John Carter (2D) - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 50 Old 05-23-2012, 01:29 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Partyslammer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,266
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Got and watched this one last night. Never bothered to see it in the theater due to poor word of mouth and what was arguably one of the worst promotional campaigns for a major motion picture in recent memory.

Surprisingly, it *is* a bit better than I expected but still far from great or even memorable in a quirky sort of way like say, David Lynch's "Dune" was. The wrap-around story that concerns Carter and "Ned" was actually the most rewarding part of the movie, the end kind of took me back to the ending of George Pal's "The Time Machine." One thing kind of bugged me about the soundtrack score - there's a 6 note "heroic" theme that sounds almost identical to that used previously in X-Men 3... maybe I'm just dreaming.

I breezed through the deleted scenes - most feature unfinished or missing effects, some to the point static line drawings of characters are used for placement of future (unfinished) CGI characters which is kind of funny to watch at times.

The Blu-ray presentation is pretty typical for this sort of giant budget green screen effects-laden flick. The indoor photography mostly seemed to be unusually dark and murky to the point there was some black crush in places. Sound was good, although the low freq sub sounded a bit muddy - not anywhere as tight as say, the "War Of The Worlds" or "Cloverfield" audio reference BRs. Vocals are pretty upfront and distinctive, something many big action movie BR releases seem to have a problem with these days.

Recommended for a single viewing for the whole family but little replay value... imo.
Partyslammer is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 50 Old 05-23-2012, 01:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mr. wally's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: land of the pumas
Posts: 3,807
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 47
already available on br? boy what a turkey of a movie.

neflixis our nemesis
mr. wally is offline  
post #3 of 50 Old 05-23-2012, 01:47 PM
 
dvdmike007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 8,687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Partyslammer View Post

Got and watched this one last night. Never bothered to see it in the theater due to poor word of mouth and what was arguably one of the worst promotional campaigns for a major motion picture in recent memory.

Surprisingly, it *is* a bit better than I expected but still far from great or even memorable in a quirky sort of way like say, David Lynch's "Dune" was. The wrap-around story that concerns Carter and "Ned" was actually the most rewarding part of the movie, the end kind of took me back to the ending of George Pal's "The Time Machine." One thing kind of bugged me about the soundtrack score - there's a 6 note "heroic" theme that sounds almost identical to that used previously in X-Men 3... maybe I'm just dreaming.

I breezed through the deleted scenes - most feature unfinished or missing effects, some to the point static line drawings of characters are used for placement of future (unfinished) CGI characters which is kind of funny to watch at times.

The Blu-ray presentation is pretty typical for this sort of giant budget green screen effects-laden flick. The indoor photography mostly seemed to be unusually dark and murky to the point there was some black crush in places. Sound was good, although the low freq sub sounded a bit muddy - not anywhere as tight as say, the "War Of The Worlds" or "Cloverfield" audio reference BRs. Vocals are pretty upfront and distinctive, something many big action movie BR releases seem to have a problem with these days.

Recommended for a single viewing for the whole family but little replay value... imo.

Stunning film, 99% of people that hated it never actually saw it.
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #4 of 50 Old 05-23-2012, 02:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundChex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA, west coast
Posts: 2,655
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 84 Post(s)
Liked: 86
It will be interesting to see if the BD sales of John Carter outperform those for The Asylum studio's mockbuster|knockbuster direct-to-video|Syfy Channel offering, Princess Of Mars (link).

[Home Office system schematic]
"My AV systems were created by man. They evolved. They rebelled. There are many speakers. And they have . . . A PLAN."

SoundChex is offline  
post #5 of 50 Old 05-23-2012, 03:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
giantchicken's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,566
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I'm pretty sure that John Carter will sell more copies.

PETER JACKSON: The theatrical versions are the definitive versions.
giantchicken is offline  
post #6 of 50 Old 05-23-2012, 10:33 PM
CIH USER
 
Franin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 17,230
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 138 Post(s)
Liked: 202
Ill definitely get this.

_________________________

Frank

Franin is online now  
post #7 of 50 Old 05-23-2012, 11:10 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 19,188
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 791
Liked the film. Wanted to love it, but ended up liking it (enough to buy the BD).

