JOHN CARTER (OF MARS!) |OT| (dir. Andrew Stanton)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Feb 9, 2008
19,111
0
0
NYC
www.thefilmstage.com
#51
OT seems remiss not to mention the films potentially around $400 million budget by this point.
NOWHERE close to that.

Andrew Stanton Says Rumors That 'John Carter' Cost $300 Million Is A "Complete And Utter Lie"

“I want to go completely on record that I literally was on budget and on time the entire shoot. Disney is so completely psyched that I stayed on budget and on time that they let me have a longer reshoot because I was such a good citizen, so I find it ironic that we’re getting accused of the opposite.”
 
Feb 9, 2008
19,111
0
0
NYC
www.thefilmstage.com
#56
To be fair, of COURSE Stanton and the studio are going to say that.

The idea that 'they let me have reshoots' doesn't negate the insane cost of reshoots.
Any smart studio fits reshoots into their overall budget. It's a necessary piece of filmmaking. Hell, I know it is on a minuscule scale compared to this, but Woody Allen factors in massive amounts of reshoots on his films. David Fincher too, I believe.
 
Jun 17, 2007
15,071
0
980
#58
Any smart studio fits reshoots into their overall budget. It's a necessary piece of filmmaking. Hell, I know it is on a minuscule scale compared to this, but Woody Allen factors in massive amounts of reshoots on his films. David Fincher too, I believe.
I think around 10% is added to most, if not all budgets for reshoots and any other unforeseen expenses.
 
Oct 31, 2007
14,221
0
0
#64
Avatar had Pandora, a director that knows how to reach a huge audience, it had the tech aspects, it had the Navi.

This has...Mars, and Gambit jumping and shit, with his bulldog alien. Could be good though!
 
Sep 22, 2006
28,323
0
0
#75
Oh wow, March 8?

I feel less hyped than I thought I'd be around announcement. :(

I think I was awaiting the final season of Friday Night Lights and after I saw it
his lack of screen time
and the CG in the movie have dropped the hype level quite a bit.
 
Dec 28, 2005
48,267
0
1,190
#82
Of course not but it would lend a sense of legitimacy if someone like Cameron or Cruise were associated with it. People who otherwise wouldn't be interested might give it a chance.
The mainstream audience was never interested in Avatar because of Cameron. Up until the final trailer, most people had no fucking idea what Avatar was. Avatar was successful because it looked fucking awesome in the final trailers which were playing non stop and because the word of mouth was insane after the first screenings.
 
May 17, 2006
16,042
0
0
32
Lawton, Okla.
www.examiner.com
#83
Of course not but it would lend a sense of legitimacy if someone like Cameron or Cruise were associated with it. People who otherwise wouldn't be interested might give it a chance.
You mean the same Tom Cruise that pre-Ghost Protocol hadn't had a true blockbuster hit since War of the Worlds? Lately, the only star that's managed to carry a movie on name alone has been Johnny Depp. I doubt John Carter would any more hype if Depp was playing Carter. It's just shit marketing all the way around.
 

Dead

well not really...yet
Jun 6, 2004
26,025
0
0
34
Houston, TX
#84
Big names don't really mean as much as they used to. I think movie concepts themselves play a much bigger factor than they used to, and if the product you're shilling isn't doing a good job of separating itself from the rest (more like prince of titans: attack of the he-men, etc), then too bad
 

JGS

Banned
Dec 5, 2008
15,807
0
0
Lexington, KY
#86
One thing that always confused me is the notion that the Earth was in danger. Was there a time in the books that Earth was in danger? How will that happen. It seems to be in most of the trailers.
 
May 14, 2008
1,875
7
0
#87
I had no interest in the movie before but I'm almost finished reading "A Princess of Mars" by Edgar Rice Burroughs (what I assume is the source for the movie) and will probably see it now. The book was entertaining. My first time reading Burroughs actually.

The book is in the public domain and a quick read. It is not high fantasy but it doesn't need to be. There are several books in the series and I'll probably continue reading them when I have free time.
 

JGS

Banned
Dec 5, 2008
15,807
0
0
Lexington, KY
#93
Was there even one director on Lion King?

Stanton is a bit more of a storyteller and is also a writer. You look at Stanton's resume (Assuming you like PIXAR) and he simply does not have a stinker as a director or writer. If this stinks, he should never leaves the dungeons of PIXAR again. I'm not talking box office since that can fail a movie many times, I'm talking about making a horrible movie. More than I like the book, I believe this guy will tell a great story of the book regardless of the marketing.

So I do expect bigger things from him than I do the director of Lion King because Lion King was a complete team effort. No one person, except maybe Katzenberg, can claim credit for it's perfection.
 
Dec 28, 2005
48,267
0
1,190
#94
Was there even one director on Lion King?

Stanton is a bit more of a storyteller and is also a writer. You look at Stanton's resumer (Assuming you like PIXAR) and he simply does not have a stinker. If this stinks, he should never leaves the dungeons of PIXAR again. I'm not talking box office since that can fail a movie many times.

So I do expect bigger things from him than I do the director of Lion King because Lion King was a complete team effort. No one person, except maybe Katzenberg, can claim credit for it's perfection.
He doesn't really have a great movie either. He's got one middling, overrated movie in Nemo. And half of a great movie in WALL-E. But I'm excited for John Carter because I've read the source material.
 

JGS

Banned
Dec 5, 2008
15,807
0
0
Lexington, KY
#95
He doesn't really have a great movie either. He's got one middling, overrated movie in Nemo. And half of a great movie in WALL-E. But I'm excited for John Carter because I've read the source material.
Now I know you don't care for him, but surely you realize you're in the minority. Honestly, if it's a hit, it's possible you won't like it because it was due to the reason many like Stanton films.

I hope it's not like his previous efforts, not because they were bad, but because John Carter the book is nothing like what he's done before. This will show, like Brad Bird, whether he can direct a variety of stories that may not conform to his norm.
 
Dec 28, 2005
48,267
0
1,190
#96
Now I know you don't care for him, but surely you realize you're in the minority. Honestly, if it's a hit, it's possible you won't like it because it was due to the reason many like Stanton films.

I hope it's not like his previous efforts, not because they were bad, but because John Carter the book is nothing like what he's done before. This will show, like Brad Bird, whether he can direct a variety of stories that may not conform to his norm.
You're telling this to a guy who champions Titanic and Avatar? Popularity of a film has no bearing on my liking it or not. Shitty characterization - which is prevalent in both of Stanton's previous films, does. Thus I'm more excited for John Carter because I know the source material.
 

JGS

Banned
Dec 5, 2008
15,807
0
0
Lexington, KY
#98
You're telling this to a guy who champions Titanic and Avatar?
That's Cameron. I know you don't have a problem with hits.

I'm saying Stanton's films are extremely popular despite your dislike for them. This one may be popular too because of what Stanton does to it and not because it's about John Carter & the Princess of Mars. The marketing dept hasn't exactly made people interested in that aspect of it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.