"John Carter of Mars" Moving Ahead!
- Thread starter Ptrope
- Start date
Hunger Games might be interesting, but it doesn't look like something I need to see on the big screen. John Carter on the other hans is definitely a visual spectacle I want to see on the big screen.
And I've read and heard enough to know I'm intent to see it this weekend.
And I've read and heard enough to know I'm intent to see it this weekend.
I haven't even read the Hunger Games books, and I'm already looking forward to buying the four movie Bluray set (pretty sure I read they're splitting the third book). I've read John Carter and thought it was pretty good, but when I heard that Pixar was doing it live action I was flabbergasted. It could have been an animated epic, but now it just looks so bland.
I have high hopes for the movie and I plan to see it this saturday.
and since it is disney I am going to stick through the credits just to see if they have anything special in them.
as for the hunger games I have'nt read any of the books yet but plan to.
the series reminds me of stephen king's the long walk and running man put together.
and since it is disney I am going to stick through the credits just to see if they have anything special in them.
as for the hunger games I have'nt read any of the books yet but plan to.
the series reminds me of stephen king's the long walk and running man put together.
I saw John Carter tonight at an advance screening in 3-D.
I thought it was bloody fantastic. It's not perfect. It does start slow, there's some dodgy effects work, it's only loosely based on A Princess of Mars (well, it's distilled down and then goes in some other directions), but the performances are solid, Barsoom and the Tharks are better realized on screen than I thought they would be (really, the trailers have not done the Tharks justice), and the characters, especially John Carter and Dejah Thoris, are invested with a psychological weight that Edgar Rice Burroughs never gave them.
In short, this is A Princess of Mars distilled down to a two hour movie that will appeal to a modern day audience. A planetary romance from 1912 made relevant for 2012. I enjoyed it thoroughly -- it's funny, it's moving, it's exciting, and I want to see more -- and I'm thinking of going to see it again this weekend, this time in 2-D.
I thought it was bloody fantastic. It's not perfect. It does start slow, there's some dodgy effects work, it's only loosely based on A Princess of Mars (well, it's distilled down and then goes in some other directions), but the performances are solid, Barsoom and the Tharks are better realized on screen than I thought they would be (really, the trailers have not done the Tharks justice), and the characters, especially John Carter and Dejah Thoris, are invested with a psychological weight that Edgar Rice Burroughs never gave them.
In short, this is A Princess of Mars distilled down to a two hour movie that will appeal to a modern day audience. A planetary romance from 1912 made relevant for 2012. I enjoyed it thoroughly -- it's funny, it's moving, it's exciting, and I want to see more -- and I'm thinking of going to see it again this weekend, this time in 2-D.
that's good news. i was afraid the Tharks would look too cartoony. what about Tars Tarkas, does he get a lot of screen time?I saw John Carter tonight at an advance screening in 3-D.
I thought it was bloody fantastic. It's not perfect. It does start slow, there's some dodgy effects work, it's only loosely based on A Princess of Mars (well, it's distilled down and then goes in some other directions), but the performances are solid, Barsoom and the Tharks are better realized on screen than I thought they would be (really, the trailers have not done the Tharks justice), and the characters, especially John Carter and Dejah Thoris, are invested with a psychological weight that Edgar Rice Burroughs never gave them.
In short, this is A Princess of Mars distilled down to a two hour movie that will appeal to a modern day audience. A planetary romance from 1912 made relevant for 2012. I enjoyed it thoroughly -- it's funny, it's moving, it's exciting, and I want to see more -- and I'm thinking of going to see it again this weekend, this time in 2-D.
The Tharks look very real. Each Thark is individualized, they have individual personalities. There's something Tars Tarkas does with his four arms that it never occurred to me a Thark would do, but when he did it I was like, "Well, damn, of course a Thark would do that!" They're not really Burroughs' Tharks, though; these Tharks couldn't run like a centaur, for instance, and they're not as tall. That said, they are very effective on screen.
He has a decent amount of screen time, probably on par with Sab Than (who is more prominent here than he is in A Princess of Mars). I won't say he has a lot of screen time because John Carter compresses down the time Carter spends with the Tharks (and it alters the relationship between some of the Tharks from the book), but he and Carter have two really good scenes together. There's a Tars line from The Gods of Mars that gets quoted twice (once by Tars, and once by Carter to try and inspire Tars), but a Tars line I really liked from A Princess of Mars isn't here.
I'd say that Sola gets more screentime than Tars. Sarkoja is in the film, but she's very minor and she's basically just a mean old lady from up the street, if that makes sense.
How is the 3D? Well done or just noticeable in a few scenes? Or downright annoying?
I enjoy seeing films in 3D that have been shot in 3D, but the post-conversions I have seen have not been great. (either exaggerating 3D too much or putting it in layers)
So - for those that have seen it - how well done is it in John Carter?
I enjoy seeing films in 3D that have been shot in 3D, but the post-conversions I have seen have not been great. (either exaggerating 3D too much or putting it in layers)
So - for those that have seen it - how well done is it in John Carter?
I'll put it like this. I would rather have seen John Carter in 2-D.
To me, the 3-D wasn't effective in anything involving action. There was too much blurring going on, and the final battle between the forces of Helium, Zodangan, and the Tharks was a bit confusing.
However, some of the 3-D is very well done, like in a 360 degree pan around two characters as they look out over Zodanga and you get to see the scale of the moving city and how it works. And I'd swear that Lynn Collins' chest had definition in 3-D.
I didn't stay that long, sorry. But I'm not sure there needed to be; the final scene of the film sets up a sequel well enough.
I know it's far too late.
Far, far, far to late.
But wouldn't you have rather seen John Candy of Mars rather than this bollocks?
Far, far, far to late.
But wouldn't you have rather seen John Candy of Mars rather than this bollocks?
Well, I couldn't possibly bad mouth John Carter after I discover how awesome this flick is.
Duh!
Um, is he supposed to have the same initials as the Christian messiah?
This better not be another blunt metaphor for a righteous lifeplan like those fricking Narnia movies.
"Sigh"
Duh!
Um, is he supposed to have the same initials as the Christian messiah?
This better not be another blunt metaphor for a righteous lifeplan like those fricking Narnia movies.
"Sigh"
It's probably the best post-conversion I've seen so far, but I didn't think it really added anything to the movie. It doesn't detract from the movie, but seeing it in 2D should be fine.
I do think it needs to be seen on a big screen, though!
Nope, nothing.
I see no point in responding in the other thread about a review that didn't care for the film.
It can be said that the film could suffer from some familiarity because the original books influenced so much that came after over the decades. And so much of it might not feel fresh and seem derivative. It's disappointing and unfair and made worse by Disney doing such a piss poor job of marketing the film.
Nonetheless I'll see it and if it's as good as I hope then it the dvd will be added to my video library.
It can be said that the film could suffer from some familiarity because the original books influenced so much that came after over the decades. And so much of it might not feel fresh and seem derivative. It's disappointing and unfair and made worse by Disney doing such a piss poor job of marketing the film.
Nonetheless I'll see it and if it's as good as I hope then it the dvd will be added to my video library.
There is nudity in the book, but apparently not in the film.