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #8 of 50 Old 05-23-2012, 11:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
pokekevin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 5,064
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

Liked the film. Wanted to love it, but ended up liking it (enough to buy the BD).

Ditto

No subwoofer I've heard has been able to produce the bass I've experienced in the Corps!

Must..stop...buying...every bluray release...
pokekevin is offline  
post #9 of 50 Old 05-24-2012, 12:13 AM
AVS Special Member
 
AmishFury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: too close to kentucky
Posts: 1,165
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

Liked the film. Wanted to love it, but ended up liking it (enough to buy the BD).

same... saw trailer, thought "this is going to be awesome", went to see it, thought it was pretty good
AmishFury is offline  
post #10 of 50 Old 05-24-2012, 07:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
DM2006RI's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,983
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I liked it -- the 3-D was actually excellent -- but it really came down to the lead being so one-note. Put another actor other than Taylor Kitsch in there and it's entirely possible the film didn't disappoint financially the way it did.
DM2006RI is offline  
post #11 of 50 Old 05-24-2012, 07:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
cobolisdead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Prattville, AL
Posts: 1,960
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 13
I didn't catch the film in Theaters, but I have the 3D version pre-ordered on Amazon. I can't wait to check it out!

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
cobolisdead is offline  
post #12 of 50 Old 05-24-2012, 10:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
raoul_duke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,301
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

Stunning film, 99% of people that hated it never actually saw it.

+1.

Reminded me so much of Flash Gordon, which I love.
raoul_duke is offline  
post #13 of 50 Old 05-24-2012, 10:58 AM
AVS Special Member
 
DM2006RI's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,983
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by cobolisdead View Post

I didn't catch the film in Theaters, but I have the 3D version pre-ordered on Amazon. I can't wait to check it out!

You won't be disappointed by the 3-D, it's outstanding IMO.
DM2006RI is offline  
post #14 of 50 Old 05-24-2012, 11:11 AM
AVS Special Member
 
giantchicken's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,566
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
This movie will develop more of a following when people give it a shot on video. I enjoyed it and I wish it could have earned enough money to get a sequel.

PETER JACKSON: The theatrical versions are the definitive versions.
giantchicken is offline  
post #15 of 50 Old 05-24-2012, 11:34 AM
Senior Member
 
Neil S. Bulk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Southern California
Posts: 245
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by raoul_duke View Post

+1.

Reminded me so much of Flash Gordon, which I love.

Exactly! It's the sci-fi movie I've always wanted.
Neil S. Bulk is offline  
post #16 of 50 Old 05-24-2012, 02:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MEC2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Frisco, TX (D/FW area)
Posts: 1,267
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Some of the worst promotions I have ever seen were for this film. The biggest shot in their own foot was releasing this through Disney. Just flogging the Disney logo in the promos made it seem far less like sci-fi and far more like JarJar Goes To Mars.

I plan to give this a shot when it comes out...
MEC2 is offline  
post #17 of 50 Old 05-24-2012, 03:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Brandon B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: LA lalalalala
Posts: 3,973
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEC2 View Post

The biggest shot in their own foot was releasing this through Disney.

??

It wasn't "released through" Disney, it was a Disney picture all the way through. Or did you mean under the Walt Disney Pictures brand instead of under one of their other studios?

On the bright side, the marketing exec responsible for the poorly handled publicity for the movie was let go.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/enter...ecutive/51401/
Brandon B is offline  
post #18 of 50 Old 05-24-2012, 03:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MEC2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Frisco, TX (D/FW area)
Posts: 1,267
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon B View Post

??

It wasn't "released through" Disney, it was a Disney picture all the way through. Or did you mean under the Walt Disney Pictures brand instead of under one of their other studios?

Absolutely. Let's face it, when you see the Disney logo, you aren't thinking of Omar Sharif riding to the well... the marketing looked childish, felt childish, and as I am not a child, I did not have any interest in seeing it. Only after reading about it and it's sci-fi history as well as a setting synopsis (Civil War soldier ends up on Mars) did it generate any interest. The Disney promos made it look like another ADHD friendly CGI twitchfest.

Quote:


On the bright side, the marketing exec responsible for the poorly handled publicity for the movie was let go.

