Jump to content


Photo

John Carter


  • Please log in to reply
286 replies to this topic

#21 NBooth

NBooth

    Magpie of Ideas

  • Member
  • 2,820 posts

Posted 19 January 2011 - 08:08 PM

Seems kind of risky to be positioning it opposite another big s.f. movie, particularly one with the pedigree Prometheus has. I hope this means that, even at this early stage (filming wrapped, post-production ongoing), they're fairly confident in the movie they've got. I get the feeling that, given the relative obscurity of Burroughs lately, they would be wiser to hedge their bets. But who knows.

#22 Ryan H.

Ryan H.

    Riding the crest of a wave breaking just west of Hollywood

  • Member
  • 5,453 posts

Posted 20 January 2011 - 03:37 PM

Seems kind of risky to be positioning it opposite another big s.f. movie, particularly one with the pedigree Prometheus has.

A little bit. But from what I've been hearing about PROMETHEUS, it's unlikely to catch on with audiences in a big way.

#23 NBooth

NBooth

    Magpie of Ideas

  • Member
  • 2,820 posts

Posted 01 February 2011 - 12:19 AM

Andrew Stanton talks John Carter of Mars

FWIW, I immediately thought of Peter when I came across this quote:

“I’m not in post-production — I’m in digital principal photography now, which goes on for the rest of 2011, so I’m only halfway through the movie.”


...which suggests that Stanton is approaching John Carter as an animated movie (with all the flexibility that entails?) as much or more than he's seeing it as a live-action film.

Edited by NBooth, 01 February 2011 - 12:21 AM.


#24 Peter T Chattaway

Peter T Chattaway

    He's fictional, but you can't have everything.

  • Member
  • 29,606 posts

Posted 01 February 2011 - 11:18 AM

Yeah, I wasn't sure what to make of that quote. Does he mean the actors' schedules are so flexible that he can bring them back again and again and again, all throughout the year, to reshoot scenes at will? (Most movies have a few weeks set aside for reshoots, sure, but to call what he's doing "principal photography", digital or otherwise, suggests something bigger than that.)

#25 Thom Wade

Thom Wade

    Happy Go Lucky Meat Machine

  • Member
  • 2,949 posts

Posted 02 February 2011 - 08:02 AM

I suspect it means they have the actors saved to a hard drive so they don't have to come back for reshoots...

#26 Peter T Chattaway

Peter T Chattaway

    He's fictional, but you can't have everything.

  • Member
  • 29,606 posts

Posted 23 May 2011 - 07:39 PM

Disney-Pixar just doesn't like long movie titles. Or maybe they're still reeling from the colossal failure of Mars Needs Moms. Either way, Dark Horizons has confirmed that this film is now called John Carter, period. No of Mars, at least not in the title.

#27 NBooth

NBooth

    Magpie of Ideas

  • Member
  • 2,820 posts

Posted 15 June 2011 - 11:25 AM

No "of Mars" in the title, perhaps, but if you look just right there's an "M" on the teaser poster.

#28 SDG

SDG

    Catholic deflector shield

  • Moderator
  • 9,009 posts

Posted 15 June 2011 - 02:14 PM

No "of Mars" in the title, perhaps, but if you look just right there's an "M" on the teaser poster.

Oh yes. This poster was clearly created for the title John Carter of Mars.

#29 NBooth

NBooth

    Magpie of Ideas

  • Member
  • 2,820 posts

Posted 16 June 2011 - 01:24 PM

Andrew Stanton gives an interview on John Carter. and its source material. Includes some concept art.

A couple of quotes give a better idea what Stanton's approach is going to be:

The fact that I became infected with it as a kid and then sort of put it aside and then didn’t read it again until I was in my 20s — at which point I had become more serious about following a career in film – I was able to recognize the fact that [the book] was not as solid in the material as I had remembered. At the same time I put a lot of value on the fact that I had remembered it and that I couldn’t ever stop thinking about it. The bones of it were strong, the sediment, the soil of it, was really fertile and ready to have built from it. I felt like the more history I delved into, too, informed my view of the material; that first book was really episodic chapters he did for a magazine and then put together in book form, so it really was like a serial with a cliffhanger on each chapter. It was more like putting train cars together instead of something with a grand design. I feel like looking for that grand design was the next logical step, the thing that maybe never got done by the original author. So then the question became: How do you find the one big conceit that has a beginning, middle and end instead of these little individual train cars of episodes.


