John Carter - Page 8 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #211 of 544 Old 03-11-2012, 07:19 PM
CIH USER
 
Franin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 17,593
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 299 Post(s)
Liked: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waboman View Post



FWIW, it has made over $100 million with overseas taken into account. It's only been out for a weekend. Lets not be too quick to write it off just yet. I for one would like to see a sequel.

That's good.

_________________________

Frank
Franin is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #212 of 544 Old 03-11-2012, 07:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Ron Temple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose CA
Posts: 8,478
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulpa View Post

The two reasons I've heard for dropping "of Mars" was 1) Mars Needs Moms failed, so Mars titles are verboten for now and 2) they did some tests or something and found that including "of Mars" didn't trend well with female moviegoers.

Both of those sound insane, but they also sound like they're in the wheelhouse for a Hollywood marketing department.

Stanton reasoning...maybe bs...was that until this movie completed with the definite credo "John Carter of Mars", it wasn't as dramatic.

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Spoiler  
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
the end credits explicitly states "John Carter of Mars"

I don't lurk as much as I used to and I NEVER listen. Comes from being old and cynical.

Ron Temple is offline  
post #213 of 544 Old 03-11-2012, 10:57 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Tulpa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 10,026
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 59
BTW, today's Foxtrot has a pretty funny John Carter cartoon.

Don't believe everything on the Interwebz! A duck's quack DOES echo!
Tulpa is offline  
post #214 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 12:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
thehun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Wine country CA
Posts: 7,346
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Temple View Post

No question...the ending plus the dialog between JC and Matai Shang in the 3rd act was very well done and intrigueing. It's so well setup for continuance. The Therns are setup to be very interesting bad guys with tough abilities to overcome. Since the archetype needs overwhelming odds, then the ending plus the foe should draw interest.

I'm thinking this one will do better internationally than domestically. Smarter audience maybe?

Well ask Stallone if they smart or not, the Europeans still cheered his films when he was already written off here. Some movies simply do better there then here, and it hard to predict which.

sent via Morse code...........

The Hun
thehun is offline  
post #215 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 12:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
thehun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Wine country CA
Posts: 7,346
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulpa View Post

The two reasons I've heard for dropping "of Mars" was 1) Mars Needs Moms failed, so Mars titles are verboten for now and 2) they did some tests or something and found that including "of Mars" didn't trend well with female moviegoers.

Both of those sound insane, but they also sound like they're in the wheelhouse for a Hollywood marketing department.

Actually in this insane world we live in they are both plausible.

sent via Morse code...........

The Hun
thehun is offline  
post #216 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 06:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
SbWillie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: War Eagle,Oklahoma
Posts: 3,543
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waboman View Post

Yes, it was good. Both my kids and I enjoyed it. A very fun movie, IMO. Will you find the meaning of life hidden in there? Of course not. But you will find 2-hours of good ol' fashioned entertainment.

FWIW, it has made over $100 million with overseas taken into account. It's only been out for a weekend. Lets not be too quick to write it off just yet. I for one would like to see a sequel.

I am not planning on seeing it but my nephews (ranging from 17 to 20) loved it....the horrid looking 3D conversion is what is holding me back more than anything.
SbWillie is offline  
post #217 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 08:26 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Matt_Stevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 13,818
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Stanton is doing what he is told in regards to the no "Mars" in the title. That was Disney marketing thinking it would turn off women. Well, women stayed away last weekend so they ****ed up. The worst campaign in history.

The film needs to earn an astounding 500 million to break even. Yes, 500 million. It cannot possibly come close to that number.

A shame. Some friends of mine saw this Saturday and loved it. Told me it was a blast, despite the annoying 3D.

Vimeo is the home of the Super8 Shooter...
http://vimeo.com/super8shooter
Matt_Stevens is offline  
post #218 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 09:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
IAM4UK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 6,052
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 24
For Disney to take on a project like this that "needs to earn an astounding 500 million to break even" seems quite foolish. That's setting themselves up for failure. Maybe a few movies per year in the past several years have accomplished that kind of blockbuster status, right?

