893 replies to this topic

[johnnypt]

How to solve this problem? Any ideas?

Kev

Like I said, I think they've already solved it, if somewhat inadvertently: different color tattoos. This way you avoid all the possible racial issues, since as everyone's mentioned, Burroughs didn't intended them to be similar to the earthly races. Whether or not they've realized they have the answer will just have to wait until we see Gods of Mars (hopefully).

[monk]

kev- black face is a little bit different i think- i doubt anyone will think it's a racist depiction. that would sort of lessen the reality and history of what real blackface was and why it was such a slight.

it would probably look closer to the black and white and white and black people in star trek for example.

[Ironhand]

Regarding the tattoos vs. skin coloring....wouldnt you WANT them to look bizarre? I never really pictured the yellow and black men as Asian and African, but as yellow (as in sunshine yellow) and pitch black.

Warlord of Mars describes the Okar as having the colour of a "ripe lemon," and the First Born have skin of polished ebony. Definitely not talking human skin tones.

Yep and it's always been my take that the Yellow Martians and Black Martians were basically European in looks, just that they had the lemon and ebony skin tones.

I was thinking the other day this will lead to some real problems if there is a second movie (which Stanton has already said he's planning to call John Carter The Gods of Mars).

What to do here, cast Asians as the Yellow Martians and African-Americans as the Black Martians? Not, I believe what was intended by Burroughs. I think ERB was basically saying these are all the same people with the exception of skin tone. But a European actor in black face? It would certainly be misinterpreted and oh man the outcry would be something awful.

The irony is that one of the tenants of the Barsoom books, is that JC meets good people and bad amongst the Red, Green, Black & Yellow Martians (I don't recall any good White Martians or Therns if you will). So JC had to in effect judge everyone he meets by the content of their character and not their skin - pretty forward thinking by ERB.

How to solve this problem? Any ideas?

Kev

The way I would handle it, and I believe this would eliminate racial problems, would be to employ a similar strategy as was employed in ST:NG for Klingons. They hired both black and white actors to play Klingons, but they were all made up to have the same skin color. For Barsoomians, I would hire actors irrespective of their race (just like college entrance, or U.S. govt hires). Then I would rigorously stain or make up their skins to correspond to the Barsoomian race their characters are supposed to belong to. As for the difference between negroid or caucasian or mongolian features, let that be attributed to individual variation. I would make certain that each of the Barsoomian races was played by actors from all of the human races that populate the Hollywood casting lines.

Expecting to be questioned on this policy at some time or other, I would already be prepared to say that Barsoomian races are not the races of Earth, and have nothing to do with them.

Edited by Ironhand, 25 February 2012 - 08:57 AM.

[EM Erdelac]

Yeah I think that'd be a good approach, Ironhand - certainly better than tattoos.

Anybody seen this?

http://www.youtube.c...Q&feature=share

I still don't care for the arena sequence. It just REALLY looks like Geonosia in Attack Of The Clones. The trailer AFTER the clip though, looks pretty great. Particularly that shot of Carter leaping into the Tharks and slicing away. I don't know what to make of this movie. I'm back and forth on it. I'm intrigued enough to be there, for sure.

[Ironhand]

Of course it looks like the arena scene in Attack of the Clones. That scene was modeled after ERB.

[Doug]

Regarding the tattoos vs. skin coloring....wouldnt you WANT them to look bizarre? I never really pictured the yellow and black men as Asian and African, but as yellow (as in sunshine yellow) and pitch black.

Warlord of Mars describes the Okar as having the colour of a "ripe lemon," and the First Born have skin of polished ebony. Definitely not talking human skin tones.

Yep and it's always been my take that the Yellow Martians and Black Martians were basically European in looks, just that they had the lemon and ebony skin tones.

I was thinking the other day this will lead to some real problems if there is a second movie (which Stanton has already said he's planning to call John Carter The Gods of Mars).

What to do here, cast Asians as the Yellow Martians and African-Americans as the Black Martians? Not, I believe what was intended by Burroughs. I think ERB was basically saying these are all the same people with the exception of skin tone. But a European actor in black face? It would certainly be misinterpreted and oh man the outcry would be something awful.

