John Carter : A Princess of Mars - Part 3

[CConn]

No, I know. I was expecting that to be an issue for me as well, but it never happened.

I think I was also kinda yearning for a change of color palette in the movie. Like how A New Hope went from the bright tans of Tattoonie to the darker greys of the Death Star...

I felt like John Carter needed that kind of switch at some point.

[DyeLorean]

Well, the director was used to do anything he wanted, with the animated features. He had control over everything. Maybe he just couldn't bring to the screen what was exactly on his own vision of the movie.
He's also a great story teller, and that's why I found interesting that the story and the plotting was one of the issues with John Carter.

[CConn]

I don't quite get what you mean.

[DyeLorean]

With animation, in Pixar, he had control over everything. He wanted an extra light in the background, he could do it. What I'm saying is that maybe he just couldn't do his best, from a story-telling point of view, with live action. I know he also did some re shoots, if I'm not mistaken.
His lack of experience in live action hurt the movie, at least that's what I think. (Which I find ironic, cause I think Brad Bird made an excellent job with M:I GP).

(And oh please, don't treat me like one of those trolls or anything. I know people liked the movie for what it is, I'm not saying otherwise, I'm just expressing an opinion from my point of view, that's all)

[Whiskey Tango]

You didn't come in to gloat over how poorly it performed and how you knew all along it would bomb. You're good.

And I expect you're right. I think it was a big project for Stanton to tackle for his first foray into live-action. he also way over-estimated the public's knowledge of the books.

[Blackman]

Originally Posted by Whiskey Tango

You didn't come in to gloat over how poorly it performed and how you knew all along it would bomb. You're good.

And I expect you're right. I think it was a big project for Stanton to tackle for his first foray into live-action. he also way over-estimated the public's knowledge of the books.

Yep. I think the same thing happened with Watchmen.

[CConn]

Originally Posted by DyeLorean

With animation, in Pixar, he had control over everything. He wanted an extra light in the background, he could do it. What I'm saying is that maybe he just couldn't do his best, from a story-telling point of view, with live action. I know he also did some re shoots, if I'm not mistaken.
His lack of experience in live action hurt the movie, at least that's what I think. (Which I find ironic, cause I think Brad Bird made an excellent job with M:I GP).

(And oh please, don't treat me like one of those trolls or anything. I know people liked the movie for what it is, I'm not saying otherwise, I'm just expressing an opinion from my point of view, that's all)

I'm not, I just don't think the direction was a weak point of the film at all.

The movie looked good. It was well shot, the pacing within individual scenes was strong. The acting could've been better, but I think that's more due to Taylor Kitch and company's lack of talent more than anything.

[Dangerman]

I liked the movie but just felt it fell apart near the end.

[Destructus86]

Finally saw it.

I REALLY don't get the hate for this movie...it boggles my mind. I thought this was a fantastic movie, I was totally engrossed the entire time.

[Blackman]

This is from TvTropes which can be edited by anyone like Wikipedia but I was wondering if there was any truth to the bolded:

There were reservations at Disney about letting Andrew Stanton direct the film, despite his strong sentimental attachment to the material, because he'd never directed a live-action feature before. But, since he'd made Wall-E and Finding Nemo into hits, they let him do it even though he warned them, "I'm not gonna get it right the first time, I'll tell you that right now." Indeed, the film required extensive double reshoots. Throughout production, he ignored the advice of the crewmembers who were live-action veterans in favor of his Pixar friends, back in their offices. Rich Ross (fired over this) and the other studio executives at Disney likewise had little experience with feature films, since most had come from television.
Then, it came time to market the film, which was already handicapped in that department by having no big stars in the cast. A trailer shown at a Disney con did not go over well, and Stanton refused to take any advice from the studio's marketing department. He insisted on using Led Zeppelin's "Kashmir" in the trailer even after it was pointed out to him that a 30-year-old classic-rock song was not likely to resonate with the younger male audience the film was intended for. The movie also went through last-minute retitling, dropping "Princess" and "Mars" from the title because those were thought to turn off the male and female segments of the youth audience respectively.

