John Carter (Post-release)

[Psab keel]

Re: John Carter

With all of the talk of this movie, and having heard reviews from some of my closest friends, (and some movie critics who I trust) I may just have to see for myself what the big deal is.

I think Disney's flop has more to do with the marketing rather than the film itself. The trailers don't look very good and the posters look unexciting. I think as others have said, perhaps if they focused on telling the general public it's history and WHY it was so influential, then perhaps people like me who have no prior knowledge of the stories, might give it a chance.

Maybe I'll catch a matinee.....

 

[Clutch]

Re: John Carter

I felt the same way. Just caught the 2D version knowing nothing about JC except it had a hot chick named Deja and a cool alien called Tars Tarkus. I thought it was very good. Predictable? Of course! Still it was good entertainment and well worth watching on the big screen. It also ended nicely so that it could (and probably will) stand on its own.

 

[EyeofSauron]

Re: John Carter

I felt the same way. Just caught the 2D version knowing nothing about JC except it had a hot chick named Deja and a cool alien called Tars Tarkus. I thought it was very good. Predictable? Of course! Still it was good entertainment and well worth watching on the big screen. It also ended nicely so that it could (and probably will) stand on its own.

i have to say i found this movie way less predictable than other movies. especially the end
of course i havnt read the books, but still

 

[falconNL]

Re: John Carter

Maybe its a generation thing?


Because im 23 at the moment, and i honestly thought is was a bad movie.

I went to the theater last Friday with my friends to see it. I knew before hand that Mr. Burroughs books where the foundation of most of the Sci-fi, Superheros and a ton of stuff we "kids" take for granted.
But even with that knowledge i still thought it was a bad movie. I thought the characters where shallow and empy, i didnt sympathizer with the protagonist,I didnt believe the love interest, the story looked like it had no ending and was from start to finish predictable (not to mention the hushed ending),the villain(s?) had no real motive other then being evil. I didnt like the whole CGI thing (remarks for the audience where "This looks like the phantom menace!) and i absolutely hated the non existing 3D. The only good solid performance was the princess and she kinda saved the whole movie on her own.

Personally i get the feeling that that Disney just came back from avatar and said: Well now we finally know what to do with the screenplay that as bugging us for years! No solid script, and just fill it with CGI... didn't that work for Lucas as well?

But hey...what do i know im just a kid :darnkids

 

[Nexus6]

Re: John Carter

I thought it was very good. Predictable? Of course! Still it was good entertainment and well worth watching on the big screen. It also ended nicely so that it could (and probably will) stand on its own.

Saw JCM tonight & have to concur with all ^THIS^. (I saw it in 3-D IMAX though.)

 

[ghostryder]

Re: John Carter

fwiw:

Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

 

[Chrisisall]

Re: John Carter

Maybe its a generation thing?

In part, but more a societal thing. JC is a long movie that takes its time, like big movies of the past. People growing up today that have a hard time being 10 feet or more from their computer for long periods of time will understandably find JC SLOW.
SO many story elements have been ripped off from these stories over the years, kids will also find it seeming derivative & predictable.
My 13 year old Son said he liked it pretty well, but I could tell he was fidgeting a little during the last hour.
When I was a kid, Star Wars was a speeding bullet of a movie. Never SEEN a movie whiz by so fast. Now most movies are like that. John Carter is blissfully retro. Long time since I've been able to spend a long time in another world...

 

[mcnopants13]

Re: John Carter

saw it last night and it felt it was a pretty awesome flick .. not without its flaws but what movie these days aren't ... i give it a 8.3 out of 10 in my "like this ****-o-meter"

 

[cayman shen]

Re: John Carter

^Bravestarr and thirty-thirty in your sig? You win all the win.

 

[Carson Dyle]

Re: John Carter

Maybe its a generation thing?


Because im 23 at the moment, and i honestly thought is was a bad movie.

You're not the only one.

A mediocre movie is a mediocre movie at any age.

I applaud Disney for taking a risk on the material and investing in a talent like Andrew Stanton. Dick Cook rolled the dice, but this time Luck was no Lady.