The irony is that one of the tenants of the Barsoom books, is that JC meets good people and bad amongst the Red, Green, Black & Yellow Martians (I don't recall any good White Martians or Therns if you will). So JC had to in effect judge everyone he meets by the content of their character and not their skin - pretty forward thinking by ERB.

How to solve this problem? Any ideas?

Kev

The way I would handle it, and I believe this would eliminate racial problems, would be to employ a similar strategy as was employed in ST:NG for Klingons. They hired both black and white actors to play Klingons, but they were all made up to have the same skin color. For Barsoomians, I would hire actors irrespective of their race (just like college entrance, or U.S. govt hires). Then I would rigorously stain or make up their skins to correspond to the Barsoomian race their characters are supposed to belong to. As for the difference between negroid or caucasian or mongolian features, let that be attributed to individual variation. I would make certain that each of the Barsoomian races was played by actors from all of the human races that populate the Hollywood casting lines.

Here's a direct quote from "Gods of Mars" "In that little party there was not one who would desert another; yet we were of different countries, different colours, different races, different religions—and one of us was of a different world."

Take care.
Doug

[Libaax]

Hehe compare the marketing for this Disney film to Conan 2011 is funny idea. Everyday i go past several cinemas on my way home there is huge posters, of JC film. Hehe they make think more of the film than the so so trailer.

Hope for ERB fans it isnt too different because it will make alot of money with average person just because its Science fantasy adventure with Disney name, reputation.

[Dark Mark]

Kim Newman appears to like it - http://www.facebook....150591066507776

[Almuric]

That's two good reviews.

And I love that clip. Yeah, another film stole some of its thunder, but it still looks pretty good.

[amster]

Hehe compare the marketing for this Disney film to Conan 2011 is funny idea. Everyday i go past several cinemas on my way home there is huge posters, of JC film. Hehe they make think more of the film than the so so trailer.

The difference is money. I'm not anticipating a massive opening weekend, though. There just doesn't seem to be much interest on the street compared to the Avengers, Dark Knight, etc. (which I suspect is why Disney moved the release date before the Summer season). I predict that its box office will grow once it's released through glowing reviews and very positive word of mouth.

[Kev]

Regarding the tattoos vs. skin coloring....wouldnt you WANT them to look bizarre? I never really pictured the yellow and black men as Asian and African, but as yellow (as in sunshine yellow) and pitch black.

Warlord of Mars describes the Okar as having the colour of a "ripe lemon," and the First Born have skin of polished ebony. Definitely not talking human skin tones.

Yep and it's always been my take that the Yellow Martians and Black Martians were basically European in looks, just that they had the lemon and ebony skin tones.

I was thinking the other day this will lead to some real problems if there is a second movie (which Stanton has already said he's planning to call John Carter The Gods of Mars).

What to do here, cast Asians as the Yellow Martians and African-Americans as the Black Martians? Not, I believe what was intended by Burroughs. I think ERB was basically saying these are all the same people with the exception of skin tone. But a European actor in black face? It would certainly be misinterpreted and oh man the outcry would be something awful.

The irony is that one of the tenants of the Barsoom books, is that JC meets good people and bad amongst the Red, Green, Black & Yellow Martians (I don't recall any good White Martians or Therns if you will). So JC had to in effect judge everyone he meets by the content of their character and not their skin - pretty forward thinking by ERB.

How to solve this problem? Any ideas?

Kev

The way I would handle it, and I believe this would eliminate racial problems, would be to employ a similar strategy as was employed in ST:NG for Klingons. They hired both black and white actors to play Klingons, but they were all made up to have the same skin color. For Barsoomians, I would hire actors irrespective of their race (just like college entrance, or U.S. govt hires). Then I would rigorously stain or make up their skins to correspond to the Barsoomian race their characters are supposed to belong to. As for the difference between negroid or caucasian or mongolian features, let that be attributed to individual variation. I would make certain that each of the Barsoomian races was played by actors from all of the human races that populate the Hollywood casting lines.

Expecting to be questioned on this policy at some time or other, I would already be prepared to say that Barsoomian races are not the races of Earth, and have nothing to do with them.

Ironhand this seems like a sensible solution. The director really needs to handle it well though, because he's walking into a minefield for sure.
Kev

[Rockamobile]

Hehe compare the marketing for this Disney film to Conan 2011 is funny idea. Everyday i go past several cinemas on my way home there is huge posters, of JC film. Hehe they make think more of the film than the so so trailer.