A.L.a.E.o.t.U.S., as proven 3/21 - never forget.
Defend liberty.
Knowledge isn't Truth; it's just mindless agreement.
IAM4UK is offline  
post #219 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 09:51 AM
Advanced Member
 
billybobg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Francis Utah
Posts: 734
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 24
If I ruled the world, I might have dropped Mars altogether as there is too much known scientifically about Mars today. MNM was animated and could be easily dismissed for using Mars in the plot. Even though ERB wrote his novels based on Mars, in todays world I believe showing large scale civilizations on Mars to be pretty far fetched. Then again, we have vampires, werewolves, etc in movies along with numerous other far fetched plot lines so I guess I'll just have to go my usual route and suspend rationality and enjoy the movie for what it is.
billybobg is offline  
post #220 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 10:12 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Tulpa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 10,026
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 59
The Mars setting was pretty engrained in the novels, with an entire culture derived from it. It would be pretty hard to set it somewhere else and keep the overall story.

Don't believe everything on the Interwebz! A duck's quack DOES echo!
Tulpa is offline  
post #221 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 11:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ron Temple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose CA
Posts: 8,478
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt_Stevens View Post


A shame. Some friends of mine saw this Saturday and loved it. Told me it was a blast, despite the annoying 3D.

That's pretty much it in a nutshell. If you're on the fence, go see this in 2D. It's going to look outstanding on blu.

Note: Stanton took a few liberties with JCs jumping ability. It was very fun and the dude sure can jump.

I don't lurk as much as I used to and I NEVER listen. Comes from being old and cynical.

Ron Temple is offline  
post #222 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 11:09 AM
Advanced Member
 
DERG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brown City, Michigan
Posts: 627
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 13
My brother was a sophomore in HS (1963) when he was given a copy of "The Gods of Mars" (Ballantine Books $0.50 back then) by a friend. Today, between the two of us, we've read nearly every Edgar Rice Burroughs novel in print.

Through the years there has been several sorry attempts to bring ERB novels to film (remember Doug McClure?) that were down right awful. And even Johnny Weissmuller's "Tarzan" films, while entertaining, failed & were far from Burroughs' vision of Tarzan. So, when "John Carter" was announced we were, naturally, a bit skeptical. After seeing "John Carter" on Friday we couldn't be happier. Finally, Andrew Stanton has brought Edgar Rice Burroughs' great story telling to film.
DERG is offline  
post #223 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 11:13 AM
Advanced Member
 
DERG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brown City, Michigan
Posts: 627
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulpa View Post

The Mars setting was pretty engrained in the novels, with an entire culture derived from it. It would be pretty hard to set it somewhere else and keep the overall story.

Very true.
DERG is offline  
post #224 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 11:19 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
oink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Shuloch
Posts: 26,553
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 818
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

Kids don't know and/or don't care a damn thing about John Carter From Mars or The Lone Ranger.

Why would Disney spend so much coin on a couple of films that would appeal primarily to old codgers (AVSers?)???
Someone should be fired....if for nothing else as a matter of principle.

Like I said above:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/movi...fice-bomb.html

A.P.S. deserve our protection....join the cause today!
oink is offline  
post #225 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 11:22 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
archiguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 18,345
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 423 Post(s)
Liked: 704
Quote:
Originally Posted by billybobg View Post

If I ruled the world, I might have dropped Mars altogether as there is too much known scientifically about Mars today. MNM was animated and could be easily dismissed for using Mars in the plot. Even though ERB wrote his novels based on Mars, in todays world I believe showing large scale civilizations on Mars to be pretty far fetched.

That's why they set the movie in the book's original time period. Obviously, you couldn't set the movie in present day because we know too much, but back then people knew very little about the planet Mars other than it appeared red in the sky.
archiguy is offline  
post #226 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 11:30 AM
Advanced Member
 
DERG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brown City, Michigan
Posts: 627
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

Like I said above:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/movi...fice-bomb.html

I don't know if $30M in the US + $100M abroad = $130M is a failure... yet.
DERG is offline  
post #227 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 11:39 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Tulpa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 10,026
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 59
It didn't earn $100 million abroad, only $70 million.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/new...s-lorax-298377

While it's nothing to sniff at, it's down from expectations for a movie of this budget ($250 million, plus marketing.)

Quote:


Disney is under no illusions that it's out of the woods financially despite a slightly bettter-than-hoped for global performance. John Carter cost $250 million to produce plus a marketing spend that puts the total pricetag well north of $300 million and probably closer to $350 million.

The hope is that it does well next weekend, because the weekend after is when The Hunger Games opens. If it doesn't pick up momentum by then, it's probably done.