And later:

There were so many personal fantasies that were fulfilled or cathartically found by fans through those books — in other words, they used the books as a conduit to their own fantasies and the things in their own head. I’ve never had to answer this before so I’m stumbling around a bit, but the thing is that because I know this book was so much the source material, directly or indirectly, for so many things, I got intrigued by the idea of treating it as if it really was the source material in the historical sense of the term. What if this really happened? That kind of opened my eyes. I suddenly had a fresh way to see it. And it goes back, in a way, to the way we take things in when [we were young readers]. When I was a kid I really wanted to imagine it as if it was a real sequence of events that took place on the surface of Mars in another century.



#30 NBooth

NBooth

    Magpie of Ideas

  • Member
  • 2,820 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 10:21 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Rf55GTEZ_E&feature=player_embedded

It may approach cliche, but I like the use of "My Body is a Cage" since the mechanism used in the books to transport John Carter to Mars is astral projection. B) [Actually, it's better than that, since the book ends with John Carter exiled to Earth, seemingly forever separated from Deja Thoris. "Keeps me from dancing with the one I love," indeed. The more I think about it, the more perfect the choice of songs seems.]

EDIT: Ok, having watched it a couple more times I've got to say that this trailer really heightens my anticipation. It looks like it has all the trappings of a Conan-style swords and sorcery [on Mars!] but the music choice suggests a more thoughtful approach on the part of the filmmakers [yes, yes, trailers lie, but still]. The design looks good, and the Thark we glimpse (Tars Tarkas?) could have stepped off any of those pulpy covers that used to adorn the books. So count me in.

EDIT EDIT: And I realize the shot of Carter jumping towards the end of the trailer is very Superman, but what can I say? Princess of Mars did it first. :D

Edited by NBooth, 14 July 2011 - 11:07 AM.


#31 Peter T Chattaway

Peter T Chattaway

    He's fictional, but you can't have everything.

  • Member
  • 29,606 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 12:11 PM

Is it just me, or is anyone else reminded of Cowboys & Aliens while watching this trailer?

Edited by Peter T Chattaway, 14 July 2011 - 12:12 PM.


#32 NBooth

NBooth

    Magpie of Ideas

  • Member
  • 2,820 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 12:18 PM

Is it just me, or is anyone else reminded of Cowboys & Aliens while watching this trailer?


I've seen a lot of comments around the web making the connection--and I guess, with its s.f. western vibe and those airships (which really do look a bit like the alien vessels or whatever they are in 'C&A'), I can see it [EDIT: Oh, yeah, there's also the whole waking-up-in-the-desert thing]. Truth is, this movie of all movies is going to remind folks of a dozen different s.f. / sword-and-sorcery flicks--Conan, Avatar, Dune, Star Wars, just to name a few--and that might hurt it a little. Of course, with the possible exception of Conan, the Burroughs books did all of this stuff first, but I'm not sure how much of a difference that will make.

[FWIW, I think this looks far better than Cowboys & Aliens, but given my already-stated nostalgia for the books there might be a lot of wishful thinking going on here. After five or so views of the trailer I don't think that's what it is, but you never can tell. ;) ]

Edited by NBooth, 14 July 2011 - 12:32 PM.


#33 Jason Panella

Jason Panella

    "I like the quiet."

  • Member
  • 3,689 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 01:17 PM

Of course, with the possible exception of Conan, the Burroughs books did all of this stuff first, but I'm not sure how much of a difference that will make.


Yup. A problem is that Average Film Consumer will see the trailer and dismiss/enjoy without ever thinking, "Gee, I wonder if this is based on a classic bit of genre fiction, and I wonder what it might've influenced."

That said, I think it looks like a blast. Count me in.

#34 Ryan H.

Ryan H.

    Riding the crest of a wave breaking just west of Hollywood

  • Member
  • 5,453 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 05:27 PM

It looks decent, but I wonder whether audiences will go for it.

