Film: John Carter (2012)

[kshRox]

I liked John Carter.
It didn't take itself too seriously, was campishly fun and visually stunning.

 

[The Holy Drunk]

It was a film based on property that has been strip mined for nigh on a century. They then removed Mars from the incredibly vague poster, because you wouldn't want young sci-fi fans turning up, and the trailer is dominated by the arena battle which to my young(ish) movie going brain only suggests Attack of the Clones.

Reading up on the process it was made, it almost seems like the Disney exec behind it was assassinated with this flop, a few weeks before it was released various Disney people connected didn't even give token support or praise for the film in interviews no doubt designed in part to advertise the damn thing.

 

[clovis-man]

It was a film based on property that has been strip mined for nigh on a century. They then removed Mars from the incredibly vague poster, because you wouldn't want young sci-fi fans turning up, and the trailer is dominated by the arena battle which to my young(ish) movie going brain only suggests Attack of the Clones.

Reading up on the process it was made, it almost seems like the Disney exec behind it was assassinated with this flop, a few weeks before it was released various Disney people connected didn't even give token support or praise for the film in interviews no doubt designed in part to advertise the damn thing.

So I take it you didn't care for it.

 

[The Holy Drunk]

So I take it you didn't care for it.

Fair to Middling.

It is the marketing and general car crash surrounding it I find horrifying.

As to where the Gross National Product of Luxembourg went in producing it, I remain baffled.

 

[cyrusDCmonster]

i personally enjoyed John Carter a lot. i blame disney and it's crappy marketing for the films bad business, if this was another Pirate movie with Johnny Depp they would've done a better job marketing the movie, but a sci fi film on mars, why bother. screw them!

 

[Gumboot]

It was a far better film than Prometheus, but it's Prometheus that will be getting a sequel. John Carter's big problem was not that it was a bad film - it's not, it's very good one - but that it was a) badly marketed, and b) an adaptation of a story that has been mined by cinema and tv sf for a century. There were a couple of longeurs, but the script was cleverly done - I particularly liked the nested structure - and the film looked gorgeous. It's been sadly under-rated by most, and criminally attacked by some.

I think the film's failure can be dumped squarely on the feet of marketing, and I think the director and Disney deserve to share fault for that.

I thoroughly enjoyed the film, but I think a big part of why I enjoyed it so much is that I was aware, going into it, how influential the books had been to sci-fi and fantasy - George Lucas in particularly shamelessly mined them for "Star Wars".

Knowing in advance that it was the "original" of many of these classic tropes enabled me to appreciate and enjoy the story for what it was, instead of being one of those people who watches "Casablanca" and complains about the cliche dialogue.

 

[Gumboot]

i personally enjoyed John Carter a lot. i blame disney and it's crappy marketing for the films bad business

You can't entirely blame Disney. Andrew Stanton (the director) was given almost unprecedented creative control over the film, and he's squarely at fault for the initial marketing.

The problem is, Stanton is a massive, massive fan of the books. They were a cornerstone of his childhood. Now, that in itself isn't a problem - Peter Jackson was much the same with "The Lord of the Rings" - but where Stanton went so catastrophically wrong is he assumed the works were as beloved and iconic to everyone else as they were to him.

Look at the original teaser trailer for the film:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8xblwyKtfo

It's totally vague, telling us virtually nothing about the film.

You know what teaser trailer it reminds me of:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYkHD9y8EqI

Star Wars - Episode I: The Phantom Menace

The teasers are strikingly similar. The reason the Phantom Menace works is because it features iconic elements of the original trilogy that are instantly recognisable. Before I knew what a horrible, horrible film it was, I can remember seeing that trailer and getting cold shivers the moment that theme motif played.

For Stanton, the iconic images and ideas of the John Carter books were in the same league. I have no doubt he expected audiences to get cold shivers the moment the guy uttered "Just a moment, Mr Burroughs", let alone when the Princess pronounces "John Carter". The ships, his appearance, everything about it is "iconic" to Stanton. What he failed to grasp is it was meaningless to anyone else.

That method of advertising can be incredibly powerful and effective, if the audience recognise it. But it's also incredibly risky, because if they don't recognise it, the trailer backfires, becoming a meaningless mess.

The alternative is the play it safe for a more traditional trailer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oni72Fl7xaw

This trailer for the 1998 adaptation of Les Misérables made it absolutely clear that it was adapted from a very important story, and that anyone who didn't recognise it should recognise it. This was followed up by emphasising a very high-profile cast of highly respected actors.

This tells the audience, even if they've never heard of Les Misérables, that they're looking at the adaptation of a storytelling classic; a famous and beloved story. That will convince people to see it.

