We didn't get all bent out of shape over Darth Vader or Jaba the Hutt and not seeing the actors faces. It did not lesson the scenes or movie magic...
The Movie John Carter?
- Thread starter thothguard51
- Start date
No one understands the 'grin' mark. Sigh....
Okay, here's my thoughts on this whole thing. True, no one complained about Jabba the Hutt or the other weird characters in Star Wars because it was presented in a fresh way for the time. Sure, there had been other alien-type flicks before but Star Wars set the bar. Anything which came after it really came out to be a pale imitation.
No, I didn't expect to see a disembodied head floating around. It wasn't in the novel and it would have looked ridiculous.
As for giving the audience credit, a lot of people--and I mean a LOT--did not recognize Tom Cruise as Les Grossman in Tropic Thunder. No CGI, no smoke and mirrors, just makeup and terrifying good acting. (And I am not a Cruise fan at all). So some members of the audience are pretty damn stupid in my opinion.
My whole point is this: I didn't think JCM was a good movie. I thought the screenplay flat, the characters not very interesting, the chemistry between the leads non-existant, and the direction rather uninspiring. Yes, the special effects were good (and these days, it's expected) but if that's all you got then it isn't much. I don't know about the advertising campaign in North America but if the movie isn't good, I don't care how much money you toss at the public, they'll know on some level it ain't a good flick.
That's what the general public thought: it wasn't worth going to. Disney will probably make more money from the DVD sales and that's fine but to me, it still isn't a great movie or one even worth buying the DVD to. Avengers, yay, JCM, nay.
Pass the popcorn....
Okay, here's my thoughts on this whole thing. True, no one complained about Jabba the Hutt or the other weird characters in Star Wars because it was presented in a fresh way for the time. Sure, there had been other alien-type flicks before but Star Wars set the bar. Anything which came after it really came out to be a pale imitation.
No, I didn't expect to see a disembodied head floating around. It wasn't in the novel and it would have looked ridiculous.
As for giving the audience credit, a lot of people--and I mean a LOT--did not recognize Tom Cruise as Les Grossman in Tropic Thunder. No CGI, no smoke and mirrors, just makeup and terrifying good acting. (And I am not a Cruise fan at all). So some members of the audience are pretty damn stupid in my opinion.
My whole point is this: I didn't think JCM was a good movie. I thought the screenplay flat, the characters not very interesting, the chemistry between the leads non-existant, and the direction rather uninspiring. Yes, the special effects were good (and these days, it's expected) but if that's all you got then it isn't much. I don't know about the advertising campaign in North America but if the movie isn't good, I don't care how much money you toss at the public, they'll know on some level it ain't a good flick.
That's what the general public thought: it wasn't worth going to. Disney will probably make more money from the DVD sales and that's fine but to me, it still isn't a great movie or one even worth buying the DVD to. Avengers, yay, JCM, nay.
Pass the popcorn....
No problem, JSF. Everyone's entitled to their opinion, and that's certainly true here. There's many, many movies that people rave about being marvelous that I think they're high for liking. *shrug* That's just how things work--you can't please everyone.
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2005
- Messages
- 23,708
- Reaction score
- 10,657
- Location
- In a world of my own making
- Website
- shadowferret.wordpress.com
On. I finally saw it and I'm conflicted. As someone who devoured Edgar Rice Burroughs, I was hugely disappointed in this movie. It deviated far too much from "A Princess of Mars" and introduced haracters and subplots that should have been saved for later in the series. The introduction of the therns was probably confusing to anyo e who hadn't read the books and I dont ever remember them coming to Earth and interfering with us. So why they threw that in there, I don't know. And I was disappointed in the whole Dejah Thoris as Xena warrior princess. I understand 100 years of women's rights has happened since the book was written, but still. John carter was the hero. A near superman in the books, coming to everyone else's rescue. *shrugs* and again, why can't Hollywood stick to the original stories? They were brilliant. Why this need to water them down and reconstitute them?
But as I said, I was conflicted. The ERB fan in me was disappointed, but the kid who loved action adventure wasn't. My son, never having read the books really likes it and I could see why. Despite a convoluted storyline featuring therns and internal politics and wars and introduction of tharks and Warhoons and red men who didn't look all that red to me, the underlying action was fun! And there was humor, especially some of the scenes with woola. Overall, once I suppressed my fanboy disappointed, it was, overall a fun movie. One that should have done. Egged at the box office if Disney had treated it better in promos.
I wonder how it's doing in terms of DVD? I had to reserve a copy at redbox because the copies were always out.
But as I said, I was conflicted. The ERB fan in me was disappointed, but the kid who loved action adventure wasn't. My son, never having read the books really likes it and I could see why. Despite a convoluted storyline featuring therns and internal politics and wars and introduction of tharks and Warhoons and red men who didn't look all that red to me, the underlying action was fun! And there was humor, especially some of the scenes with woola. Overall, once I suppressed my fanboy disappointed, it was, overall a fun movie. One that should have done. Egged at the box office if Disney had treated it better in promos.
I wonder how it's doing in terms of DVD? I had to reserve a copy at redbox because the copies were always out.
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2005
- Messages
- 23,708
- Reaction score
- 10,657
- Location
- In a world of my own making
- Website
- shadowferret.wordpress.com
I heard the movie has broken even, but I haven't found a specific link.
It was #1 in DVD sales and #6 in rentals the week of June 10th.
It was #1 in DVD sales and #6 in rentals the week of June 10th.
With foreign distribution and dvd sales driving more business than domestic box office these days, MOST movies at least break even (hell, even Waterworld did, eventually) anymore. The problem is, of course, that Disney had wanted to do much more than that with this film.
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2006
- Messages
- 8,142
- Reaction score
- 2,669
- Location
- In cahoots with the other boo-birds
- Website
- www.staciakane.com
Well, we bought the hubs as Blue-Ray player yesterday as one of his birthday gifts (he turns 40[!] tomorrow, so it's a Big Birthday). And this was the movie he wanted, so it was our first Blue-Ray experience as well as first time seeing the movie.
We loved it, actually. I haven't read the stories, he has. He mentioned the differences afterward but they didn't bother him that much, and while I found a few segments/elements initially confusing, I thought it was all clarified and came together well.
I thought it was a lot of fun. It looked GORGEOUS. I loved Woola; our seven-year-old did, too, and she was actually interested enough to stay awake and attentive through the whole thing, which was awesome. (She interrupted the movie about halfway through to say she was confused by something: How could they all breathe? We explained how long ago the book was written and the concept of "suspended disbelief," and she was satisfied.) I thought the performances were great overall--agree the underuse of Purefoy was criminal, though--and just basically really enjoyed it.
Maybe not one of the greatest movies I've ever seen (that's not a huge list, though, of course), but I'd happily watch it again. I liked it a lot.
We loved it, actually. I haven't read the stories, he has. He mentioned the differences afterward but they didn't bother him that much, and while I found a few segments/elements initially confusing, I thought it was all clarified and came together well.
I thought it was a lot of fun. It looked GORGEOUS. I loved Woola; our seven-year-old did, too, and she was actually interested enough to stay awake and attentive through the whole thing, which was awesome. (She interrupted the movie about halfway through to say she was confused by something: How could they all breathe?
We explained how long ago the book was written and the concept of "suspended disbelief," and she was satisfied.) I thought the performances were great overall--agree the underuse of Purefoy was criminal, though--and just basically really enjoyed it.Maybe not one of the greatest movies I've ever seen (that's not a huge list, though, of course), but I'd happily watch it again. I liked it a lot.