The difference is money. I'm not anticipating a massive opening weekend, though. There just doesn't seem to be much interest on the street compared to the Avengers, Dark Knight, etc. (which I suspect is why Disney moved the release date before the Summer season). I predict that its box office will grow once it's released through glowing reviews and very positive word of mouth.

It has to make huge box office for there to be a chance of sequel. Disney invest a huge amount of money into this film.

I think for better recognition purpores they might have done better to call it John Carter of Mars Perhaps?

Edited by Rockamobile, 26 February 2012 - 12:20 AM.

[amster]

Yeah I think that'd be a good approach, Ironhand - certainly better than tattoos.

Anybody seen this?



I still don't care for the arena sequence. It just REALLY looks like Geonosia in Attack Of The Clones. The trailer AFTER the clip though, looks pretty great. Particularly that shot of Carter leaping into the Tharks and slicing away. I don't know what to make of this movie. I'm back and forth on it. I'm intrigued enough to be there, for sure.

I think it looks fantastic. You get a real feel for what the movies going to be like. It's not a literal adaptation of A Princess of Mars, but IMO it's rather like a live action version of the 70s Marvel comic. The spirit of ERB is definately there. I'm fully expecting to enjoy this film immensely. I would take that sequence over Attack of the Clones any day.

[johnnypt]

Hehe compare the marketing for this Disney film to Conan 2011 is funny idea. Everyday i go past several cinemas on my way home there is huge posters, of JC film. Hehe they make think more of the film than the so so trailer.

The difference is money. I'm not anticipating a massive opening weekend, though. There just doesn't seem to be much interest on the street compared to the Avengers, Dark Knight, etc. (which I suspect is why Disney moved the release date before the Summer season). I predict that its box office will grow once it's released through glowing reviews and very positive word of mouth.

It has to make huge box office for there to be a chance of sequel. Disney invest a huge amount of money into this film.

I think for better recognition purpores they might have done better to call it John Carter of Mars Perhaps?

I just talked with some friends, including one in financial business who I thought might have heard of Disney's possible earnings issues due to the film, and none of them had heard of it. The marketing has definitely been botched, including the utter panic over using the word Mars, which has made things worse if you asked me. But what may save it is the fact that all reports are it's just a plain old good movie. My thinking is if it does OK at the worldwide box office, then does good business on home video and streaming, a sequel could get greenlit with a lower budget to make profitability easier.

[amster]

I just talked with some friends, including one in financial business who I thought might have heard of Disney's possible earnings issues due to the film, and none of them had heard of it. The marketing has definitely been botched, including the utter panic over using the word Mars, which has made things worse if you asked me. But what may save it is the fact that all reports are it's just a plain old good movie. My thinking is if it does OK at the worldwide box office, then does good business on home video and streaming, a sequel could get greenlit with a lower budget to make profitability easier.

John Carter of Mars has stood the test of time. Even if it's intitially a box office disappointment, if it's a great film, it will surely become a classic. I do think they made a mistake by not calling it John Carter of Mars, though. Too clever by a half.

[Ironhand]

When my friends ask me "Who's John Carter? Why didn't they call it John Carter of Mars?" I just say "brain fart".

[Libaax]

Hehe compare the marketing for this Disney film to Conan 2011 is funny idea. Everyday i go past several cinemas on my way home there is huge posters, of JC film. Hehe they make think more of the film than the so so trailer.

The difference is money. I'm not anticipating a massive opening weekend, though. There just doesn't seem to be much interest on the street compared to the Avengers, Dark Knight, etc. (which I suspect is why Disney moved the release date before the Summer season). I predict that its box office will grow once it's released through glowing reviews and very positive word of mouth.

How big the BO wil be depend on if people still pay alot for the Disney name. Other than of course the genre, adventure film fans. It can be a minus that Disney rep is so much connected to Pixar films in BO today. The big money is made by Pixar films like Toy Story, Up etc

Im not sure Avengers and Dark Knight Rises will make big BO numbers. We have seen a superhero fatigue in BO numbers. Captain America and other recent films didnt make near as much Iron Man I did for example.

Thor made most and numbers that cant compare to Iron Man and The Dark Knight in 2008. Thor made 449 million World wide and Iron Man 560 world wide.