Don't believe everything on the Interwebz! A duck's quack DOES echo!
Tulpa is offline  
post #228 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 11:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
GoCaboNow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,158
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 205 Post(s)
Liked: 346
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

Like I said above:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/movi...fice-bomb.html

They are also panning Kate Upton as well...

Location: Beaverton, Oregon
My Dedicated Home Theater Room
GoCaboNow is offline  
post #229 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 12:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
cinema13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,810
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 168 Post(s)
Liked: 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by billybobg View Post

If I ruled the world, I might have dropped Mars altogether as there is too much known scientifically about Mars today. MNM was animated and could be easily dismissed for using Mars in the plot. Even though ERB wrote his novels based on Mars, in todays world I believe showing large scale civilizations on Mars to be pretty far fetched. Then again, we have vampires, werewolves, etc in movies along with numerous other far fetched plot lines so I guess I'll just have to go my usual route and suspend rationality and enjoy the movie for what it is.

Well, if memory serves, ERB addressed this...I seem to remember some device (maybe a telescope?) that allowed JC to view Earth....and what he saw were dinosaurs. So he may also be on Mars in the distant past. (Earth time)

cinema13 is online now  
post #230 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 12:11 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 19,895
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1435 Post(s)
Liked: 1029
Quote:
Originally Posted by DERG View Post

So, when "John Carter" was announced we were, naturally, a bit skeptical.

It was the other way 'round for me: when Stanton was announced as the director, I assumed it would be an animated pic from Pixar and was relieved that one of my favourite novels from my youth was in the hands of good storytellers. My relief turned to skepticism after seeing the promos. Will reserve judgement till I see the film.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #231 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 12:37 PM
Advanced Member
 
DERG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brown City, Michigan
Posts: 627
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

It was the other way 'round for me: when Stanton was announced as the director, I assumed it would be an animated pic from Pixar and was relieved that one of my favourite novels from my youth was in the hands of good storytellers. My relief turned to skepticism after seeing the promos. Will reserve judgement till I see the film.

We seem to be opposites. Prior to this film I had no idea who Stanton was. But when I first saw early trailers I felt encouraged.

If this was one of your favorite novels of your youth, you won't be disappointed.
DERG is offline  
post #232 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 12:43 PM
Advanced Member
 
DERG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brown City, Michigan
Posts: 627
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by cinema13 View Post

Well, if memory serves, ERB addressed this...I seem to remember some device (maybe a telescope?) that allowed JC to view Earth....and what he saw were dinosaurs. So he may also be on Mars in the distant past. (Earth time)

Your memory serves you correctly but I could only guess which novel that was in. Perhaps his last Barsoom novel, "John Carter of Mars" written in the late '40s but published in 1964.
DERG is offline  
post #233 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 12:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Ron Temple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose CA
Posts: 8,478
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Also, not addressed in the film and I can't remember when ERB mentioned it, but Barsoomians live for 1000 years and then to even things up, he mentions that JC or Uncle Jack (not really a relation) has been around his family for generations and always 30 years old. Don't know if that will ever make it in if there's more films since it kind of dismisses his backstory as shown. I always thought that was a cool touch.

I don't lurk as much as I used to and I NEVER listen. Comes from being old and cynical.

Ron Temple is offline  
post #234 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 02:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Waboman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Terraforming Planet Wabo
Posts: 7,256
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 483 Post(s)
Liked: 776
Quote:
Originally Posted by DERG View Post


I don't know if $30M in the US + $100M abroad = $130M is a failure... yet.

It was a $100 million total. With combined domestic and overseas takes.

__________________________________________

When life gives you limes, make margaritas
Waboman is online now  
post #235 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 03:10 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
oink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Shuloch
Posts: 26,553
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 818
It remains to be seen whether it makes its $$$ back (Disney spent a ton on marketing for this thing).

I think, at this point, we can safely say it ain't gonna be a blockbuster.

A.P.S. deserve our protection....join the cause today!
oink is offline  
post #236 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 03:29 PM
Advanced Member
 
DERG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brown City, Michigan
Posts: 627
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waboman View Post

It was a $100 million combined domestic and overseas totals.

OK, $100M. I don't know if $100M is a failure... yet.

So, how is "Blockbuster" defined? Seems like $100M for 3 days might qualify. But, is there a ratio of investment to profit standard or something to go by? Seems there are plenty calling $100M for a weekend a bomb. So, what's the standard?

