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

Status
Not open for further replies.
No one really thinks that.
I think his point is that the environment doesn't look alien at all. And I agree with his sentiment.

Why is the marketing for this film all over the place? I'm pretty interested in the movie as it is an adaptation of A Princess of Mars, but goddamn, it's really hard to defend all the claims of JOHN BOMBA and so on just watching how the show is being marketed. Any normal person with no knowledge of the history of the books would think this is some crappy Disney wannabe Avatar/Phantom Menace ripoff.
There's a very good chance that this movie might be that bad. And if that is the case, I'd say it's commendable of Disney to market it thusly. Saves a lot of people a good amount of money.
 
but wouldnt his muscles adept to the mars gravity over time? is this explained in the books?
I don't know if he does eventually, I'm on Chapter 9 and he's only been on Mars for a few days at this point. But it doesn't really seem like it - the Martians evolved specifically to live on Mars. John's biology is completely different, his bones are much much lighter than a Martian's if nothing else. He has a very different muscle-to-bone-to-weight ratio than things natural to Mars, I don't know why that would change. He eventually learns to walk properly by shuffling around, but it's not like his entire biology is going to adapt to being on Mars and he'll lose his ability to jump really far and be really strong. His bones aren't going to suddenly get heavier.

It's like being on the moon. Just because you hang out on the moon for a month doesn't mean you're suddenly going to not be able to bounce around when you walk. There's less gravity there. I don't think our bodies can adapt to something that radically different, that quickly.

Maybe if he didn't exercise and let his body and muscles kind of atrophy he wouldn't be able to anymore but I'd imagine as long as he stays in good physical condition, he'd be able to keep using his "powers" forever.
 
Burroughs didn't have the benefit of the existence of the international space station and studies on their inhabitants. Even with moderate resistance training, over a 6 month stay in orbit/low g resulted in a loss of one third of peak calf muscle strength.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/research/experiments/Biopsy.html

It's safe to say that his physical advantage over martians would noticeably diminish over months and certainly by a year.
 
Burroughs didn't have the benefit of the existence of the international space station and studies on their inhabitants. Even with moderate resistance training, over a 6 month stay in orbit/low g resulted in a loss of one third of peak calf muscle strength.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/research/experiments/Biopsy.html

It's safe to say that his physical advantage over martians would noticeably diminish over months and certainly by a year.
Not to mention that creatures from a lower gravity world would probably have lighter bones, not heavier.
 
Why is the marketing for this film all over the place? I'm pretty interested in the movie as it is an adaptation of A Princess of Mars, but goddamn, it's really hard to defend all the claims of JOHN BOMBA and so on just watching how the show is being marketed. Any normal person with no knowledge of the history of the books would think this is some crappy Disney wannabe Avatar/Phantom Menace ripoff.
Disney tends to suck at marketing period. They rely on their name and the brand.

However, John Carter was being marketing in a state of flux as the head of marketing was pushed out as a result of a string of disappointments/bombs. They apparently were doing for hire deals and the results were spotty. With her gone, I think they firmed up the marketing of this to the best of their limited ability.

Salvor.Hardin said:
I think his point is that the environment doesn't look alien at all. And I agree with his sentiment.
I don't think it's supposed to look too alien. Architecture wise I think it succeeds and I never got that they were actually on Earth, just that they were in the desert. Burroughs could see Mars back then and it looked like what a person from far away would vision Mars to be.

That's a big problem for this movie though because our preconceived notion of Mars has changed so drastically. The Mars aspect of it was not that important, so I wish they had went the Barsoom angle.
 

Qwomo

Junior Member
It's a bummer because the more I read about the John Carter stories the more I think they'd make a great film series.

Oh well, maybe they'll make another one in 50 years.
 
the film is converted 3d, right? so, did they only convert the scenes with the "real" actors and render all the cg in real 3d? or did they convert everything?
 
What the hell is with the weird cuts in that trailer? I thought it was my computer or YouTube fucking up but during his "I did not cause this..." line it literally cuts right as he's saying "on this night" and it sounds utterly terrible. Marketing joke.
 

I don't understand who the bald antagonists with the ships are in the trailer. I finished "A Princess of Mars" and just started "The Gods of Mars". (I'm in Ch. 5) Nothing I've read so far has dealt with Earth being in any danger.

If it is a spoiler for something to come in the series, then never mind. I'd rather not know. But if it is some "new element" Disney has decided to add to "A Princess of Mars", I'd like to know.
 

Tucah

you speak so well
I guess that's a better trailer than what we've been getting but it's still pretty bad. Disney only have themselves (well, their marketing team) to blame if this thing bombs.
 
I saw that one trailer where the guy in the background talking was happy go lucky as if it was some playful animated film. It looked atrocious.

I feel bad whenever a great writer/director has a movie that flops so I hope it doesn't, but I would not be surprised at all if it does.

Generic evil looking bald guy: "Nothing will stand in our way."



Could they really not think of something better than that?
 
Are the bald guys supposed to be the Therns? Is Disney mixing the story lines?


Edit: Answered my own question. Went to the Disney site for the movie: http://disney.go.com/johncarter/#/splash-page

Apparently, the movie covers more than the first book "A Princess of Mars" since the Therns (the bald guys) who don't show up until the second book are in the trailer and described in the character list on the web site. Seems Disney is taking license with the story and re-envisioning the Burrough's tale. That is not necessarily a bad thing.
 
Are the bald guys supposed to be the Therns? Is Disney mixing the story lines?


