If that had been the title of the movie mistitled John Carter, I am confident that it would be doing much better at the box office. It was the title of the book on which it was based and, unlike Disney, Edgar Rice Burroughs knew how to sell books. It would help as well, of course, if the trailers had offered ample views of Lynn Collins rather than Mars monsters. It would have brought in the adolescent males by the hordes, just as DiCaprio brought the female tweens into Titanic.
We took the afternoon off (from normal weekend chores) to go see it at the matinee in 3-D IMAX, and we had a great time. Yes, it’s harder to suspend disbelief about the features of the planet than it was in E. R. Burroughs’ day, but it’s still a great story. Sadly, the theater was almost empty, both because of Disney’s awful marketing, and because it was competing with the opening weekend of a movie about teens hunting each other down.
I was amused to hear at the end someone talking about how it was a rip off of Star Wars. Obviously, whoever said it had no concept of what George Lucas was reading as a boy. I imagine that it was pitched as “Star Wars meets Gladiator,” but it’s a lot more than that. I highly recommend, and I particularly recommend it for families, who want a great role model for their daughters.
I really enjoyed the movie too, and agree with those who say it was better than any of the Star Wars prequels. I think years from now people will keep discovering it on DVD and wondering how they missed this little gem.
The sad part is that Disney’s bad marketing decisions have turned it into a major financial loss, so a sequel is unlikely.
The sad part is that Disney’s bad marketing decisions have turned it into a major financial loss, so a sequel is unlikely.
A bit of Disney history. What do Fantasia, Pinocchio, and Bambi have in common?
They all lost money on their first release.
There’s more to the movie business than instant gratification. DVD sales haven’t even started yet.
Also, the movie is doing much better overseas. Russia and China are the best markets. Asia in general is doing well?
Different marketing campaign overseas? Could be — that’s happened before. In the US, Disney mis-marketed “The Incredibles” as if it were a comedy, with their entire campaign built around fat jokes. Fortunately, the movie and the Pixar brand were strong enough to overcome that. Compare that to the way the movie was marketed in Japan, though:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Si5oVMaIqg8
I really enjoyed the movie too, and agree with those who say it was better than any of the Star Wars prequels.
Talk about damning with faint praise.
Well, yeah, I guess that bar couldn’t be any lower unless we buried it in a ditch. I’d say I liked it much better than Avatar, but I didn’t like Avatar a bit either.
I’m trying to find an appropriate comparison. I’d say it holds up pretty well against all of these: http://www.imdb.com/genre/sci_fi, like Inception, In Time, X-Men, V for Vendetta, Transformers: Dark of the Moon, etc.
I saw it, and I liked it. Frankly I don’t understand what all the noise is about, and I wish there would be sequels.
The change of name is understandable, as there was a B-Movie attempt in 2009 with Traci Lords, of all people, in the title roll. I skimmed it and it was…not good. Horrid, actually.
Hey, I like Traci Lords. Have you read her autobiography “Underneath it All”? Of course I bought it to fend off any feminist claims that men don’t read books written by women. It has been most successful in that regard.
Princess of Mars is still available on Netflix Instant Watch.
Why would you want to fend off any feminazi claims? Just give, ’em the one finger salute and move on.
Why would you want to fend off any feminazi claims?
Because the way he does it is much more satisfying than a one finger salute.
I saw the first 20 minutes, “pirated” and convinced my brother, the only other person I know who likes Sci-Fi in anyway within driving distance, to go with me.
I liked it, A LOT!
I ever read the books, but I know that these are legend, I have a grudge against Conan, because Robert Jordan took them over, but bro trusts my judgment and we watched it, just in standard IMax, still a bit more pricey, which actually makes me mad, I tend to stand up in IMAX theaters in zoom scenes and when I realize i’m doing so, I suffer fear of falling, but that’s besides the point.
the beginning of the movie kinda doesn’t make sense, I can explain easily, but so can most anyone, and then you get to the story, and it was very well done in my opinion, and anyone with a touch of enjoyment Sci-Fi, In my opinion, would like John Carter.
Maybe movies should have Like buttons, and “block” buttons. I thinks this one would have a lot of likes.
Also, as for the “$200 million” Loss thing. Disney is Notorious for having the dirtiest accounting in the industry, so don’t believe it, If John Carter hits 100 mil, I bet, there will be a sequal, if there isn’t, then Disney deliberately tanked it to screw a lot of other people over in prep for The Avengers which is rolling out like a square wheeled freight engine.
Wrt movies having “block” buttons and like buttons, try http://www.jinni.com. It works suprisingly well for recommendations
G’day,
As I said before I iked it a lot and my wife who is not an SF fan enjoyed it too. In fact just about everyone I know rated it from good to excellent. The title should have been “John Carter: Princess of Mars” . The Disney marketing officials should hang their head in shame.
ta
Ralph
Uh, Ralph, you mean “John Carter and the princess of Mars”. Your current title would attract a niche market.
The way that the studio failed to promote it, and the glee with which industry types seem to be reporting its failure at the box office, leads me to wonder if there’s some undercurrent of personal vendetta. Did the director or the producer piss someone off?
I think you might have hit on something Trimegistus. For example, the director Andrew Stanton is openly Christian. From this interview with him about his Wall-E movie:
I haven’t watched John Carter (yet), but this could in itself explain your observation.
