OK really, you all went to see Captain America and no one mentions the John Carter from Mars trailer?
Well, it was the best spoiler of the day...so thanks.
http://youtu.be/6Rf55GTEZ_E
Fixed stupid link
OK really, you all went to see Captain America and no one mentions the John Carter from Mars trailer?
Well, it was the best spoiler of the day...so thanks.
http://youtu.be/6Rf55GTEZ_E
Fixed stupid link
Last edited by Major Malphunktion; 08-02-2011 at 10:40 PM.
I saw a poster but no trailer, so yeah, I never mentioned it. Thanks for the link, though!
It should be John Carter of Mars but it isn't. That seems like it would draw more people than just his name by itself.
Pfft, they probably didn't even shoot it on Mars.
To be fair, the poster I saw has three stylized letters, J, C, and M--and not much else.
I agree, it seems like the trailer went out of it's way not to explain what they movie was really about. Even the idea that it was another world, let alone mars, seemed almost ... hidden.Originally Posted by Warning
That is the most humorously fail linking I've seen.
It looks interesting, but I have to wonder at how they will market this. The average moviegoer likely has no idea who "John Carter of Mars" is, or even Edgar Rice Burroughs for that matter. The trailer's shift between late 19th century America period movie and what appears to be an Arabian inspired sci-fi fantasy movie could be too odd for some people. The trailer gives off a mild Flash Gordon vibe, which isn't a bad thing neccessarily.
Perhaps with Cowboys and Aliens having warmed people to the idea of a sci-fi period piece this movie won't have as much trouble luring in moviegoers. Still, I think it's going to be a tough sell based on such an old IP with such a giant leap of plot logic. I'll probably see it though if opening weekend reviews are kind.
Well, it is a March movie.
Just FYI since the trailer strangely makes no mention of it, this is the live-action directorial debut of Andrew Stanton, the Pixar alum behind Wall-E and Finding Nemo.
That actually makes it a lot more interesting, and I love Burroughs. Can Hollywood make a good John Carter movie? Probably not. But Andrew Stanton raises my eyebrows a little.
Geoff
Let's see - largely not stars cast, Disney, been in post-production for quite a long time, 3D, was a summer 2012 film and now its set for March.
We can hope, but optimism should not be high.
It may not have huge names, but it's still a great cast: Bryan Cranston, Samantha Morton, Thomas Haden Church, Ciarin Hinds, Mark Strong, Willem Dafoe, James Purefoy, Dominic West.
Andrew Stanton directing, cowritten by Stanton and Michael Chabon.
I dunno, I feel pretty comfortable being optimistic.
I should be clear that while it may end up being a fine movie, all signs indicate that Disney doesn't think it will be a financially successful movie. Pulling it from the summer to spring is a good indicator of lack of confidence, and my point with the lack of stars is that they can't sell the movie based on that. And the John Carter background has a very limited appeal in 2011 (or 2012, as it were.)
That doesn't mean it can't be successful in March, just that history doesn't favor it.
As far as how good it will be just as a film, your "great cast" list doesn't include either of the leads. Flash Gordon, for example, had a pretty good cast outside the leads as well. That could sink it. Or bad effects. And Andrew Stanton makes it worth following, but hardly proves it will be good as he has no track record in live action films. Not to mention that what he's actually directed were two films - A Bug's Life as co-director and WALL-E as director. All his other Pixar stuff was in other duties.
We'll see.
Disney is hoping for a repeat of Alice in Wonderland, a March release that cracked a billion globally.
After Cowboys and Aliens, I'm surprised to see someone could combine scifi and western aesthetics without coming off as silly.
Last edited by alexlitel; 08-04-2011 at 08:36 PM.
Eh, A Princess Of Mars wasn't a western at all, but more like space opera starring a character who came from the old west.
He is credited as director for Finding Nemo as well.
The first half of WALL-E was up there with the best movies I've ever seen, so I have high hopes for this.
Before I saw the trailer, I thought, "Hm. Disney. So much for DT being nude."
Then I saw the trailer and thought, "Well, at least I can see her eyes kinda."
DT? I puzzled over this for several minutes before I realized it was short for Dejah Thoris. You are setting the bar kind of high, Wand.
I saw the trailer finally at Conan. Which was appropriate enough for me since I alternated reading Conan and John Carter novels in my Physics class in high school. The Tharks and flying ships looked cool, but who knows. Burroughs and planetary romances in general didn't age well even when I read it, much less now. And Burroughs was no where near as good a writer as Robert E. Howard. Still, in memory of my youth, I'll give it a shot if it is even half-way decent.
Are you me? LOL.
ERB's John Carter books were the first sci-fi books I read. Cardboard characters in pulp fiction where the hero gets the princess in the end. Damn I loved those books.
I suspect the source material is not deep enough without a lot of rewriting/re-imaging. No matter, I will have to see it. Wasn't the original story published in 1912? Only 100 years to go from book to move.
They should call it John Carter of Barsoom. Get that name brand recognition going.
A Princess of Mars, starring Traci Lords as Dejah Thoris, is available for Netflix streaming. I'll bet that has what you're looking for.
You missed Traci Lords as Dejas Thoris, middle-aged Bitch-Princess of Mars from 2009. And be thankful that you missed it!
As far as source material, there's several books in the Barsoom sequence.
I'm currently working through Chessman of Mars, with live action chess-like gaming, where the pieces fight like battlechess 2000...except it's more like rounds of street fighter when they enter the square to fight to the death, and their "piece" on the board determines their starting equipment. And that's just the awesome bits spoiled in the title, which doesn't even happen until the second half of the book.
How can you possibly say this isn't aging well?! Especially in drips and drabs read for free on my Droid X (since you don't always have book on you, but you usually have your phone!)
Odd that I was one of the two animators for the original Battle Chess, had read The Chessmen of Mars, and it had virtually no affect on the game.
Because I worked at JPL while images of Mars came in live and there was no Helium, no abysmally slow flyers (love that Robert Abbett cover on A Fighting Man of Mars), no Tharks, not much atmosphere and even less water (alas). You have to kind of put your mind into another era to invoke willing suspension of disbelief (which I can do, but Burroughs is notoriously sloppy about anything that is even vaguely scientific, making it that much harder).How can you possibly say this isn't aging well?! Especially in drips and drabs read for free on my Droid X (since you don't always have book on you, but you usually have your phone!)
If you are going to post a JCoM pic...really it is this:
Or This:
I was trying to choose an image appropriate to The Chessmen of Mars, and to my taste, Frank Frazetta in black and white is not any less than his color work. As for John Carter himself, this one ranks higher for me on the Frazetta scale:
And if you have to have a Frazetta female ("I do, I do!"):
Though, of course, I appreciate the ones you posted also (I'm from the buy the book because Frazetta did the cover artwork era).
Last edited by corsair; 08-27-2011 at 12:59 AM.
I think you can solve a lot of the aging problems by just not calling Barsoom Mars at all and just assuming it's some kind of alternate dimension/far flung fantasy world. There's really no reason it has to be the actual planet Mars.
Except that Carter sees the planet of War in the sky and makes an appeal to it. And then you can toss the whole Percival Lowell inspired canals/dying planet thing, not to mention the whole God of War/idealized warrior world angle. The basic underpinnings don't make sense then.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