True, the film has got to catch on just to brake even if the $250M cost figure is accurate.
DERG is offline  
post #237 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 03:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Ron Temple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose CA
Posts: 8,478
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by DERG View Post

OK, $100M. I don't know if $100M is a failure... yet.

So, how is "Blockbuster" defined? Seems like $100M for 3 days might qualify. But, is there a ratio of investment to profit standard or something to go by? Seems there are plenty calling $100M for a weekend a bomb. So, what's the standard?

True, the film has got to catch on just to brake even if the $250M cost figure is accurate.

It was mentioned earlier...2.5 times the production cost is the break even point for the studio. The audience reaction that I've noted has been positive, but the show I attended was less than half full (400 seats) and mostly comprised of older couples, some single men 45+ and some parents with kids...mostly older folks. The 15-30 demo was fairly absent. They have no clue as to what John Carter is about and unless there's a groundswell of positive word of mouth, this film has no chance in the states.

I don't lurk as much as I used to and I NEVER listen. Comes from being old and cynical.

Ron Temple is offline  
post #238 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 03:43 PM
Advanced Member
 
DERG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brown City, Michigan
Posts: 627
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Temple View Post

Also, not addressed in the film and I can't remember when ERB mentioned it, but Barsoomians live for 1000 years and then to even things up, he mentions that JC or Uncle Jack (not really a relation) has been around his family for generations and always 30 years old. Don't know if that will ever make it in if there's more films since it kind of dismisses his backstory as shown. I always thought that was a cool touch.

Good point. Burroughs seem to do this in novels in other series as well; Amtor (Venus) & Pellucidar (at the earth's core) to name a few.
DERG is offline  
post #239 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 03:54 PM
Advanced Member
 
DERG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brown City, Michigan
Posts: 627
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Temple View Post

It was mentioned earlier...2.5 times the production cost is the break even point for the studio. The audience reaction that I've noted has been positive, but the show I attended was less than half full (400 seats) and mostly comprised of older couples, some single men 45+ and some parents with kids...mostly older folks. The 15-30 demo was fairly absent. They have no clue as to what John Carter is about and unless there's a groundswell of positive word of mouth, this film has no chance in the states.

Good to know. I'll make a note of that.

We went to an IMAX 3D @ 4:30PM on Friday. I'd guess the theater could hold 250-300 but not sure exactly. While the preceding show was exiting I would guess around 50 people walked out. Our show had a similar number as well. Add to that we over heard several people saying that they had seen it @ the mid-night viewing. Like us, excited Burroughs fans. Very few under 21 & mostly 40 & up.
DERG is offline  
post #240 of 544 Old 03-12-2012, 07:44 PM
Member
 
Vracer111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 137
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

It was the other way 'round for me: when Stanton was announced as the director, I assumed it would be an animated pic from Pixar and was relieved that one of my favourite novels from my youth was in the hands of good storytellers. My relief turned to skepticism after seeing the promos. Will reserve judgement till I see the film.

Please do reserve judgement until seeing the movie. The Disney advertising of this movie is not done well...there are fan made trailers that are better IMO. I had not really paid attention or known about this movie prior to 2 weeks ago when I received an e-mail from DMR advertising the movie...and oh boy was that advertising horrible (and I have no experience with the source material whatsoever). The layout of the advertisment made it look like some hokey made for TV Sci-Fi channel movie aimed for teens... promptly deleted it! LOL

I will put it this way, John Carter is better than Avatar for me because of the following: 1) It's not centered around a somewhat preachy environmental theme 2) it has more emotional impact than Avatar 3) visuals just about as impressive. 4) excellent balance of drama/humor/adventure/and action

I do like Avatar, but John Carter just seems more cohesively put together and more enjoyable to watch. I just can't watch Avatar at any time, with John Carter you could probably watch at any time, no matter how you are feeling.

John Carter is very much centered around love and loss, and the struggle to let go of the past and believe in something strong enough to fight for it. Ignore basically all the reviews and basically just go see it - in 2D if you can. I've seen it twice so far; Saturday morning in XD 3D and Sunday night in Digital 2D. The 3D was well done, but it doesn't really add anything to the movie other than an inflated ticket price...LOL

I particularly like the feel this fan made trailer gives:

Vracer111 is offline  
Reply Movies, Concerts, and Music Discussion

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