Good, he earned it...
MEC2 is offline  
post #19 of 50 Old 05-24-2012, 04:03 PM
 
dvdmike007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 8,687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEC2 View Post

Absolutely. Let's face it, when you see the Disney logo, you aren't thinking of Omar Sharif riding to the well... the marketing looked childish, felt childish, and as I am not a child, I did not have any interest in seeing it. Only after reading about it and it's sci-fi history as well as a setting synopsis (Civil War soldier ends up on Mars) did it generate any interest. The Disney promos made it look like another ADHD friendly CGI twitchfest.



Good, he earned it...

You are so right kids don't see movies, its lucky no kids saw Star Wars
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #20 of 50 Old 05-24-2012, 04:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Sean_O's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Carlsbad, CA.
Posts: 1,539
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

You are so right kids don't see movies, its lucky no kids saw Star Wars

Hmmm, you aren't actually defending this failed marketing campaign are you? They had it wrong from the start in dropping "Of Mars" from the title. A friend told me he had no idea it was even a Sci Fi movie based on the posters he'd seen. The only good poster they had was the one for the 3D IMAX release.

If anything deserves to carry the blame for the poor box office, it's the marketing campaign.
Sean_O is offline  
post #21 of 50 Old 05-24-2012, 04:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Deviation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Posts: 2,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
The director of the film, Andrew Stanton, was responsible for the trailers, not the marketing executive that was let go. Staton basically had veto power over most aspects of the marketing campaign and the guy who let go wasn't even the person who was in charge of marketing for that particular project (that person was so frustrated with everything going on behind the scenes that they resigned).

But it's probably best not to go to much into the marketing behind this movie - if you're curious, the information is out there and only a search away. Certain people got worked up about it in the original thread for this title and it ended up being deleted.

This film ended up being a lot better than the marketing led me to believe it would be. Even if it's wildly successful on home video, however, the extent of the failure at the box office probably means there will never be a sequel, unfortunately. Though I'd certainly love to be proven wrong.
Deviation is offline  
post #22 of 50 Old 05-24-2012, 04:45 PM
 
dvdmike007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 8,687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean_O View Post

Hmmm, you aren't actually defending this failed marketing campaign are you? They had it wrong from the start in dropping "Of Mars" from the title. A friend told me he had no idea it was even a Sci Fi movie based on the posters he'd seen. The only good poster they had was the one for the 3D IMAX release.

If anything deserves to carry the blame for the poor box office, it's the marketing campaign.

People can't make their own minds up? Jack and Jill was really a better trailer?
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #23 of 50 Old 05-25-2012, 07:08 AM
Member
 
jd371's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 27
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean_O View Post

Hmmm, you aren't actually defending this failed marketing campaign are you? They had it wrong from the start in dropping "Of Mars" from the title. A friend told me he had no idea it was even a Sci Fi movie based on the posters he'd seen. The only good poster they had was the one for the 3D IMAX release.

If anything deserves to carry the blame for the poor box office, it's the marketing campaign.

The reason they dropped "Of Mars" from the title is they didn't want another movie with Mars in the title after the flop "Mars Needs Moms" from the year before.
Totally agree that they dropped the ball on marketing of this movie.

jd371 is offline  
post #24 of 50 Old 05-25-2012, 07:42 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RobertR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: California
Posts: 6,116
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 142 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd371 View Post

The reason they dropped "Of Mars" from the title is they didn't want another movie with Mars in the title after the flop "Mars Needs Moms" from the year before.

That was asinine, moronic thinking ("oh, the content of MNM or the "needs moms" part of the title couldn't possibly have had anything to do with the movie's failure. It HAD to be Mars in the title"). Idiots.
RobertR is online now  
post #25 of 50 Old 05-25-2012, 06:38 PM
Senior Member
 
vazel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 449
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

Stunning film, 99% of people that hated it never actually saw it.

I don't see how anyone that's a fan of old pulp adventures can hate this movie. I thought it captured the feel of that sort of fiction really well. I really enjoyed it and have my copy pre-ordered from Best Buy with the bonus disc.
vazel is offline  
post #26 of 50 Old 05-27-2012, 10:49 AM
 
dvdmike007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 8,687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean_O View Post

Hmmm, you aren't actually defending this failed marketing campaign are you? They had it wrong from the start in dropping "Of Mars" from the title. A friend told me he had no idea it was even a Sci Fi movie based on the posters he'd seen. The only good poster they had was the one for the 3D IMAX release.