[CGHulk]

This is all conjecture, what he said she said, someone said! It doesn't matter to me what they all are saying. It's still a damn good movie!

[Destructus86]

Originally Posted by cghulk

this is all conjecture, what he said she said, someone said! It doesn't matter to me what they all are saying. It's still a damn good movie!

^this!

[Blackman]

I agree I liked the movie I was just wondering were there other reports of the bloded happening because that was teh first I heard of it

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

[CGHulk]

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplayli...twitter&page=2

(Brad) Bird has also been outspoken about the response to "John Carter" (and its supposed financial shortcomings), taking to Twitter to defend the film from its numerous snarky detractors. The whole experience is still a blur to Andrews, who helped conceive of the adaptation during a brainstorming session with eventual director Andrew Stanton. "It was a crazy experience. I had kind of gone through it with 'Iron Giant.' You have a great film and nobody saw it," Andrews said. "And here it happens again on 'Carter.' And it's like 'Are you kidding me? This happens twice in a lifetime?'"[/B] Andrews remains defensive about what he perceives as a general lack of support from Disney, who had more or less written the movie off before it opened. "I was in denial for quite a bit and the studio pulled the plug on it a little prematurely and I think there were some mistakes in marketing. It was like 'Give it a chance! This thing is struggling to find itself! Hold on a little longer!'" Still, he offers some perspective: "I think, ultimately, what's really interesting now is that it's the #1 pirated movie of all time. I think all the bad press has given it this mystique."

What's more is that Andrews is actually optimistic about returning to the series. "It's going to get its legs back and me and Andrew aren't done with that story yet and we really want to do two and three," Andrews said. "There's some great stuff for John Carter as a hero to deal with in the future." He added that they continue to work on the script for the subsequent films: "We're ready to go. As soon as somebody from Disney says, 'We want 'John Carter 2,'' we'd be right there." (Andrews also says that Pulitzer Prize-winning author Michael Chabon will be back to co-write the additional films.)

[dark_b]

i need some proof that its the number pirated movie. thanks Andrew

[CGHulk]

It was #1 pirated movie in May. Maybe he just made a mistake.

[Whiskey Tango]

Originally Posted by dark_b

i need some proof that its the number pirated movie

I bet that'll keep him up nights.

[Randal Graves]

^ Haha.

[cky]

Finally got around to watching this as the trailers never really appealed to me but I'm glad I did. I thoroughly enjoyed this movie! Some of the acting here and there was a miss but overall it's a really good movie!

If there's a sequel, I'm all for it!

[Blackman]

I wish a sequel would be made, but I seriously doubt it

[CGHulk]

Is The Media Being Unfair To 'John Carter'? Brad Bird Thinks So
http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplayli...bird-thinks-so

Quotes from his Twitter page.

"The showbiz press complains about big-budget sequels & remakes, but when a big NEW film like JOHN CARTER arrives, support is nonexistent," he tweeted. Clarifying, he added, "I dont mean the 'press'press...I mean the industry prognosticators who bagged on 'Ratatouille,' 'Wall-E' & 'Up' before they came out." He also said, "The loudest complainers about JC haven't seen it!"

"@tombrazelton: Disney's done a poor job communicating what the film is.' Epic sci-fi fantasy from the creators of TARZAN and FINDING NEMO."

"It's the first big movie adaptation of a classic series of novels. Many filmmakers have tried." But again, whether it has succeeded in that regard remains to be seen. People decide what movies to go see based on trailers, stills or other marketing material, and if they don't like what they see, or they aren't moved by it, they "complain" or instead, just don't go."

"@CoreyAtad: The press loves failure. It's why they go super negative before every new [James] Cameron film.' Yet we never see them eat super crow,"

[Hit-Girl]

It was poorly advertised, but it was also a bad movie. People need to realize that and stop whining.

[Kane52630]

Found this amazing poster on tumblr.

[Speedball]

That text. Why didn't they use that text instead of the boring text that they keep using on promotional materials and the DVD? It was the same problem with Prince of Persia.

[Blackman]

The whole marketing was so f***ed up