John Carter (Post-release)
- Thread starter Vivek
- Start date
Chrisisall
Master Member
Re: John Carter
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.
Tremas
Master Member
Re: John Carter
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
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
Re: John Carter
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 worse
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 worse
Chrisisall
Master Member
Re: John Carter
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...
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.
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...
nightwind1
Well-Known Member
Re: John Carter
The cgi throughout was flawless, especially the Tharks.
Highly recommended.
Four Thark thumbs up!!!!
Just got back, in fact. It was FANTASTIC. Action, romance, swords, radium guns. And the airships are awesome.
The cgi throughout was flawless, especially the Tharks.
Highly recommended.
Four Thark thumbs up!!!!
Colin Droidmilk
Sr Member
Re: John Carter
But cgi when done well IS my thing! Got no gripes with cgi per se (I lap up Jurassic Park), just with bad users of cgi, which happens to be most users today. ALL the creatures in this just bug hell out of me. The only spark of interest for me is the flying machines. But they're not enough - the risk of paying good dough for lousy entertainment is too high. If there's a good movie in there I'll just have to miss it!
It's not a question of judging the film by the trailer, rather it's this: if a trailer excites you, you want to see the film, if it doesn't, you probably won't much. If it actually offends your eyes, as this does mine, then as I said, you'd be fairly nutso to let anything other than wild horses drag you in there.
As for the line I mentioned it's in trailer 2 (though I confess I took satiric liberties with it, perhaps that's why you didn't recognise it...)
For me the off-putting problem with the modern fantasy movie approach to battles is what Plinkett rightly calls the 'blizzard of crap' all over the screen. There are many other ways to film epic battles. Other rhythms, other camera moves (Check Lawrence of Arabia, Ran), other ways to do it, all of which happen to be a hell of a sight more real-looking, a hell of a sight less cartoon-looking...
But cgi when done well IS my thing! Got no gripes with cgi per se (I lap up Jurassic Park), just with bad users of cgi, which happens to be most users today. ALL the creatures in this just bug hell out of me. The only spark of interest for me is the flying machines. But they're not enough - the risk of paying good dough for lousy entertainment is too high. If there's a good movie in there I'll just have to miss it!
It's not a question of judging the film by the trailer, rather it's this: if a trailer excites you, you want to see the film, if it doesn't, you probably won't much. If it actually offends your eyes, as this does mine, then as I said, you'd be fairly nutso to let anything other than wild horses drag you in there.
As for the line I mentioned it's in trailer 2 (though I confess I took satiric liberties with it, perhaps that's why you didn't recognise it...)
For me the off-putting problem with the modern fantasy movie approach to battles is what Plinkett rightly calls the 'blizzard of crap' all over the screen. There are many other ways to film epic battles. Other rhythms, other camera moves (Check Lawrence of Arabia, Ran), other ways to do it, all of which happen to be a hell of a sight more real-looking, a hell of a sight less cartoon-looking...
Last edited:
JD
Master Member
Re: John Carter
It was ok... which is still better than Avatar!!
The "love story" portion failed pretty hard. The CG was decent. The lead actor seemed to just miss the mark. The actress playing Dejah did a great job... would be a perfect pick for Wonder Woman - too bad she's just a little too old for that (although, even at 34, she still looks the part).
It was ok... which is still better than Avatar!!
The "love story" portion failed pretty hard. The CG was decent. The lead actor seemed to just miss the mark. The actress playing Dejah did a great job... would be a perfect pick for Wonder Woman - too bad she's just a little too old for that (although, even at 34, she still looks the part).
shagger999uk
Well-Known Member
Re: John Carter
Saw it today (3d version) and I enjoyed it. I hope they make more.
Saw it today (3d version) and I enjoyed it. I hope they make more.
