So I watched this movie last night and I didn't really have any expectations going into the movie. I did really enjoy the story and the world as well.
I thought there was actually a lot of highly done violence considering it was a disney movie.
I absolutely loved getting sucked into the world of John Carter and Barsoom.
Originally posted by Emma718
I would really like to see a sequel to John Carter because I feel like they could improve on the storyline and make it better.
You know all that stuff about Issus, and the river and whatnot that didn't make sense or come of anything? Well, it's very important in the next book. And it's pretty freakin' awesome...
They really shouldn't have made it such a huge budget movie, honestly. It was a little too much. But it's made 101 million so far worldwide... keeping fingers crossed... has it been released everywhere yet or are there still some places it hasn't opened?
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
You know all that stuff about Issus, and the river and whatnot that didn't make sense or come of anything? Well, it's very important in the next book. And it's pretty freakin' awesome...They really shouldn't have made it such a huge budget movie, honestly. It was a little too much. But it's made 101 million so far worldwide... keeping fingers crossed... has it been released everywhere yet or are there still some places it hasn't opened?
Not bad. But the production company only makes a small percantage of the overseas gross.
Originally posted by ares834
Not bad. But the production company only makes a small percantage of the overseas gross.
Standard practice is half of all grosses go back to the studio; the other half is kept by theatre owners.
We'll see if the spike in box office from Saturday continues this week, and it actually gains more audience in North America. But it is really up to the overseas markets to push this into profitability - or at least respectability. So far it's positive news there.
The Lorax has already doubled this in profits. 😄
Plus it's a better movie.
Disney can do goofy violence, like Jack Sparrow being swung around on a rope, trying furiously to skewer Davy Jones, and "scan away" at Will's Death, but John Carter is about straight on war, that's why he goes to Mars, that the whole idea of it. He comes from earth to help the good guys on mars. that's like, shoving spears into people, sword fighting that isn't, you know, the disney style of stick person, person falls, no blood.
I think that may be a dragging down factor to this film. Like, everybody on here is talking about it, but no one in RL knows anything. Plus, it's a war movie. That's going to take away a lot of people, what could've been a family movie is not, so there goes that revenue.
I think that when people heard Andrew Stanton was directing, they all thought "PIXAR!!!" and Finding Nemo and WALL-E, and really all Pixar films because those guys are very close.
But the movie wasn't a fantasy of cute noises and overcoming not that tragic of circumstances. It wasn't "Andrew Stantony" enough.
Originally posted by Robtard
Will watch part two in the theaters as well.
If there will be a part two...
Originally posted by siriuswriter
Disney can do goofy violence, like Jack Sparrow being swung around on a rope, trying furiously to skewer Davy Jones, and "scan away" at Will's Death, but John Carter is about straight on war, that's why he goes to Mars, that the whole idea of it. He comes from earth to help the good guys on mars. that's like, shoving spears into people, sword fighting that isn't, you know, the disney style of stick person, person falls, no blood.I think that may be a dragging down factor to this film.
I agree. It doesn't belong with Disney. Definitely brings it down in quality. I say lower the budget, go to Universal or something and make it a stronger PG-13 or lower the budget more and make it R. That would make me as giddy as a schoolgirl.
Originally posted by siriuswriter
Like, everybody on here is talking about it, but no one in RL knows anything.
RL? Real Life?
Originally posted by Newjak
I think for all the talk of it being Disney I thought John Carter was pretty violent and showed quite a bit of gore. At one point you see John decapitate someone while covered in blood. That doesn't scream too little violence to me.
It's not that there wasn't enough violence. It's how the violence was handled because it's Disney. Yes, it's fairly violent for Disney, but the blood was BLUE, and they sort of shy'd away from the violence. The decapitation was edited so as to almost hide the fact that he cut his head off.. and the big massacre was edited so as to remove the sound effects and to keep cutting back and forth to some flashback on Earth, thus taking the focus off of the violence.
Watch Immortals, and you'll see what I mean. That's how it should be done.
Originally posted by Patient_LeechWho cares if the blood is blue. I mean they show him busting through a monster guts and all.
It's not that there wasn't enough violence. It's how the violence was handled because it's Disney. Yes, it's fairly violent for Disney, but the blood was [b]BLUE, and they sort of shy'd away from the violence. The decapitation was edited so as to almost hide the fact that he cut his head off.. and the big massacre was edited so as to remove the sound effects and to keep cutting back and forth to some flashback on Earth, thus taking the focus off of the violence.Watch Immortals, and you'll see what I mean. That's how it should be done. [/B]
The scene when the feral aliens were all surrounding him and he was scattering there bodies with single blows, you see blood spraying everywhere.
Spoiler:
The charred remains of his wife and kid were also there.
Plus it seemed like someone was dying all the time.
I fail to see why the violence had to be this big gory mess for the violence to be good or how it would have made the movie better?
Originally posted by Patient_LeechSo the movie has to be exactly like the books?
Read the book. The first or second chapter explains how he is drawn to Mars because he is so used to war (Mars = Roman god of war). Like siriuswriter pointed out, it's kind of the core of the story. Therefore the violence shouldn't be shy'd away from.
And that's fair I've never read the books, but having not read them I don't see where showcasing mountains of gore would have made the story they were telling in the movie any better.
It doesn't need lots of gore, necessarily. But the intensity wasn't really right. Like the anti-climactic decapitation scene. That has nothing to do with the book. It just should have been drawn out a bit more, making it more compelling. And then the decapitation would have been a better pay off. It just happened too quickly, in my opinion.
I'm gonna see it again, at some point, to see how much these things bother me the second time..
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
It doesn't need lots of gore, necessarily. But the intensity wasn't really right. Like the anti-climactic decapitation scene. That has nothing to do with the book. It just should have been drawn out a bit more, making it more compelling. And then the decapitation would have been a better pay off. It just happened too quickly, in my opinion.I'm gonna see it again, at some point, to see how much these things bother me the second time..
Me too. It's a better way to examine the structure of the film, the second time around. Like the arena sequence; that's something I would have expected to be in the first third or half of the film, instead of where it got placed.