RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,414
Posts: 5,506,372
Members: 25,129
Currently online: 504
Newest member: krishna

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15

Retro Review: Prodigal Daughter
By: Michelle on Dec 13

Sindicate Lager To Debut In The US Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > TV & Media

TV & Media Non-Trek television, movies, books, music, etc.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old March 20 2012, 05:01 PM   #31
OmahaStar
Disrespectful of his betters
 
OmahaStar's Avatar
 
Location: OmahaStar
View OmahaStar's Twitter Profile Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to OmahaStar Send a message via Yahoo to OmahaStar
Re: Disney's JOHN CARTER

propita wrote: View Post
The politics inside a studio are self-defeating at the studio level, but I suppose they help those individuals involved.
I think it's like that at most, if not all, studios. I'd point to Warner Brothers for a perfect example of that. Each department (much less each division) actively works against all other departments. The television and movie divisions are actively at war with each other, and simply don't work together ... ever.

jmsnews.com has an archive of J. Michael Straczynski's posts over the years. Search for Warner or WB. It's fascinating.
__________________
"Sorry. Wrong movie, buddy."
OmahaStar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 20 2012, 08:17 PM   #32
Galileo7
Fleet Captain
 
Galileo7's Avatar
 
Location: U.S.A.
Re: Disney's JOHN CARTER

Deckerd wrote: View Post
I think marketing are more guilty here than the director. Whoever decided to remove 'of Mars' from the title probably cost Disney $100m or so.
Agree.
Galileo7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 20 2012, 08:26 PM   #33
Harvey
Admiral
 
Harvey's Avatar
 
Re: Disney's JOHN CARTER

Asbo Zaprudder wrote: View Post
Robinson Crusoe on Mars (1964) was a fairly decent film despite the cheesy title and cost £1.2M to make - does anyone know if it turned a profit?
At this point it probably has, but judging by some of the remarks on the audio commentary on the DVD/Blu-Ray, it wasn't a huge hit at the box office when it was first released. I can't find any figures online, though.
__________________
"This begs explanation." - de Forest Research on Star Trek

My blog: Star Trek Fact Check.
Harvey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 20 2012, 09:00 PM   #34
Admiral2
Vice Admiral
 
Admiral2's Avatar
 
Location: Arendelle
Re: Disney's JOHN CARTER

Deckerd wrote: View Post
Why go to all that effort and expense and be left with a product which a substantial number of people who saw it didn't realise it wasn't on Earth?

Given the number times the name Mars was mentioned after John Carter realized where he was only an idiot would still be stuck thinking it was Earth for the rest of the movie. Come on.
__________________
"You should never give up on family -- even if they say harsh things and create snow monsters to make you go away."

-Elsa on what she learned from Anna
Admiral2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 20 2012, 09:05 PM   #35
George Bailey
The Revd's Oldman
 
George Bailey's Avatar
 
Location: Bob The Skutter
View George Bailey's Twitter Profile
Re: Disney's JOHN CARTER

Mars? You are on Barsoom, John Carter.
__________________
You sit around here and you spin your little webs and you think the whole world revolves around you and your money. Well, it doesn't, Mr. Potter. In the whole vast configuration of things, I'd say you were nothing but a scurvy little spider!
George Bailey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 20 2012, 09:15 PM   #36
captcalhoun
Admiral
 
Location: everywhere
Re: Disney's JOHN CARTER

should've stuck with "Princess of Mars"...
captcalhoun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 20 2012, 10:14 PM   #37
Asbo Zaprudder
Rear Admiral
 
Asbo Zaprudder's Avatar
 
Location: On the beach
Re: Disney's JOHN CARTER

Harvey wrote: View Post
Asbo Zaprudder wrote: View Post
Robinson Crusoe on Mars (1964) was a fairly decent film despite the cheesy title and cost £1.2M to make - does anyone know if it turned a profit?
At this point it probably has, but judging by some of the remarks on the audio commentary on the DVD/Blu-Ray, it wasn't a huge hit at the box office when it was first released. I can't find any figures online, though.
I'm guessing it didn't make enough as there weren't any sequels. The ending makes it look as though either they ran out of money in production or they were expecting it to have a follow-up.

Anyway, regarding John Carter, I expect Disney will break even eventually but it beats me how anyone can hope for a sequel with the budget that would be required to match the effects in the first outing.
Asbo Zaprudder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 20 2012, 11:49 PM   #38
Harvey
Admiral
 
Harvey's Avatar
 
Re: Disney's JOHN CARTER

Indeed, there was apparently early talk of a sequel called "Robinson Crusoe and the Invisible Galaxy," but that was scrapped after the film failed to light the box office on fire. (Just found this in a Tom Weaver interview book)
__________________
"This begs explanation." - de Forest Research on Star Trek

My blog: Star Trek Fact Check.
Harvey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 21 2012, 12:55 AM   #39
Temis the Vorta
Fleet Admiral
 
Temis the Vorta's Avatar
 
Location: Tatoinne
Re: Disney's JOHN CARTER

captcalhoun wrote: View Post
should've stuck with "Princess of Mars"...
Warlord of Mars, to avoid confusion, if JC is the main character. If they wanted to title it Princess of Mars, then Dejah should be the main character, which would be fine by me but that's not what they did.

