joe_b

I started reading "A Princess of Mars" last night and already finished the first five chapters. John initially describes waking up in a "strange and weird landscape". While not being overly descriptive of the surroundings, he never really compares it's appearance to the southwest (not by this point, at least) -- save for the intense heat. The character sensed immediately that he was on Mars.

joe_b

Actually, he descibes the female Tharks having tusks larger than the males -- which I found slightly humorous.

Ash Ketchum

Regardless of what the book said, if you're going to do Mars on film these days, you have to make it look like "Mars" and not like the American southwest. I mean we've all SEEN pictures from Mars, something audiences before 2004 couldn't have said. ROBINSON CRUSOE ON MARS (1964) was shot in Death Valley, which was a new and novel approach back then but wouldn't work today. Both TOTAL RECALL (1990) and MISSION TO MARS (2000) managed to find ways to make their landscapes look Martian, although it's been so long since I've seen them, I couldn't tell you what they did. GHOSTS OF MARS (2001) had pretty generic sci-fi backdrops, but it was a low-end movie anyway so we weren't expecting much from it. If you're gonna do JOHN CARTER OF MARS as a big-budget film in 2011, you gotta make it look like "Mars" to the audience or you risk losing their interest. It becomes just another SyFy Channel movie...

Cellar Door

The Viking Progam (1970's)

joe_b

Well, I suppose rendering Martian genitals isn't necessary to the plot. They can always just animate them to resemble a Ken doll.

After reading Burroughs description of the Tharks in the third chapter, I decided to compare it with the brief glimpse of the one we saw in the trailer:

The tusks are described as coming up from the lower teeth (kind of like a warthog) and curving upward almost to eye level. For the film, it appears they are just jutting out from under their cheekbones with no connection to the mouth. The book also describes their eyes being on the far sides of their face and protruding outward, enabling them to look in two directions without turning their heads. The eyes were also blood red -- neither description seems to correspond with the Thark from the trailer.

I also don't see any ears. The book describes them as cup shaped antennae placed above their eyes, but perhaps the animators felt that would be too reminiscent of Shrek? Was also hoping for something more bulky and broad-shouldered, but maybe the character shown here is supposed to be a female. I know, it's nit-picking to the extreme -- but oh well. The rendering is fine, but it looks way to Disney-fied for creatures described as physically horrific.

Book spoiler:

islandclaws

Interesting article from Dark Horizons:

With a budget at nearly $300 million, Disney Pictures is taking a big gamble with their adaptation of "John Carter". Now in an extensive article in The New Yorker, the film's director Andrew Stanton talked about the 18 days of reshoots done for the film back in April which lead to online concern about the project.

Stanton’s nearly three hour rough cut of the movie was shown to various people at Pixar in December last year where they gave him some "serious critiques" including complaints of a "rather drab opening sequence in which the details of the Barsoomian wars on Mars are explained" and the lack of a personal touch seen in other Stanton films like animated hits "Finding Nemo" and "Wall-E".

As a result came the 2.5 weeks of reshoots in Los Angeles which the studio agreed to fund. “Reshoots should be mandatory…some of the Pixarness we’re trying to spread at Disney is ‘It’s O.K. to not know, to be wrong, to screw up and rely on each other.’ Art is messy, art is chaos—so you need a system” Stanton explains. The new opening will "launch viewers immediately into a battle between Zodangans and Therns, before cutting to earth where we first meet John Carter."

A test screening of a slightly over two hour cut of the film was held in July in Portland which reportedly went down well with the movie scoring either “excellent” or “very good” with 75% of attendees, and this was despite great swaths of it being unfinished and still in need of much post-production. However the eventual film turns out, the studio reportedly needs to take at least $700 million worldwide before this can become anything close to a franchise.

************************************************************

Good luck with that.

Hokeyboy

$700 million worldwide to break even? With a mostly unknown property, unknown leads, and roaring disinterest in response to the first trailer?