If anything deserves to carry the blame for the poor box office, it's the marketing campaign.

I made my own mind up and went and saw it, I never need to be told by marketing shame others in the world do really.

I thought the trailers were fine, there have been worse trailers in the past year
I don't think the pulp thing sells to Joe six pack plain and simple.

I have hundreds of people each week come in to my shop and refuse to rent amazing movies as they are over 2 hours long, are they right?

Make your own mind up, On Stranger Tides had a bad trailer ad worse reviews and was a billion dollar movie.
Your argument means nothing really except you have no faith in people to go beyond a trailer and that is really sad you think that.

Calling it John Carter of Mars would not have helped it, people will or wont see it, they wanted Adam Sandler in drag and that is what they saw.
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #27 of 50 Old 05-27-2012, 02:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Sean_O's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Carlsbad, CA.
Posts: 1,539
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hey Mike people make up their minds based on the information they are given, and most people don't live and breath movies.

Your opinion seems to be that nothing would have been better than the way they marketed this movie, despite it being one of the biggest box office busts of all time yet those who have actually seen it are of the opinion that the film didn't deserve returns nearly as poor as it got.
Sean_O is offline  
post #28 of 50 Old 05-27-2012, 03:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Morpheo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Montreal by day, Paris by night...
Posts: 6,538
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 98 Post(s)
Liked: 295
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

I made my own mind up and went and saw it, I never need to be told by marketing shame others in the world do really.

[...]

Calling it John Carter of Mars would not have helped it, people will or wont see it, they wanted Adam Sandler in drag and that is what they saw.

Sandler's movie wasn't exactly a resounding success either, which I haven't seen cause I hate Sandler's *cough* humor.

I don't consider myself a 'joe-six-pack' and I think I'm reasonably intelligent. Yet, I had no interest in seeing JC. I guess if the marketing campaign had been better and better targeted, Disney could have picked my interest a little more. It didn't. From what I've read and heard though, John Carter is a mediocre movie. Mediocre in the true sense of term, not really bad but not really good. Word of mouth was inexistant cause people weren't interested, they didn't care. Frankly, this story still doesn't interest me, but I'll rent it. I certainly don't need a marketing campaign to make my mind up, but sometimes it does help. Is ID4 a great movie? Nope. But its intriguing ads generated buzz and hype - in the end people wanted to see it, and they went.

When I see a trailer for a movie I've never heard of, if that trailer does its job then it will at least pick my interest. That never happened with John Carter.
Morpheo is online now  
post #29 of 50 Old 05-27-2012, 04:26 PM
 
dvdmike007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 8,687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean_O View Post

Hey Mike people make up their minds based on the information they are given, and most people don't live and breath movies.

Your opinion seems to be that nothing would have been better than the way they marketed this movie, despite it being one of the biggest box office busts of all time yet those who have actually seen it are of the opinion that the film didn't deserve returns nearly as poor as it got.

Battleship had a good trailer
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #30 of 50 Old 05-27-2012, 04:31 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Partyslammer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,266
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post

Sandler's movie wasn't exactly a resounding success either, which I haven't seen cause I hate Sandler's *cough* humor.

I don't consider myself a 'joe-six-pack' and I think I'm reasonably intelligent. Yet, I had no interest in seeing JC. I guess if the marketing campaign had been better and better targeted, Disney could have picked my interest a little more. It didn't. From what I've read and heard though, John Carter is a mediocre movie. Mediocre in the true sense of term, not really bad but not really good. Word of mouth was inexistant cause people weren't interested, they didn't care. Frankly, this story still doesn't interest me, but I'll rent it. I certainly don't need a marketing campaign to make my mind up, but sometimes it does help. Is ID4 a great movie? Nope. But its intriguing ads generated buzz and hype - in the end people wanted to see it, and they went.

When I see a trailer for a movie I've never heard of, if that trailer does its job then it will at least pick my interest. That never happened with John Carter.

Agree with everything you say although I don't think the movie is quite down to the level of "mediocre." On a scale of 1 - 10, 10 being best, I'd give it a 5. "Average."
Partyslammer is offline  
Reply Blu-ray Software

Tags
John Carter Two Disc Blu Ray Dvd Combo

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off