#35 NBooth

NBooth

    Magpie of Ideas

  • Member
  • 2,820 posts

Posted 15 July 2011 - 02:17 PM

It looks decent, but I wonder whether audiences will go for it.


I have my doubts, myself. Have any of these types of movies (besides Star Wars, which borrows stuff from the Barsoom novels and re-casts them so that they bear very little resemblance to the Burroughs novels anyway) really "caught on" with the general public? My impression of the Conan movies is that they're more of a cult thing, and other attempts at the genre like Kevin Sorbo's bigscreen movie a while back (Krull? Not sure) seem to vanish without making a ripple.

Stanton says he's going ahead with concept development on the sequel--as a private exercise--so as to be ready in case Disney greenlights the rest of the trilogy, and that's an encouraging sign of his enthusiasm for the project, but I think John Carter might prove to be more successful with a small number of genre fans than with the moviegoing public.

#36 winter shaker

winter shaker

    Bazooka Babushka

  • Member
  • 331 posts

Posted 15 July 2011 - 06:34 PM

I have my doubts, myself. Have any of these types of movies (besides Star Wars, which borrows stuff from the Barsoom novels and re-casts them so that they bear very little resemblance to the Burroughs novels anyway) really "caught on" with the general public? My impression of the Conan movies is that they're more of a cult thing, and other attempts at the genre like Kevin Sorbo's bigscreen movie a while back (Krull? Not sure) seem to vanish without making a ripple.



Kevin Sorbo was in Kull The Conqueror and that's from the '90s (I just heard about it yesterday). Krull came out in about 1985.



#37 NBooth

NBooth

    Magpie of Ideas

  • Member
  • 2,820 posts

Posted 16 July 2011 - 01:29 AM

I have my doubts, myself. Have any of these types of movies (besides Star Wars, which borrows stuff from the Barsoom novels and re-casts them so that they bear very little resemblance to the Burroughs novels anyway) really "caught on" with the general public? My impression of the Conan movies is that they're more of a cult thing, and other attempts at the genre like Kevin Sorbo's bigscreen movie a while back (Krull? Not sure) seem to vanish without making a ripple.



Kevin Sorbo was in Kull The Conqueror and that's from the '90s (I just heard about it yesterday). Krull came out in about 1985.


That's the one. I knew "Krull" sounded wrong. But hey! Off by one letter ain't bad. ;) (The nineties weren't so long ago, right? Right??)

Edited by NBooth, 16 July 2011 - 01:59 AM.


#38 winter shaker

winter shaker

    Bazooka Babushka

  • Member
  • 331 posts

Posted 16 July 2011 - 12:11 PM


I have my doubts, myself. Have any of these types of movies (besides Star Wars, which borrows stuff from the Barsoom novels and re-casts them so that they bear very little resemblance to the Burroughs novels anyway) really "caught on" with the general public? My impression of the Conan movies is that they're more of a cult thing, and other attempts at the genre like Kevin Sorbo's bigscreen movie a while back (Krull? Not sure) seem to vanish without making a ripple.



Kevin Sorbo was in Kull The Conqueror and that's from the '90s (I just heard about it yesterday). Krull came out in about 1985.


That's the one. I knew "Krull" sounded wrong. But hey! Off by one letter ain't bad. ;) (The nineties weren't so long ago, right? Right??)



Yup. And Krull The Conqueror is a great movie - I features Liam Neeson in what I think is one of his first film roles.



#39 Attica

Attica

    Celtic Creation Mystic, Film Buff- -oon

  • Member
  • 1,899 posts

Posted 16 July 2011 - 03:31 PM

N booth said:

but the music choice suggests a more thoughtful approach on the part of the filmmakers [yes, yes, trailers lie, but still].




I was thinking something very similar. The music was great.

The fact that it was so different from what one might expect from a trailer for this type of movie, speaks to me that they are making a film that isn't afraid to be
at least somewhat atypical from what has often been given to us, in the last few years.

#40 Peter T Chattaway

Peter T Chattaway

    He's fictional, but you can't have everything.

  • Member
  • 29,606 posts

Posted 19 July 2011 - 12:02 PM

The Disney-owned Marvel Comics has announced that it will produce a comic-book prequel called John Carter: World of Mars, written by Peter David and illustrated by Luke Ross.