cory. said:I got the first three books for free from the Kindle Store, I might read them.
BertramCooper said:Underwhelming trailer, but I have faith in Andrew Stanton.
And while I defended Disney's decision to change the title of Rapunzel to Tangled, I am puzzled by this one. John Carter is a ridiculously vague title.
Wait, what? You thought it would look like Mars really looks? Why?JGS said:I liked the original title. They shouldn't have punked out over it.
Watching the trailer again, still have the same impression. However, the beginning seems to indicated this is telling Burrough's story literally- almost like the last Journey to the Center of the Earth was a movie about Verne's book. I guess I could be reading into that wrong, but that would explain why Mars is not our view of Mars a little more.
Ether_Snake said:Well it doesn't have to look like the real Mars of course, but there is a lot of artwork out there that gives an idea of what it could have looked like. Personally I feel that it's obvious the studio doesn't really believe in the movie, it doesn't look like they put much effort in the budget, and I don't know any of the actors. I think there isn't much of a market for this kind of movie though. It has to be either Michael Bay-like, a comedy, or a actor's movie.
We haven't seen much yet but I would have liked something like this:
http://i56.tinypic.com/21lsyus.jpg
[IMG]http://i55.tinypic.com/c195k.jpg[/QUOTE]
Those pictures don't show much and they haven't revealed enough to make decisions like that.
Nope, some of the complaints were that wasn't visually appealing enough aka typical.Zaraki_Kenpachi said:Wait, what? You thought it would look like Mars really looks? Why?
thetrin said:What do you want them to do? Not follow the book it's based on?
dreamworksface.jpgJCreasy said:they need to do better than this . . .
What is this, Fraggle Rock?
THE-Pink-Dagger said:I don't really see what's wrong with the alien's face above, it looks really well done. GAF once again?! ^^
You don't know Willem Dafoe, Mark Strong or Bryan Cranston? Is that even possible?Ether_Snake said:Well it doesn't have to look like the real Mars of course, but there is a lot of artwork out there that gives an idea of what it could have looked like. Personally I feel that it's obvious the studio doesn't really believe in the movie, it doesn't look like they put much effort in the budget, and I don't know any of the actors.
exarkun said:__________ at work. The hate, it permeates!
Looks fine to me, give it a little shine, maybe see more than a minute and thirty seconds of the movie... I think the trailer did exactly what a modern trailer should: Doesn't show the whole movie, teases alot, and keeps a lot of the settings and characters close to the chest.
And if that looks cheap to people who profess to love sci-fi, then you need to ask yourself do you really love sci-fi. Because it isn't about how big the budget/how cheap it looks, but whether it gives you a great experience/takes you out there.
exarkun said:Edit: Whoops, many people thinking the same thing at the same time. The hate, it permeates!
Looks fine to me, give it a little shine, maybe see more than a minute and thirty seconds of the movie... I think the trailer did exactly what a modern trailer should: Doesn't show the whole movie, teases alot, and keeps a lot of the settings and characters close to the chest.
And if that looks cheap to people who profess to love sci-fi, then you need to ask yourself do you really love sci-fi. Because it isn't about how big the budget/how cheap it looks, but whether it gives you a great experience/takes you out there.
ZoddGutts said:Generalizations, eh.
RobotNinjaHornets said:You don't know Willem Dafoe, Mark Strong or Bryan Cranston? Is that even possible?
Though I suppose they weren't actually shown in the trailer, so never mind.
Expendable. said:will be digitally remastered for IMAX 3D release.
Stanton said he thought that the Franzetta art was cheesy.Ether_Snake said:We haven't seen much yet but I would have liked something like this:
http://i56.tinypic.com/21lsyus.jpg
http://i55.tinypic.com/c195k.jpg
cory. said:I got the first three books for free from the Kindle Store, I might read them.
Buckethead said:Stanton said he thought that the Franzetta art was cheesy.
That's about time when I lost all hope for this project.
bengraven said:Wow, this came and went before I even saw this.
Trailer was really hit and miss. Didn't scream Disney blockbuster to me - it felt more like they lost their ass with Prince of Persia and cut the budget of this.
That said, I've been interested in the books for years and would love a sci-fi/alien filled adventure film.
One of these movies has a ridiculous amount of talent working off a rich piece of classic literature. The other was a lazy attempt at recreating the Pirates franchise using a video game license.jett said:That's an interesting comparison, actually this movie seems to be just as mediocre as that one.
I think the solution is obviousthetrin said:I agree. I wasn't saying that Bud was being absurd. I was truly asking him what they SHOULD do, if it really is tired. Because honestly, I don't have a solution.
That said, it drives me nuts when a movie strays from its source material (the only exception being Blade Runner, which ended up being better than its source material)
Similar thing happened with some reviews I saw of LotR. That said... this doesn't look very good to me.THE-Pink-Dagger said:That's because the book (published for the first time in 1912 I think) has been ripped off by movies such as Star Wars, Avatar, etc.
I haven't read them but it is apparently one of the greatest influences on sci-fi movies, hence why you must think that this is generic, and how ironic it is. Slashfilm saw clips of the movie and said it was definitely more exciting than the teaser trailer which doesnt show much, as Stanton said that he didn't want to show everything in the teaser.
IMO, it looks really good.