Edit: Answered my own question. Went to the Disney site for the movie: http://disney.go.com/johncarter/#/splash-page

Apparently, the movie covers more than the first book "A Princess of Mars" since the Therns (the bald guys) who don't show up until the second book are in the trailer and described in the character list on the web site. Seems Disney is taking license with the story and re-envisioning the Burrough's tale. That is not necessarily a bad thing.
Ya, I'm not really sure what's going on anymore. I don't really think I like the idea of them changing the story... It seems even weirder if they're going to have the Therns but not the first born? It's not mentioned in the characters or in any trailers so I guess not first borns or any of that.

Well that was... better. I still don't like the lack of mass everything has for him. I get the jumping and being stronger than the aliens, but the lack of mass is doing my head in.

Still not looking like a good movie from the marketing though.
What do you mean by lack of mass?


I saw that one trailer where the guy in the background talking was happy go lucky as if it was some playful animated film. It looked atrocious.

I feel bad whenever a great writer/director has a movie that flops so I hope it doesn't, but I would not be surprised at all if it does.



Generic evil looking bald guy: "Nothing will stand in our way."



Could they really not think of something better than that?
Have you read the books? The thorns are bald but they're supposed to have gold wigs. I'm not sure what you're getting at with the bald thing though.
 

140.85

Cognitive Dissonance, Distilled
Started reading the books yesterday. Had no idea they had influenced so much and came out so long ago.

Going to avoid the film and just read the series.
 
Anyways I'm still not impressed. I don't understand why they didn't just have the Japanese trailer for American audiences. Best trailer of the bunch by a country mile.
I can't believe they aren't even acknowledging the source material in the American marketing. The "100th anniversary of the pulp-fiction classic" angle they used with the Japanese trailer is hundreds of times better.
 
I can't believe they aren't even acknowledging the source material in the American marketing. The "100 anniversary of the pulp-fiction classic" angle they used with the Japanese trailer is hundreds of times better.
Dude, any sort of attempt to market this film as a unique and influential science fiction story with a heritage and history would just SCARE CHILDREN AWAY!!!! Amirite???? That is why we must have SPACE GLADIATOR!

:(
 
I can't believe they aren't even acknowledging the source material in the American marketing. The "100th anniversary of the pulp-fiction classic" angle they used with the Japanese trailer is hundreds of times better.
I'm still dumbfounded they changed the name. "John Carter" is meaningless to modern audiences. Adding "of Mars" would at least give some kind of hint at what the movie's about. I mean, I can kinda see why they didn't want to go with "A Princess of Mars", but just plain "John Carter"? Major error.
 
I'm still dumbfounded they changed the name. "John Carter" is meaningless to modern audiences. Adding "of Mars" would at least give some kind of hint at what the movie's about. I mean, I can kinda see why they didn't want to go with "A Princess of Mars", but just plain "John Carter"? Major error.
A PRINCESS OF MARS <--- Boys will shun it!!!!

JOHN CARTER OF MARS <--- Girls will shun it!!!!

Clearly the only option left was....

JOHN CARTER <---- Everyone will shun it!!!!

:D
 
What the hell is with the weird cuts in that trailer? I thought it was my computer or YouTube fucking up but during his "I did not cause this..." line it literally cuts right as he's saying "on this night" and it sounds utterly terrible. Marketing joke.
Any line that starts with "On this night..." automatically sucks unless you are Russel Crowe in Gladiator who turned somewhat similar shit to gold
 
I'm still dumbfounded they changed the name. "John Carter" is meaningless to modern audiences. Adding "of Mars" would at least give some kind of hint at what the movie's about. I mean, I can kinda see why they didn't want to go with "A Princess of Mars", but just plain "John Carter"? Major error.
Should have called it "Warlord of Mars"
 
When I first saw the trailer: "Who is John Carter? Where is he? Why is he fighting? Why do I have the impression that it's inspired by Star Wars, Avatar, and so on?"

After I looked into the film and series of novels, viewed additional clips, and watched a fan-edited trailer: "Oh, that makes sense, now. This actually seems interesting. It has a good cast, a director with two decent films under his belt, and actually is based on a novel published 100 years ago that inspired such properties as Star Wars and Avatar."

That's not how marketing is supposed to work.
 
Any line that starts with "On this night..." automatically sucks unless you are Russel Crowe in Gladiator who turned somewhat similar shit to gold
His delivery of the line isn't that bad. It's just in the trailer they cut the dialogue halfway into another word and then end it with "We will end it." It sounds like YouTube skipping, but it's their god awful fucking editing. I haven't seen editing this bad since the butchered theatrical cut of Terminator Salvation.
 
That's what I said earlier in this thread. It sounds much better as a title. Shit, it's the kind of title that gives you at least one more sequel.
I always thought they should've went the Indiana Jones route and called it "John Carter and the Princess of Mars". Sounds pulpy and tells you all you need to know. They could have even made "John Carter" the most prominent part if they thought Princess and Mars were too alienating. But I don't think the title is the problem it's the marketing. No one can really get a grasp of the movie from any of the marketing.
 
I always thought they should've went the Indiana Jones route and called it "John Carter and the Princess of Mars". Sounds pulpy and tells you all you need to know. They could have even made "John Carter" the most prominent part if they thought Princess and Mars were too alienating. But I don't think the title is the problem it's the marketing. No one can really get a grasp of the movie from any of the marketing.
Yea that would have been a good title calling it "John Carter" and showing generic sci fi battles in the trailer isn't going to get people to see it.
 
I always thought they should've went the Indiana Jones route and called it "John Carter and the Princess of Mars". Sounds pulpy and tells you all you need to know. They could have even made "John Carter" the most prominent part if they thought Princess and Mars were too alienating. But I don't think the title is the problem it's the marketing. No one can really get a grasp of the movie from any of the marketing.
Ooh, that I kinda like.
 
Devils Advocate on the rock: He isn't pulling on it with his core strength when he falls over. When he is pulled I think a chunk of the rock pops off and then he swings it around with his earth strength or whatever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.