on. It wasn't bad but I've got a bit of a cold and I'm worn down from sleep training a 3 month old.

I'll watch it again, for sure. The scenes with Bryan Cranston were somewhat amusing and it's too bad there weren't more.

mr. tegu
11-19-2012, 05:14 PM
It was a decent movie for what it is. I was just expecting some entertainment and that's what it provided. Nothing more but also nothing less.

DaneMcCloud
11-20-2012, 03:12 PM
So, I finally got through the entire movie last night. What a freaking mess.

First off, there are like FIVE antagonists in the film:

1. The people who murdered John Carter's family
2. The Union Calvery
3. The Tharks
4. The Thern
5. The Zogdangan

It's just TOO much to follow in such a short period of time. The Thern were especially ridiculous. Immortals who help species to destroy their own worlds as sport? Matai Shang specifically states they don't actually get involved, yet in later scenes, he's extremely involved, directing and guiding Sab Than.

The film would have played much better if Carter was a Union soldier in Arizona that stumbled upon the gold mine and medallion. No unnecessary backstory about his family's murder or being a Confederate, etc. The Thern were absolutely unnecessary, as was the subplot between Tars Tarkas and Tal Hajus, where it was really unnecessary to see the latter beheaded.

Visually, the film was amazing. The Tharks looked extremely real as did the airships (loved the retro design). But the subplots only made the story more convoluted and when the final scene requires a voice-over, you know you're watching a bad movie with problems. It's really a shame because there's a good movie in there somewhere, had the right people produced and edited it.

And finally, Michael Giacchino's score completely underwhelming. So many cues sounded like LOST cues re-purposed. There was no central theme, no theme for Carter or the Tharks or the citizens of Helium (another poor choice - helium? Come on). It was just music for music's sake and didn't enhance the scenes.

I have to give this film 1.5 stars out of 5 and that's only because of Taylor Kitsch and the CGI team.

BWillie
11-20-2012, 03:34 PM
So I was supposed to know who John Carter was before this movie?

htismaqe
11-20-2012, 04:45 PM
So, I finally got through the entire movie last night. What a freaking mess.

First off, there are like FIVE antagonists in the film:

1. The people who murdered John Carter's family
2. The Union Calvery
3. The Tharks
4. The Thern
5. The Zogdangan

It's just TOO much to follow in such a short period of time. The Thern were especially ridiculous. Immortals who help species to destroy their own worlds as sport? Matai Shang specifically states they don't actually get involved, yet in later scenes, he's extremely involved, directing and guiding Sab Than.

The film would have played much better if Carter was a Union soldier in Arizona that stumbled upon the gold mine and medallion. No unnecessary backstory about his family's murder or being a Confederate, etc. The Thern were absolutely unnecessary, as was the subplot between Tars Tarkas and Tal Hajus, where it was really unnecessary to see the latter beheaded.

Visually, the film was amazing. The Tharks looked extremely real as did the airships (loved the retro design). But the subplots only made the story more convoluted and when the final scene requires a voice-over, you know you're watching a bad movie with problems. It's really a shame because there's a good movie in there somewhere, had the right people produced and edited it.

And finally, Michael Giacchino's score completely underwhelming. So many cues sounded like LOST cues re-purposed. There was no central theme, no theme for Carter or the Tharks or the citizens of Helium (another poor choice - helium? Come on). It was just music for music's sake and didn't enhance the scenes.

I have to give this film 1.5 stars out of 5 and that's only because of Taylor Kitsch and the CGI team.

The big problem wasn't that those people and plots were unnecessary, it's that there wasn't enough time to develop them. So in the end, they seemed superfluous.

The Lord of the Rings trilogy was the epitome of this.

This 3-hour movie actually took place over the course of 3 books. They shouldn't have tried to cram it all into one motion picture.

htismaqe
11-20-2012, 04:47 PM
So I was supposed to know who John Carter was before this movie?

:D

DMAC
11-20-2012, 04:54 PM
Me, my 8 year old, and my 6 year old all got bored in the first 30 minutes and found ourselves with Legos.

htismaqe
11-20-2012, 04:57 PM
Me, my 8 year old, and my 6 year old all got bored in the first 30 minutes and found ourselves with Legos.

My 8-year old got bored as well.

My 10-year old immediately started downloading the books. She actually isn't as fond of the movie now as she was, primarily because of how much better the books are.

ChiefsFanatic
06-18-2013, 02:32 AM
I just watched this movie, and I actually enjoyed it. I didn't see it in the theater because I just didn't think Kitsch could pull off the starring role in a big budget movie.

But I thought he did well. This movie took me back to when I was a kid with Star Wars and Indiana Jones. According to Box Office Mojo it made almost $283,000,000.00 worldwide.

And Lynn Collins is pretty hot.

AphexPhin
06-18-2013, 08:00 AM
easily one of the worst films of the past 10 years. I have absolutely no clue what the Disney studio exes were thinking when they greenlighted this shit. And the budget was well over 200 million too! So glad it bombed.

patteeu
06-18-2013, 08:17 AM
easily one of the worst films of the past 10 years. I have absolutely no clue what the Disney studio exes were thinking when they greenlighted this shit. And the budget was well over 200 million too! So glad it bombed.

