John Carter

Avatar Image
andy-hughes | 15:02 Wed 21st Mar 2012 | Film
27 Answers
I read the JC novels when I was around twelve and absolutely loved them, so I look forward to the film.

I thought the CGI was absolutely breathtaking, and I enjoyed most of the characterisations, although no film is ever as good as a reader's immagination.

So I am sad to read that relative to its production budget, the film is a box-office flop and it's unlikely that the sequel which was left open in the storyline will now be made.

I shall miss seeing more of Lynn Collins, she is lovely!

Any thoughts?


1 to 20 of 27rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by andy-hughes. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
apparently it is one of the biggest flops in box office history.
oh lol you said that, anyways i havent read the books, the trailer looked good but the reviews, made me change my mind, im not going to waste my money when there are so many better films out this year.
I must admit form the trailers alone I discounted it being a film I would spend money to see. Maybe it flopped due to advertising?
i have to disagrre, i thing the animations looked amazing but i just think that maybe the story fell a bit flat.
Maybe it's just me but I am sick of all the CGI in films these days and 3D also gets on my wick. I won't go see anything unless it's available in 2D now.
i like 3d, but it does give me a head ache if i havent watched it in ages
It just does nothing for me and also gives me a headache. It is defo a fad that will burn out soon enough imo - there is no need for it. I have to admit Alice in wonderland 3D was very pretty and Avatar also but everything else has fallen flat
oh lol you said that, anyways i havent read the books, the trailer looked good but the reviews, made me change my mind, im not going to waste my money when there are so many better films out this year//

This means that you are taking someone else's word that it's no good. I have stopped reading fim & tv reviews because time & again I have read reports about bad programs & when I have seen the actual film/tv prog my opinion was completely the opposite to the written criticism.
Because we are all different go & see the movie you may very well thoroughly enjoy it.

W Ron.
apparently Disney has a problem with films about Mars:

"The House Of Mouse, as Disney is known by its staff, might have been considered brave for considering a movie based on Mars at all.

The studio has now been stung by Mars movies on four separate occasions - with John Carter, Mars Needs Moms and earlier box office flops Mission To Mars (2000) and My Favourite Martian (1999)."
no whiskey, but as there are so many better films out this year that i am more interested in and i would rather see, i will save my money to see that. i will see it of course when it is on tv or DVD or something but there are a lot more films i would rather see than that.
Question Author
jno - your point about the 'Mars' curse for Disney appears valid. The original novel is 'John Carter Of Mars' and that was to be the original title, but Disney insisted on the 'Mars' being dropped.

Didn't do them any good though did it!

Ass far as 3D is concerned, I don't watch 3D films, I get headaches, and I find it distracting.
Isn't the whole notion of "an adventure on Mars" a bit lame?

I don't know anyone who's seen it, nor anyone who wants to see it.
because of the difference in atmosphere, imagine how far a netball would fly on Mars.

It sounds a very adventurous place to me.
I have no interest in netball.
also, they get pitch invasions


and indeed Taylor Kitsch invasions.

I'm with andy on 3D, though; it makes my head hurt.
I wonder if there is a room anywhere where they can remove some air to create an atmosphere equal to Mars ...

And then the netball team go in with breathing stuff on, to see how far a netball does actually fly.

LOL ... did I say I had no interest in netball?

Which one was I thinking of?

Oh yes, I know ... cricket!!

they are easily distinguished, Jayne.

Cricketers are the ones who don't pose in frilly black knickers. (I suppose.)
Cricketers are the ones who stand on a big pitch with nothing exciting happening!
Question Author
Actually, Burroughs makes plenty of observations about the gravity of Mars being one sixth that of Earh, allowing Carter to jump about twenty feet or so, and to be somewhat stronger than he would be on earth, but it is seriously exagerated in this film, for dramatic effect i know, but it jarred with me having enjoyed the novels so much.

I am sure if i read them now, they would seriously clunk with alegorical patriatoism and casual racism, as was the way of literature when they were written, so i may not venture back there. I was disappointed to enough when reading Noddy to my children and finding the villainous gollys airbrushed out of the stories!
I have seen it, in 2D, I didn't think it was that bad, however the plot doesn't make any real sense, in that the narrative isn't consistant. The guy playing Carter just isn't a very good actor and the "action" is sporadic andnon inspiring.

It could of done with being shorter.

Andy - Lynn Collins is CGI saw her on "Freshly Squeezed" (Ch4) last week and she looks nothing like she does in the film :-(

1 to 20 of 27rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

John Carter

Answer Question >>