This is on SYFY right now and I feel like I should kick my own ***** for sitting thru thisSourdoh said:
This is on SYFY right now and I feel like I should kick my own ***** for sitting thru thisSourdoh said:
Spoilers? Sorta?
Just saw it and I'm still trying to figure out how I feel about it. I'm a big fan of the books, and I was distracted throughout by them throwing out the original plot.
I'm not a guy who wants adaptations to remain 100% true, but I'm afraid they watered down everything that made the original special. For me, the center of the whole thing is the love story between John Carter and Dejah Thoris, and that seemed like an afterthought, while the movie spent time on new stuff they had added in.
Even Dejah Thoris. I like the changes they made, and Lynn Collins was brilliant, but in superficially making her a more rounded character they removed her agency and power. In the book, she makes choices and acts on them for the good of her people. In the movie she's forced into situations by others who were forced into situations (by others who, etc).
In fact, no one in the movie makes any choices or feels any thing at all. No one is in control of them self, they're all just kind of there.
It looked great, and the CG was top notch, but it made me sad that today we are no longer allowed to be great, or feel great things for each other, rather we must small, flawed and tentative, and mistakenly call that "realistic."
I agree that the situations sort of took over the plot, a sad fact of contemporary book-to-movie adaptions, I guess. Still, it was a lot more faithful than I expected it to be...spectre_general said:
You sound like a 01%er, thinking that this country and Barsoom are meritocracies where hard work and bravery might elevate you above the other 99%.
Get your head straight. This should not be a culture of equal opportunity but rather a land of equal freebies. Your thirst for exceptionalism betrays that you have no heart and are probably clinging to a gun or Bible.
Everyone is ENTITLED to a beautiful Martian Princess and a four armed army of followers.
Hard work, bravery AND INTELLIGENT CHOICES can elevate you above the average human or Thark; the law of both jungles makes it so, and always has.outlander said:
And only I get a Martian princess!!!
I have to admit I never heard of the character before. but that is because of me living under a rock.
I usually don't like to see someone fail but i hope Disney takes a big money hit on this one. Films with these sky rocketing budgets have to come to an end. no film should cost the est. $250,000,000 that this film is rumoured to have. I mean really...most of this film, like all these CGI "block busters", are shot in front of a green screen. Not much of the budget was spent on sets so lots of computor geeks getting paid here it seems. thats my 2 cents...
Actually, most of the film was shot on location in Utah. Just sayin'.joker-scar said:
Ouch, beat out by The Lorax.
‘John Carter’ Has Disastrous Opening Weekend; ‘The Lorax’ Stays Atop The Box Office
$30 million domestic, but it made $70 million internationally, total of $100 million worldwide for the weekend.
A mere $100 mil won't cut it for a sequel, I'm afraid.
It will only feed chickens.
At least the weak opening (if $100 million is weak. Why are we ignoring international?) is being blamed on the excessively poor marketing, for which Disney deserves a slap.
International means more distribution costs, less return.spectre_general said:
Imagine trying to sell Dances With Wolves as a straight up action movie, and you get the idea.Stormy320 said:
Must say the cg battle clips I've seen on TV read like a catalogue of every abuse I've seen the cg-tool put to over the last 15 years: ONCE AGAIN we are bombarded with awkward stilted motion, cartoon weightlessness, ludicrous swooping p.o.v.s and all the rest of it... Add to this the hideous clip of Carter (if he it be) grunting out "we didn't start this but by gum we're gonna end in it" or whatever it is he burbles, and I have to say wild horses couldn't drag me in there...
I think it didn't do well is because of the fact that it's been released in a period of time where there's an over abundance in "films inspired by" the "story that started it all" to the point where when the original story is told, it's doesn't have a chance. Plus, the trailer probably didn't help out in drawing an audience.
Hey, CGI is not my thing- give me MODELS, REAL locations & ACTORS!Colin Droidmilk said:
That said, there's simply no other way to do a fantasy like John Carter or Lord Of The Rings without it today. So yeah, heavy CGI like Avatar, but filmed on a REAL location, not all green screened. And that line is nothing I recognize from the movie. So, judge by the bad trailer if you want, but there's really a good movie in there, I swear.
WOW..is Utah that expensive to shoot in?????Quote:
Originally Posted by joker-scar
most of this film, like all these CGI "block busters", are shot in front of a green screen. Not much of the budget was spent on sets so lots of computor geeks getting paid here it seems. thats my 2 cents...
Actually, most of the film was shot on location in Utah. Just sayin'.
Lots of great lines, snide looks, and snarky dialogue. Good fight scenes, adequate plot, and...all in all, well worth the ticket price.
My wife and I both liked it a lot...
Alex
Location shoots are expensive. Think housing & feeding a crew of a couple hundred for a month, medical services, insurance, local filming fees, transportation... it's basically a small town. They could have green screened ALL of that stuff for 1/4 of the price, but it wouldn't have looked as authentic.joker-scar said:
Saw it this afternoon; had to say, I thoroughly enjoyed it.
That said, I'd still love some merchandise from it--a Thark action figure, or a flier model kit would be good. Or a sword. Swords are cool.
Until then, guess I'll just have to be content with my Trendmasters action figures.
By tremas at 2012-03-11
By tremas at 2012-03-11
By tremas at 2012-03-11
By tremas at 2012-03-11
By tremas at 2012-03-11
Sadly this is already written in stone, the American people (especially younger ones) don't want anything new or fresh or anything based on stories that their grandparents liked. I think GI Joe and transformers are a fluke in that usually if it's older than the viewer these days it only does well on dvd. I couldn't ever get into the books or most anything he wrote sadly and i try not to buy anything disney's made since 1989 when it all took a turn for the worseVivek said:
It's cowardly new world, I fear. Back in the day I ate up the old 30's/40's Flash Gordon/Buck Rogers stuff. Metropolis is STILL amazing to me. Day The Earth Stood Still, 2001, Star Wars, Matrix, Serenity... a glorious history.Wes R said:
John Carter will join this cinematic SF/Fantasy history IMO, and those children that groove to sound/video bites as a staple of entertainment will be missing SO much... and voting for pretty much any liar that promises posivitive change in the proper ADD fashion.
Read my lips to the nth degree.
John Carter may well be the last link to old time cinematic glory in this digital age.
Or maybe The Hobbit...
Just got back, in fact. It was FANTASTIC. Action, romance, swords, radium guns. And the airships are awesome.The Wook said:
The cgi throughout was flawless, especially the Tharks.
Highly recommended.
Four Thark thumbs up!!!!
Reply with Quote