Not even close.

Hawk
06-18-2013, 08:57 AM
easily one of the worst films of the past 10 years. I have absolutely no clue what the Disney studio exes were thinking when they greenlighted this shit. And the budget was well over 200 million too! So glad it bombed.

Ha, I'm not sure what you were expecting. But you must not have seen a lot of movies if you think John Carter was one of the worst films of the past 10 years. I thought it was fine for what it was, and I enjoyed it. There are loads of much worse movies out there in the last decade. Loads.

AphexPhin
06-18-2013, 12:25 PM
Easily one of the dumbest and worst films of the past 10 years and I've seen TONS of films since I'm a big film buff.

The story, acting and direction were AWFUL.

What was so good about John Carter? Honestly there wasnt one thing that was redeeming about it. Even the cgi was iffy at best

DaneMcCloud
06-18-2013, 12:29 PM
Easily one of the dumbest and worst films of the past 10 years and I've seen TONS of films since I'm a big film buff.

The story, acting and direction were AWFUL.

What was so good about John Carter? Honestly there wasnt one thing that was redeeming about it. Even the cgi was iffy at best

You're quite the addition to the forum. Your takes are unparalleled.

AphexPhin
06-18-2013, 12:29 PM
worst films I've seen since 2003 in no particular order

Crash
John Carter
Battleship
Clash of the Titans
Spiderman 3
Gangster Squad
Bad Boys 2
Transformers
Indiana Jones 4 (probably the worst)
Revenge of the Sith

I'm not counting all the Eddie Murphy, Jack Black, Martin Lawerence or Adam Sandler films. Those are films you know what you're getting into which is why I boycott them

DaneMcCloud
06-18-2013, 12:33 PM
I just watched this movie, and I actually enjoyed it. I didn't see it in the theater because I just didn't think Kitsch could pull off the starring role in a big budget movie.

But I thought he did well. This movie took me back to when I was a kid with Star Wars and Indiana Jones. According to Box Office Mojo it made almost $283,000,000.00 worldwide.

And Lynn Collins is pretty hot.

I've watched this film several times since my initial scathing review and I've really enjoyed it. The biggest issue was that there were so many sub-plots to decipher, which was next to impossible with a single viewing. After watching the film as many as five time, I know see and understand the genius behind it.

Disney's biggest mistake with this film was marketing. They kept changing the title and rushing Andrew Stanton. What they should have done was to put together a 10 minute short film to explain the different cultures on Mars and how an "outsider" would affect their planet (or something along those lines) and run it before one of the Marvel film (along with releasing it online).

The bottom line for me is that it's just way too much information and back story for a single viewing.

Frosty
06-18-2013, 12:54 PM
I've watched this film several times since my initial scathing review and I've really enjoyed it. The biggest issue was that there were so many sub-plots to decipher, which was next to impossible with a single viewing. After watching the film as many as five time, I know see and understand the genius behind it.

Disney's biggest mistake with this film was marketing. They kept changing the title and rushing Andrew Stanton. What they should have done was to put together a 10 minute short film to explain the different cultures on Mars and how an "outsider" would affect their planet (or something along those lines) and run it before one of the Marvel film (along with releasing it online).

The bottom line for me is that it's just way too much information and back story for a single viewing.

Yeah, if you haven't read the books ( and I've only read through part of the first), it doesn't make as much sense.

They should have also kept the "Of Mars" part of the title (or kept the "Princess of Mars" title from the book).

Deberg_1990
06-18-2013, 12:57 PM
I liked it. It's not nearly as bad as people made it out to be. I've noticed critics like to attack movies based on budgets a lot. It's like they get the knives out ready to attack whenever something with a big budget flops.
Posted via Mobile Device

DaneMcCloud
06-18-2013, 01:02 PM
I liked it. It's not nearly as bad as people made it out to be. I've noticed critics like to attack movies based on budgets a lot. It's like they get the knives out ready to attack whenever something with a big budget flops.
Posted via Mobile Device

It didn't lose money but it didn't earn any money.

I've spoken to several people that advised Disney to do something more with the trailers, with the title, with the overall marketing but they refused to listen.

Unfortunately, it happens.

DaneMcCloud
06-18-2013, 01:07 PM
Good God, I just watched the trailer linked in this thread for the first time.

:facepalm:

What a horrible choice in music, the edits, etc. Wow, just awful.

Lzen
06-18-2013, 01:14 PM
worst films I've seen since 2003 in no particular order

Crash
John Carter
Battleship
Clash of the Titans
Spiderman 3
Gangster Squad
Bad Boys 2
Transformers
Indiana Jones 4 (probably the worst)
Revenge of the Sith

I'm not counting all the Eddie Murphy, Jack Black, Martin Lawerence or Adam Sandler films. Those are films you know what you're getting into which is why I boycott them

You apparently haven't seen Paranormal Activity 4.

listopencil
06-18-2013, 01:27 PM
Good God, I just watched the trailer linked in this thread for the first time.

:facepalm:

What a horrible choice in music, the edits, etc. Wow, just awful.