It might be because Andrew Stanton’s from Pixar.
A few years ago, Pixar got tired of Disney mis-marketing their films and took control of their own marketing back from Disney. There were some hurt feelings at the time. It was reported that Disney marketing people were hoping and expecting Pixar to get their comeuppance on the next film. That didn’t quite happen.
One curious thing about John Carter was the merchandising. Disney made the unusual decision that there would be no John Carter merchandise at all, except for the high-end “collector’s market.”
I hadn’t noticed the lack of merchandise, but that is odd. You’d expect to see McDonald’s toys by now as part of the marketing at least. Perhaps someone at the top decide to bury this movie early on. Smells a little like corporate politics.
The heirs to the Burroughs estate no longer hold any copyright claim on Burroughs’ works but they claim an extant trademark on the characters themselves. With the trademark claim they sue anyone attempting any derivative work of the characters. Sounds dubious legally, but that is nonetheless the strategy of the heirs. That is why you see no John Carter merchandise.
Very dubious legally, as the Supremes have already ruled that you can’t trademark something that has already entered public domain. My guess is that they have been lucky that no one has challenged them in court yet.
“Superman”is trademarked even though the Max Fleischer Superman cartoons have been in the public domain for some time. Same with Bugs Bunny. The fact that you can freely copy the original work doesn’t mean you have the right to create new or derivative works with a trademarked character.
Same with Sherlock Holmes, Tarzan, and (I’m pretty sure) John Carter. Disney paid the ERB estate for a license. They wouldn’t have done that if it wasn’t necessary.
I didn’t know the real purpose of copyright law was to ensure that the author’s great grandchildren didn’t have to find gainful employment. I mean what exactly is in public domain then, if not the characters (names and descriptions), locations (again, names and descriptions), and plot of the given work?
Trademarks and copyrights are two different things and governed by different law. For what it’s worth, I think trademark law in the USA is even more screwed up than copyright and patent law.
“Uh, Ralph, you mean “John Carter and the princess of Mars”. Your current title would attract a niche market.”
Ha ha, good one Karl.
It makes no sense to call the movie Princess of Mars – the Dejah Thoris role amounted to little more than a cameo, maybe five minutes of screen time.
What does making sense have to do with it? Since when do movie titles have to make sense? It still would have been better marketing.
Seemed like more than five minutes to me, but maybe I was just the typical male who in the intervening parts couldn’t get that actress out of my head…
Anyway, why not include “A” before “Princess of Mars”, sorta like Burroughs did? 🙂
This would have been my preferred title:
_Edgar Rice Burroughs’_ –
“A Princess of Mars”
I.e. with italic on his name leading to the larger case, unitalicized and quoted title from the original book. Just my two bits.
“The Hunger Games” isn’t a movie about teens hunting each other down, that’s just the hook. I think the popularity of this book/movie franchise is a great thing because it is introducing the concept of totalitarianism to the next generation. While our politicians are trying to stir up class warfare among rich and poor, this story is showing youth what real class warfare looks like. While our politicians are trying to tell us that welfare programs are good for us, this story is showing youth that every handout comes with strings attached.
I haven’t heard of the book before the movie was released. Its only been this weekend that I gathered it was a series. Trent, your review is enough to make me get the books and go through them. Thanks in advance.
Seconding Trent on the movie plotline. The Hunger Games Trilogy was a great read as well. Heard a review that called the people who lived in The Capital “The 1%” and rolled my eyes.
Yes, Hunger Games is flying under the Left’s radar, just like District 9.
Would the fact that the source material is public domain have anything to do with the lack (I’m sorry, but if they REALLY gave the marketing people 100 million to promote this movie, it was all spent on hookers and coke) of promotion? I mean anyone can make a movie (or toys and video games) based on this stuff, so Disney isn’t likely to get anything exclusive (except for what is exactly in the movie) out of the deal. A Thark doll that fits the description in the book for instance, would look quite similar to the ones in the movie, yet still might be legal because it is based on what Burroughs wrote. Maybe someone just realized you couldn’t create an exclusive franchise from material that is anyone’s to use.
I haven’t see this movie yet, should I reread the book first? Or did Disney use the name, the John Carter named character and the planet Mars to ‘just’ make a movie?
I just watched it and have a good opinion of it. It’s not entirely faithful to the book, having took some liberties with the plot and a few of the characters, but they did good work. It appeared to me that the movie did borrow material to a modest extent from other books in the John Carter series and changed a bit the mythos of the series.
In particular, the primary villains are considerably more dangerous and subtle than the original villains of Princess of Mars. While a lot of Carter’s enemies in the movie (and books) could be bested with his considerable physical prowess, he does face challenges that aren’t so easily dealt with.
In summary, good plot (aside from some timing problems), decent actors, lots of action, fairly faithful to the books, and good villains. A pretty good fantasy movie, I’d say. Worth seeing in theater or in rental, if you would rather wait.
Oh, I thought it was JIMMY Carter of Mars!
Just saw it and its as good or better than the Mummy movies which I found entertaining enough.
Saw it today. Best SF action/adventure film I’ve seen in a long, long time. It’s amazing how much they put in the movie. Too bad it won’t do well enough for a sequel. I’m not sure how they could put the yellow men of Mars in without having the PC police chime in, though. They probably already will–the high tech Barsoomians (kind of) being the white guys, the warlike Barsoomians being the red men.