I'm truly sorry John Carter failed to connect with audiences, because as a lifelong sci-fi fan I'd like to see more literary-based sci-fi adaptations make it to the big screen (thanks to the JC debacle the wait for Foundation, Rendezvous with RAMA, and a decent DUNE remake just got longer).

I welcome any and all science-fiction films, and I want them all to be hugely successful at the box office. One way to accomplish that is to make sure that the films in question are better than John Carter. Better and less expensive.

Because I don't care how pretty the pictures or, nor how much passion the director has for the material... if the the casting is uninspired, and if the screenplay is a mass of convoluted exposition, and if the source novel has been previously raped and pillaged by another hugely popular film franchise, and if the budget is north of $250 mil, then you're just asking for trouble.

And the slobs in marketing may not be able to save you.

 

[Chrisisall]

Re: John Carter

I'm truly sorry John Carter failed to connect with audiences

Okay, I can't play anymore- most peeps who see the movie, like the movie. I'm on 2 other sites, and it's the same thing- all but like, TWO peeps on each site either like or love it. So this perception you have set in your head that this movie stinks is just that, YOUR PERCEPTION.
IT
WAS
MARKETED
WRONG.

Most peeps who see it like it, but most peeps won't SEE it period, because of a) the crappy marketing or b) not into SF/Fantasy to begin with.

So condescend all you like, but it's not as YOU see it.
The story is there. The acting is fine. The FX are well done.

No, it's NOT Star Wars or Serenity or Blade Runner- but neither is it is it Catwoman, Batman & Robin, or Highlander 2.

Hey, my most hated film of all time is Steel Magnolias, but y'know what? Just 'cause I hate it (with a passion in point of fact) doesn't mean it's a bad movie. Plenty of peeps seem to like it- enough to show me that I have something against the movie, so I'm not seriously gonna say it sucked.

So, like John Connor asked, are we learning yet?

Hey- you're not gonna get a "John Carter SUCKS' tattoo or bumper sticker, are you?behave

 

[Carson Dyle]

Re: John Carter

this perception you have set in your head that this movie stinks is just that, YOUR PERCEPTION.
IT
WAS
MARKETED
WRONG.

First of all, calm down. This isn’t personal. No need to go ALL CAPS on me.

I’m thrilled you love John Carter. I’m sorry I didn’t, but I’m hardly alone in my view that the film missed the mark dramatically.

And in any case, my opinion is an informed one, and I’m just as entitled to it as you are to yours. The fact that you don’t happen to share my opinion doesn’t mean I’m being condescending. I respect your right to post your views as you see fit, and at no point in this or any other thread have I indicated otherwise.

Besides, for a guy who likes to accuse others of condescension you can be pretty condescending yourself….

So, like John Connor asked, are we learning yet?

Seriously?

 

[The Wook]

Re: John Carter

Okay, I can't play anymore- most peeps who see the movie, like the movie. I'm on 2 other sites, and it's the same thing- all but like, TWO peeps on each site either like or love it. So this perception you have set in your head that this movie stinks is just that, YOUR PERCEPTION.
IT
WAS
MARKETED
WRONG.

Most peeps who see it like it, but most peeps won't SEE it period, because of a) the crappy marketing or b) not into SF/Fantasy to begin with.

So condescend all you like, but it's not as YOU see it.
The story is there. The acting is fine. The FX are well done.

I'm sorry, dude, but you can't draw conclusions about how much people enjoyed a movie based on feedback posted on movie geek sites like this one and the other two sites where you say you've heard nearly universal positive feedback.

MOST people who go see movies are NOT posting about them on sites like the RPF. No, the people who post on these sights are sci-fi geeks of the highest order, a biased group for sure, compared to the broader movie-going population, which accounts for the bulk of box office receipts.

I realize geeks can be the HARDEST on films--just look at any Star Wars prequel thread--but I think John Carter has benefited greatly from the bias of low expectations, or a complete lack of expectations because they've never heard of John Carter.

I'm not disagreeing that the movie was poorly marketed, but you're drawing conclusions about its appeal from an audience that is too small, too biased, and too niched.

The Wook

 

[cayman shen]

Re: John Carter

Okay, I can't play anymore- most peeps who see the movie, like the movie. I'm on 2 other sites, and it's the same thing- all but like, TWO peeps on each site either like or love it. So this perception you have set in your head that this movie stinks is just that, YOUR PERCEPTION.
IT
WAS
MARKETED
WRONG.