I know. I enjoyed the series of books as a teen. I'm a fan of this type of science fiction and it was grueling for me personally to see how the film was handled. I feel as if somebody stumbled into a diamond mine, grabbed a small dirty bit of dust, crammed it into their asshole then wore it proudly around town for six weeks. Frustrating and disappointing.

Guru
06-18-2013, 04:45 PM
I thought this movie was great. Of course, because of this forum I went in completely expecting it to be awful. I've seen it 3 times now and each time I catch something I didn't catch before.

calling it the worst movie of the last 10 years? This shouldn't even be on the list of the worst 50.

Deberg_1990
10-21-2014, 05:41 PM
Disney lost the rights, so now there might be a sequel.


http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/10/prweb12253636.htm


Edgar Rice Burroughs, Inc. announces that the movie, television and merchandise rights have reverted back to the company. Walt Disney Pictures held the rights and produced the movie JOHN CARTER in 2012. Edgar Rice Burroughs, Inc. will be seeking a new studio to continue this seminal Sci-Fi adventure.
“John Carter of Mars was the creative stimulus behind such movie classics as Superman, Star Wars and Avatar,” said James Sullos, President. “Edgar Rice Burroughs was the Master of Adventure and his literary works continue to enjoy a world-wide following. We will be seeking a new partner to help develop new adventures on film as chronicled in the eleven Mars novels Burroughs wrote. This adventure never stops. Along with a new TARZAN film in development by Warner Bros., we hope to have JOHN CARTER OF MARS become another major franchise to entertain world-wide audiences of all ages.”
About Edgar Rice Burroughs, Inc.
Founded in 1923 by Edgar Rice Burroughs himself, Edgar Rice Burroughs, Inc. holds numerous trademarks and the rights to all literary works of the author still protected by copyright. The company has overseen every adaptation of his literary works in publishing, film, television, theatrical stage productions, licensing and merchandising. The company is still a very active enterprise and manages and licenses the vast archive of Mr. Burroughs' literary works, fictional characters and corresponding artworks that have grown for over a century. The company continues to be owned by the Burroughs family and remains headquartered in Tarzana, California, the town named after the Tarzana Ranch Mr. Burroughs purchased there in 1918 which led to the town's future development. For more information, please visit EdgarRiceBurroughs.com.

listopencil
10-22-2014, 12:49 AM
Disney lost the rights, so now there might be a sequel.


http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/10/prweb12253636.htm


Edgar Rice Burroughs, Inc. announces that the movie, television and merchandise rights have reverted back to the company. Walt Disney Pictures held the rights and produced the movie JOHN CARTER in 2012. Edgar Rice Burroughs, Inc. will be seeking a new studio to continue this seminal Sci-Fi adventure.
“John Carter of Mars was the creative stimulus behind such movie classics as Superman, Star Wars and Avatar,” said James Sullos, President. “Edgar Rice Burroughs was the Master of Adventure and his literary works continue to enjoy a world-wide following. We will be seeking a new partner to help develop new adventures on film as chronicled in the eleven Mars novels Burroughs wrote. This adventure never stops. Along with a new TARZAN film in development by Warner Bros., we hope to have JOHN CARTER OF MARS become another major franchise to entertain world-wide audiences of all ages.”
About Edgar Rice Burroughs, Inc.
Founded in 1923 by Edgar Rice Burroughs himself, Edgar Rice Burroughs, Inc. holds numerous trademarks and the rights to all literary works of the author still protected by copyright. The company has overseen every adaptation of his literary works in publishing, film, television, theatrical stage productions, licensing and merchandising. The company is still a very active enterprise and manages and licenses the vast archive of Mr. Burroughs' literary works, fictional characters and corresponding artworks that have grown for over a century. The company continues to be owned by the Burroughs family and remains headquartered in Tarzana, California, the town named after the Tarzana Ranch Mr. Burroughs purchased there in 1918 which led to the town's future development. For more information, please visit EdgarRiceBurroughs.com.

Good news. There is such a wealth of storytelling in those books. I'd love to see the series done well.
<script status="whitelisted" id="yarip-default-script" type="text/javascript">var yarip = { $: function(xpath) { var arr = []; var xr = document.evaluate(xpath, document, null, XPathResult.ORDERED_NODE_SNAPSHOT_TYPE, null); if (xr) for (var i = 0; i < xr.snapshotLength; i++) { var e = xr.snapshotItem(i); if (e && (e.nodeType !== 1 || !/^yarip-/.test(e.id))) { arr.push(e); } } return arr; }, run: function(fun, xpath) { var arr = this.$(xpath); if (arr.length > 0) fun.call(this, arr); } }</script><script status="whitelisted" id="yarip-element-script_www-chiefsplanet-com_0" type="text/javascript">yarip.run(function (array) { for (var i = 0; i < array.length; i++) { var element = array[i]; console.debug("Found element:", element); } }, "/html/body/div/div[@class='page']/div/div[1]"); </script>

Rausch
10-22-2014, 01:34 AM
It just became obvious to me that the "Planet Hulk" storyline was a clear homage (or ripoff) of the John Carter series...