Even if the movie turns out to be great -- I hope it does -- it's going to kill off any interest for Disney to go beyond-the-boundaries producing science fiction, fantasy, visionary or offbeat action/genre films.

They should just call the fucking thing "John Carter of Mars". "John Carter" alone is weak as balls.

Solid Snake

Jesus.

Xander

I totally agree. I want it to be good and do well, so that Disney can continue to try new things, but that is a tall order to fill.

And it should absolutely be called "John Carter of Mars". Who would be interested in a movie called "John Carter" if they had never heard of the original books? Lame.

DRG

No kidding. Tron Legacy had a more familiar property, Jeff Bridges coming off a Best Actor Oscar win, and a generally positive buzz to the trailer, and that film only managed $400 million worldwide.

Preterite

As a lifelong Barsoom fan, I think this movie looks great and I can't wait to see it.

But the only chance in Hell it has of making $700 million is if they offer a free Dejah Thoris with each ticket.

Jon2

I'll chalk this up to bad memory as I have to confess I haven't read any of ERB's Mars books for fifteen years, at least. It could also be that how ERB described Mars is how I pictured the southwest before I moved here, So the association could be just mine.

Of course... a lot of people could describe the southwest as a "strange and weird landscape" had they never been here. I know I do sometimes, and I've lived here over twenty years.

And there's this, too. I'm an astronomy buff, so I try to keep up on things extraterrestrial. All those photos from the various Mars landers, to me they look like... (you guessed it) the American southwest.

Regarding the female Tharks, I was darn sure ERB described them as not having tusks, or smaller ones. But there's that memory thing, again. Guess I'll have to reread the book.

As for the title, IMO they should have stayed with the book title.

milo bloom

I still can't fathom why this isn't a full-blown CGI Pixar movie. The whole thing just feels "off".

CloverClover

I am hoping it flops, to teach the Disney CEO a lesson when he basically said stories don't matter, only special effects do and that is what they're going to focus on

Preterite

Riiiiiggggghhhhhtttt. Because said CEO would totally put the failure of the film down to his own hubris and not the director, the writer, the stars, the IP, a fickle public, the competition, the economy, downloaders, bootleggers, bloggers, remote viewers, sunspots, and/or their secretary.

Ash Ketchum

Has a movie studio head ever said..."Y'know, I blew it. I made a bad judgment call"? Actually I think they have. For one example, read Steven Bach's book, "Final Cut..." about the making of HEAVEN'S GATE (1980). He really cops to his and the studio's failure on that one. I'm sure there are more examples than that. What did David Putnam say about LEONARD PART VI? That must be on record somewhere.

Preterite

There's "I shouldn't have let that director have free reign" and then there's "my vision for the future of the company is flawed based on this one film's performance".

And John Carter would not be the best test case, anyway, as there's every indication that the makers did place a great deal of importance on the story.

PopcornBandit

Funny, I clicked on this thread because the title "John Carter of Mars" caught my attention. If the thread title had just been "John Carter", I probably would have scrolled right past it.

Quatermass

How about "Edgar Rice Burroughs John Carter, Warlord of Mars Chapter 1: The Battle for Barsoom." It just sort of rolls off the tongue.

joe_b

For anyone that's interested, the Barsoom series can be read for free online at Project Gutenberg. It seems they're all in the public domain by this point. Very convenient, as my local library only had two in the series.

RE: Female Tharks

Michael Corvin

The Kindle version is only $.99 cents for the first 3 combined. I've never read them, and it will be my first purchase when my Kindle Fire arrives.

whotony

Do you have an android or iPhone? There is a kindle app for that and there is now kindle web app too although that might only be for smartphone or iPad.

Ash Ketchum

I'm there!

Terrell

I'm still shocked that they bet 300 million on Taylor Kitsch. That's just downright insane.

Labor

New full length trailer

http://www.ign.com/videos/2011/11/30...carter-trailer

Despite being the originator, it will be hard to seperate this film from the ones before it. All audiences will see is the ssame mold for movies like Star Wars, Braveheart and Avatar, etc

The visual design continues to look completely unexciting as well.