Most peeps who see it like it, but most peeps won't SEE it period, because of a) the crappy marketing or b) not into SF/Fantasy to begin with.

So condescend all you like, but it's not as YOU see it.
The story is there. The acting is fine. The FX are well done.

No, it's NOT Star Wars or Serenity or Blade Runner- but neither is it is it Catwoman, Batman & Robin, or Highlander 2.

Hey, my most hated film of all time is Steel Magnolias, but y'know what? Just 'cause I hate it (with a passion in point of fact) doesn't mean it's a bad movie. Plenty of peeps seem to like it- enough to show me that I have something against the movie, so I'm not seriously gonna say it sucked.

So, like John Connor asked, are we learning yet?

Hey- you're not gonna get a "John Carter SUCKS' tattoo or bumper sticker, are you?behave

I'm gonna pile on too and ask you to stop saying "peeps." :lol

 

[Chrisisall]

Re: John Carter

Besides, for a guy who likes to accuse others of condescension you can be pretty condescending yourself….

I thought that line would be funny... I asked my Wife & she said she thought my post would get a laugh. Not meaning to go CAPS, just a tad monkeys@#t is all.:lol

I just watched the fan trailer & was flooded with good memories of my theatrical viewing.
I can get carried away.:behave
Shutting up, sir.

 

[Chrisisall]

Re: John Carter

I'm not disagreeing that the movie was poorly marketed, but you're drawing conclusions about its appeal from an audience that is too small, too biased, and too niched.

You are possibly correct. :confused

 

[Chrisisall]

Re: John Carter

I'm gonna pile on too and ask you to stop saying "peeps." :lol

It's a holdover from he past. I'll try hard to stop.
Just don't ask me to drop "dude", my inner Ted couldn't possibly do that....

I better just get back to my models....:cool

 

[steveo]

Re: John Carter

Someone doesn't want this movie to succeed.

Crazy that it's probably true, but stupid and insane. Why make it if it's suppose to fail?

 

[Carson Dyle]

Re: John Carter

I'm not disagreeing that the movie was poorly marketed, but you're drawing conclusions about its appeal from an audience that is too small, too biased, and too niched.

Amen.

One thing I suspect we can all agree on is that the film suffered from a poor (if extensive) marketing campaign -- but even that is not entirely Disney's fault...

The Inside Story of How John Carter Was Doomed by Its First Trailer -- Vulture

The studio pretty much gave Andrew Stanton free reign to market the film as he saw fit. The major creative decisions, with regard to the print and AV campaigns, were Stanton's.

Please understand, I have the utmost respect and admiration for Andrew Stanton, as well as for the legions of talented artists, engineers, designers, etc. who labored to bring this epic project to the screen. There is much to admire here on a technical level, and certainly Stanton and Co. should be applauded for creating some breathtaking (if somewhat familiar-looking) cinematic vistas.

Nevertheless, as both a film fan and a lifelong Burroughs devote, I do not think Stanton's vision does justice to Burrough's work. Others obviously disagree, and that's as it should be whenever a bunch of people come together to discuss a film.

Those of you who haven't seen the movie are urged to go check it out on the big screen and judge for yourselves. If nothing else it's got some cool FX.

 

[Chrisisall]

Re: John Carter

Crazy that it's probably true, but stupid and insane. Why make it if it's suppose to fail?

I've heard that lots of peep...le... got paid wicked good, and maybe they all hoped it'd be another Avatar, and if not, liked they seemed to have suspected early on, it'd make enough to not be a total loss in the end, and everyone (except fans that might want a sequel) would go home happy.

Secret boardroom late night secret tape excerpt:
"Deep Pocket"-...give Stanton another million for this week's shoot- ha ha, I have friends who are setting up their retirement with the spillover here.
"Woodburn"- But the movie... the movie's the thing... else we will catch the-
"Deep Pocket"- Don't go all dopey on me again; nobody cares about a hundred year old story... We want him funded. I did not say this. I am not here.
"Woodburn"- I guess Disney can handle this...

*tape was fast forwarded at this point- fast forward eats the f@#!@@g tape...*