Chrisisall
Master Member
Tremas
Master Member
EyeofSauron
Master Member
Re: John Carter
saw it today. enjoyed it, was kinda surprised by some twists during the movie. Also, gotta get me one of 'em dogs, best part of the movie
saw it today. enjoyed it, was kinda surprised by some twists during the movie. Also, gotta get me one of 'em dogs, best part of the movie
Chrisisall
Master Member
Re: John Carter
Yeah, it was cool. A classic in future times. Blade Runner was a flop in its day...:rolleyes
airhead
Sr Member
Re: John Carter
I've been waiting for someone to film something from the Mars series ever since the first indications of CG main characters. To me, the film was successful in translating the ERB Barsoom world. I know that there were lots of changes from APOM, some big and some not so big, but I felt like the result was true to the spirit of the original story while creating a film that was not dependant upon a cliff-hanger ending (read the book). My wife has never read any of the books and she loved it. The Disney folks couldn't get that far from the images that we all have of Barsoom and it's denizens and the action shots from such as Frazetta. It's all personal taste, in the end, but I liked it and would recommend it to anyone who likes a good old adventure fantasy movie.
I've been waiting for someone to film something from the Mars series ever since the first indications of CG main characters. To me, the film was successful in translating the ERB Barsoom world. I know that there were lots of changes from APOM, some big and some not so big, but I felt like the result was true to the spirit of the original story while creating a film that was not dependant upon a cliff-hanger ending (read the book). My wife has never read any of the books and she loved it. The Disney folks couldn't get that far from the images that we all have of Barsoom and it's denizens and the action shots from such as Frazetta. It's all personal taste, in the end, but I liked it and would recommend it to anyone who likes a good old adventure fantasy movie.
Chrisisall
Master Member
Re: John Carter
Good review! I agree.:cool
Good review! I agree.:cool
Kit Rae
Sr Member
Re: John Carter
I saw it tonight. I was not expecting much since the mass media reviewers are trashing it, but that is usually a good reason to see it IMO. So I did. I ABSOLUTELY LOVED IT. They not only handled the original source material with respect, but even the changes/additions to the story were done well.
I read the book as a kid, so I am biased in that I have always wanted to see this made into a movie. My wife and nephew saw it with me and had not read the book, nor really had any idea what it was about. They both loved it too. People cheered at the end in the theater, so I think the majority were as on board and carried away with the story as I was.
Ignore the idiot reviewers who all jumped on the bash-the-big-budget-epic-movie band wagon before they even saw it and just go see it.
I did not bother seeing it in 3D since it was not actually filmed in 3D. The 2D was incredble. No extra fake D needed.
I saw it tonight. I was not expecting much since the mass media reviewers are trashing it, but that is usually a good reason to see it IMO. So I did. I ABSOLUTELY LOVED IT. They not only handled the original source material with respect, but even the changes/additions to the story were done well.
I read the book as a kid, so I am biased in that I have always wanted to see this made into a movie. My wife and nephew saw it with me and had not read the book, nor really had any idea what it was about. They both loved it too. People cheered at the end in the theater, so I think the majority were as on board and carried away with the story as I was.
Ignore the idiot reviewers who all jumped on the bash-the-big-budget-epic-movie band wagon before they even saw it and just go see it.
I did not bother seeing it in 3D since it was not actually filmed in 3D. The 2D was incredble. No extra fake D needed.
Qrest Fourstar
Sr Member
Re: John Carter
Saw it last week, thought it was great. It's a shame it's called a flop becuase of the money situation.
Saw it last week, thought it was great. It's a shame it's called a flop becuase of the money situation.
EKF5
Active Member
Re: John Carter
I saw the movie over the weekend with my wife. We both read the books over 30 years ago and I haven't looked at them since (well I peaked at APOM to compare the CGI green martians to the Frank Schoonover's 1917 illustrations).
We thought it was a good, not great, movie. We were entertained and had something fun we could talk about when we went to dinner afterwards. While a great film would have been nice, I don't think that's a fair expectation.
Overall the film did a good job of adapting the books and creating both the characters and the impression of Barsoom. John Carter was clearly a "Gentleman of Virginia", Tars Tarkas was a forward looking Jeddak, etc. The green martians could have been bulkier and the red martians could have been redder or at least less "human" in color, but those and any similar complaints are nits.
The film did introduce some major changes, some for the good, some for convenience, and at least one with a major plot implication if there is a sequal.
The first change was how Carter arrived on Barsoom. I think this was a necessary change for a modern audience. Burroughs had a much lower threshold for willing suspension of disbelief. A modern audience is much less likely to accept a Deus ex Machina transportation and needs etiher visible technology or magic to get him there if they are going to go along with him. This worked.