And let's face if, for Disney to release a movie called Princess of Mars will lead most people to assume it's an animated fairy tale. Don't make the mistake of assuming the audience knows anything about the source material, because they don't.

Why make their jobs tougher than they need to be, by creating a misleading impression that they'll have to spend millions on countering, while at the same time spending millions more trying to sell the movie? Call it Warlord of Mars and focus on selling people the epic romantic story of a tragic Civil War veteran who gets his chance at love and redemption on an amazing alien world.

Warlord of Mars tells you it's an action movie ("war"); about a guy fighting for power ("lord"); it's sci fi ("Mars"); and it's kind of retro ("warlord") but that can be cool. The title doesn't get "romance" or "redemption" in there, so those elements should be the focus of the marketing campaign. And there you have the whole package.
Temis the Vorta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 21 2012, 05:37 AM   #40
Dream
Admiral
 
Dream's Avatar
 
Re: Disney's JOHN CARTER

Mr Light wrote: View Post
But every Mars movie has bombed "Mars Needs Moms", Disney's Mars movie last year, is one of the biggest box office bombs of all time. Ghosts of Mars... Red Planet... that other one from around 2000...
Total Recall was actually a hit when it was released. That obviously took place on Mars.

Lots of people actually went to that movie unlike John Carter. TR was based on a much less famous story, but it actually had a popular action star in the lead role instead of a nobody.
Dream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 21 2012, 08:46 AM   #41
captcalhoun
Admiral
 
Location: everywhere
Re: Disney's JOHN CARTER

Temis the Vorta wrote: View Post
captcalhoun wrote: View Post
should've stuck with "Princess of Mars"...
Warlord of Mars, to avoid confusion, if JC is the main character. If they wanted to title it Princess of Mars, then Dejah should be the main character, which would be fine by me but that's not what they did.

And let's face if, for Disney to release a movie called Princess of Mars will lead most people to assume it's an animated fairy tale. Don't make the mistake of assuming the audience knows anything about the source material, because they don't.

Why make their jobs tougher than they need to be, by creating a misleading impression that they'll have to spend millions on countering, while at the same time spending millions more trying to sell the movie? Call it Warlord of Mars and focus on selling people the epic romantic story of a tragic Civil War veteran who gets his chance at love and redemption on an amazing alien world.

Warlord of Mars tells you it's an action movie ("war"); about a guy fighting for power ("lord"); it's sci fi ("Mars"); and it's kind of retro ("warlord") but that can be cool. The title doesn't get "romance" or "redemption" in there, so those elements should be the focus of the marketing campaign. And there you have the whole package.

except Warlord of Mars is a different book and would be the basis of JC2.

alright, should've gone way retro and called it "John Carter and the Princess of Mars"
captcalhoun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 21 2012, 08:49 AM   #42
George Bailey
The Revd's Oldman
 
George Bailey's Avatar
 
Location: Bob The Skutter
View George Bailey's Twitter Profile
Re: Disney's JOHN CARTER

Doesn't the film mix elements of 3 different books?
__________________
You sit around here and you spin your little webs and you think the whole world revolves around you and your money. Well, it doesn't, Mr. Potter. In the whole vast configuration of things, I'd say you were nothing but a scurvy little spider!
George Bailey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 21 2012, 11:22 AM   #43
captcalhoun
Admiral
 
Location: everywhere
Re: Disney's JOHN CARTER

nope, as far as i know it's just an adap of Princess of Mars.
captcalhoun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 21 2012, 11:27 AM   #44
Gov Kodos
Admiral
 
Gov Kodos's Avatar
 
Location: Gov Kodos Regretably far from Boston
Re: Disney's JOHN CARTER

It takes characters and locations from the first 3 books, but its not even a loose adaptation of A Princess of Mars. It has many similar scenes and the tone is very much in tune with the books. However, it's not a close following of the story in A Princess of Mars. The basic premise of him getting to Mars, meeting Dejah, Tars and Sola as well as fighting Zodanga are from the first book but that's about it. The Therns are from the second book, but they are religious hucksters using the ancient Martian religion to prey on the other Martians and aren't techno-gods as in the movie. The third book deals more with the ancient Martan religion and the goddess Issus mentioned in the movie.
__________________
We are quicksilver, a fleeting shadow, a distant sound... our home has no boundaries beyond which we cannot pass. We live in music, in a flash of color... we live on the wind and in the sparkle of a star! Endora, Bewitched
Gov Kodos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 21 2012, 12:09 PM   #45
Mr Light
Admiral
 
Location: Pennsylvania
Re: Disney's JOHN CARTER

Yeah, they said Total Recall was the only successful Mars movie. BUT! They don't have Mars in the title. And it was in 1990, that's 22 years ago
__________________

Mr Light is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
burroughs, disney, edgar rice burrows, john carter

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:42 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.