You'll note the John Carter teaser makes no mention of its origins, makes no mention of the pedigree of the filmmakers, and almost seems to avoid revealing what is actually a very, very good cast.

The full theatrical trailer is just as bad, if not worse, making the same mistakes.

It was some time around here that Disney realised the marketing campaign was bombing - badly - and they had the makings of a historic flop on their hands. So they took over the marketing and did what any self-respecting studio does; they hashed together an even worse trailer, designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator, full of spectacle and explosions and zero substance.

Interestingly, a number of fans of the film seem to understand how to market something like the John Carter films better than the filmmakers themselves:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BxeHQY1NuM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wK64fLSFM5M

Interestingly, while the film utterly tanked in the US, its international sales weren't quite so horrific and it has actually made a profit, although a very small one thus far.

 

[cyrusDCmonster]

it's a shame it didn't do so well, i'm holding out hope they make more, but i doubt it. Disney are the main culprits here, but i agree Andrew Stanton shouldn't be let off the hook for his role in the marketing, which was shocking all around.

i found i've sat and watched this movie about 8 times since it came on dvd. i think it may be my favourite movie released this year.

 

[MontyCircus]

I think the main problem with it was the name.

John Carter. Makes me think of Jimmy Carter. Who wants to see a movie about him?

Saw it on cable and it was alright. Recommendable. Which makes it one of my top ten of the year actually.

 

[Rodders]

I bought this yesterday. I haven't seen it yet, but I'm looking forward to it. I bet it's not as bad as people think.

 

[GWakeling]

I bought this yesterday. I haven't seen it yet, but I'm looking forward to it. I bet it's not as bad as people think.

Some people loathed this film, but I actually thought it was a very fun romp! I haven't read the books, but I like some of the species differentiation, and all told, I enjoyed it. Hope you do to!

 

[Abernovo]

I thoroughly enjoyed it. As a Science Fantasy action adventure, it does exactly what it's supposed to, in my opinion: entertain. A popcorn movie. Nothing wrong with that.

 

[iansales]

I think you're doing it an injustice. It's much cleverer than that. It's structured so it has two endings - a sad one, followed by a happy one. There's the three nested narratives. And the flashback scene during the battle with the Tharks...

 

[biodroid]

Rodders, its a fun, entertaining movie with tons of effects, it has humour too. I also dont know why it was rated poorly, i loved it

 

[mr kite]

Watched last night at last .
And blimey ! I enjoyed it .
Is this how the new Star War films will turn out . ?
Not a fan of Star Wars ( must be the only Sci Fi I don`t like , oh and Blakes 7 )
But John Cater was a film that did`nt have that " Lets sell Toys " edge to it .

 

[Rodders]

Yes, i definately enjoyed it. As you say, it was a fun romp and i'd definately watch it again. A shame it flopped.

 

[biodroid]

It could have been as bad as Eragon the movie, but I think audiences aren't in that Space Opera kinda mind at the moment since The Avengers came out at around the same time. Maybe The Avengers hype destroyed this movies hype and people didnt bother to watch it. Battleship was also a good movie, I preferred it more to the Transformer movies, going on the Taylor Kitsch theme.

I also read a review that some crits were trying to compare it to Avatar which is wrong because they might have slightly similar feels they are 2 very different movies.

 

[biodroid]

Watched last night at last .
And blimey ! I enjoyed it .
Is this how the new Star War films will turn out . ?
Not a fan of Star Wars ( must be the only Sci Fi I don`t like , oh and Blakes 7 )
But John Cater was a film that did`nt have that " Lets sell Toys " edge to it .

I reckon JJ Abrams is an intelligent director who understands the audience of the Star Wars kind. I think the new Star Wars movie will be more complex than John Carter and the budget will be bigger too, it's Star Wars, it has to be one of the biggest movies of the new decade.

 

[Jeffbert]

Well, I finally got around to seeing Disney's notorious "flop", based on the first of the century-old Barsoom novels by Edgar Rice Burroughs.

I wondered why nobody had bothered to respond to my last post in the A Princess of Mars, the 1st John Carter adventure (post #64) thread, in which I offered my own critique of this film, just a day before this current thread was created. I will not burden you with a quote, but ask that you follow the link & read it.

BTW, I do like the discussion on this thread.

 

[Robert C Adams]

I liked the movie. It was fun and maybe a little campy but not overly so. The marketing for it was really really bad though. I didn't even know who John Carter was until I looked up the name even though I read Princess of Mars when I was really young after finding a copy of it on a shelf of old paperbacks in the garage. I think if they had just called the movie Princess of Mars it would have got way more interest. It's too bad the movie flopped but I enjoyed watching it.