An example of the second was how Carter learned Martian. In the books he actually learned the language over time. The "learn language" potion was a convenience change so the script didn't have to drag us through his stumbling efforts at Martian baby talk, improved grammar, broken idiom, etc. This type of change is almost mandatory in an adaptation or you can't move from the text to the screen.
The third type put's the character arcs from the books in jeapardy.
SPOILER ALERT - In APOM Carter returns to earth during a heroic struggle to save Barsoom and restore the air supply. Just as may have succeeded he collapses and finds himself back on Earth without knowing if he saved Dejah and the rest of Barsoom. In the film we are shown that Carter kept the medallion that brought him to Barsoom and once Dejah teaches him he can choose to go home whenever he wants.
Following the wedding we are shown that he has chosen to stay on Barsoom because he throws the medallion away (a frighteningly stupid action since Dejah can use it to learn more about the 9th ray - what a waste of resources). He is then forced back to Earth by a Thern (or whatever they eventually call themselves).
In the book Carter didn't know how he travelled to Barsoom and he was also ignorant of how to get home. In the movie DJ knows he has both the knowledge and ability to return to Earth. Because he disappears she has reason to incorrectly believe he left on his own. Instead of the tragic element of this plot line being that Carter is prevented from knowing if he saved Barsoom, the tragic element will now be that Deja will think he ran out on her. I think that's a major plot change that damages the characters.
END SPOILER ALERT
Even with my grump about the plot change I think this was a successful adaptation and it's a 2.5 - 3 out of 5. Good enough to enjoy, worth seeing on a big screen, but not a great film.
I saw the movie over the weekend with my wife. We both read the books over 30 years ago and I haven't looked at them since (well I peaked at APOM to compare the CGI green martians to the Frank Schoonover's 1917 illustrations).
We thought it was a good, not great, movie. We were entertained and had something fun we could talk about when we went to dinner afterwards. While a great film would have been nice, I don't think that's a fair expectation.
Overall the film did a good job of adapting the books and creating both the characters and the impression of Barsoom. John Carter was clearly a "Gentleman of Virginia", Tars Tarkas was a forward looking Jeddak, etc. The green martians could have been bulkier and the red martians could have been redder or at least less "human" in color, but those and any similar complaints are nits.
The film did introduce some major changes, some for the good, some for convenience, and at least one with a major plot implication if there is a sequal.
The first change was how Carter arrived on Barsoom. I think this was a necessary change for a modern audience. Burroughs had a much lower threshold for willing suspension of disbelief. A modern audience is much less likely to accept a Deus ex Machina transportation and needs etiher visible technology or magic to get him there if they are going to go along with him. This worked.
An example of the second was how Carter learned Martian. In the books he actually learned the language over time. The "learn language" potion was a convenience change so the script didn't have to drag us through his stumbling efforts at Martian baby talk, improved grammar, broken idiom, etc. This type of change is almost mandatory in an adaptation or you can't move from the text to the screen.
The third type put's the character arcs from the books in jeapardy.
SPOILER ALERT - In APOM Carter returns to earth during a heroic struggle to save Barsoom and restore the air supply. Just as may have succeeded he collapses and finds himself back on Earth without knowing if he saved Dejah and the rest of Barsoom. In the film we are shown that Carter kept the medallion that brought him to Barsoom and once Dejah teaches him he can choose to go home whenever he wants.
Following the wedding we are shown that he has chosen to stay on Barsoom because he throws the medallion away (a frighteningly stupid action since Dejah can use it to learn more about the 9th ray - what a waste of resources). He is then forced back to Earth by a Thern (or whatever they eventually call themselves).
In the book Carter didn't know how he travelled to Barsoom and he was also ignorant of how to get home. In the movie DJ knows he has both the knowledge and ability to return to Earth. Because he disappears she has reason to incorrectly believe he left on his own. Instead of the tragic element of this plot line being that Carter is prevented from knowing if he saved Barsoom, the tragic element will now be that Deja will think he ran out on her. I think that's a major plot change that damages the characters.
END SPOILER ALERT
Even with my grump about the plot change I think this was a successful adaptation and it's a 2.5 - 3 out of 5. Good enough to enjoy, worth seeing on a big screen, but not a great film.
Similar threads