Edited by Libaax, 26 February 2012 - 08:50 PM.

[Jack LesCamela]

I just talked with some friends, including one in financial business who I thought might have heard of Disney's possible earnings issues due to the film, and none of them had heard of it.  The marketing has definitely been botched, including the utter panic over using the word Mars, which has made things worse if you asked me.  But what may save it is the fact that all reports are it's just a plain old good movie.  My thinking is if it does OK at the worldwide box office, then does good business on home video and streaming, a sequel could get greenlit with a lower budget to make profitability easier.

John Carter of Mars has stood the test of time.  Even if it's intitially a box office disappointment, if it's a great film, it will surely become a classic.  I do think they made a mistake by not calling it John Carter of Mars, though.  Too clever by a half.

I saw the movie over the weekend at an advance screening. The movie is phenomenally good. If any of you have been putting off buying complete sets of the John Carter series in an old paperback edition, or Burroughs stuff in general --I suggest you do so before the movie comes out. Afterward and you'll be paying much dearer prices for it.

Edited by Jack LesCamela, 27 February 2012 - 03:42 PM.

[Jack LesCamela]

I wrote a review and posted it on IMDB. Here it is:

'I HAVE BEEN TO BARSOOM'

I am a man of obsessions. For months, a movie I hadn't seen was the thing. Not Peter Jackson's THE HOBBIT, not Joss Whedon's THE AVENGERS, not even the upcoming Sam Mendes directed James Bond movie SKYFALL (which I'm excited about but it hasn't really sunk its hooks into me yet)...

No, it was Andrew Stanton's JOHN CARTER.

My excitement was not the universal feeling. Disney advertising had dropped the ball and the trailers seemed lackluster to most. Yet something within directed me toward it like a compass points to True North. There was something special about it, something just out of view in the trailers that wouldn't let me go. I trust my obsessions, always, but at some point I got to feeling a bit exhausted and just wanted to know if I was right or maybe a total loon.

I've now been to two advance screenings of JOHN CARTER.

And?

Holy Living Thark! The bar on science fiction and fantasy movies has Officially Been Raised.

JOHN CARTER is based on Edgar Rice Burroughs' A Princess of Mars --a novel first published a century ago. I expected to come out of the movie with my head full of comparisons to all the things Burroughs' imagination inspired: STAR WARS, AVATAR, FLASH GORDON, etc. Understandably so, as I'm much more familiar with all of them. That didn't happen. Put simply, if STAR WARS is a kids' science fiction movie franchise that adults enjoy (and it is), then JOHN CARTER is an adult science fiction movie that kids will enjoy.

CARTER was such an immersing experience. Every moment reveals something new about Mars; about the exotic alien races and cultures that call it home, or about their individual characters. James Cameron's AVATAR showed us a world we've never seen before and it was wondrous to behold, but Andrew Stanton's JOHN CARTER is a movie so rich with detail that it left me feeling like I had been somewhere. JOHN CARTER feels like nothing so much than as if David Lean had made a science fiction epic of love and war set on Mars.

This movie has a confidence to it you won't be expecting. It's unafraid to linger over the characters, and give them time to breathe and reveal themselves. My favorite decade for movies is the 1960s, and JOHN CARTER has some of the epic adventure movies of that time running through it like a seam of gold. There's a bit of LAWRENCE OF ARABIA in there as I alluded to before, and perhaps a touch of ZULU and SPARTACUS is mixed in with the Martian airships and predator cities. Old fashioned storytelling magic and 21st century movie sorcery have combined into a film that's a pulp sci-fi masterpiece.

To the ERB faithful: please relax. Yes, there are changes from the novel; no, they are not the arbitrary changes made in inferior movie adaptations where the filmmaker just wants to do his/her own ideas. Every change is made to tell Burroughs' story or reveal some aspect of Burroughs' characters in a way more befitting a movie instead of a novel.

Going into this, I had absurdly high expectations. A friend of mine told me he was worried the movie wouldn't live up to them and that frankly I was starting to sound a little crazy. Well, the movie went and exceeded my expectations. I love it, and give it a 10/10. I'm definitely going to see it at least six times in the theater, and will finally buy a Blu-Ray player just to watch it at home.

I realize this review sounds over the top. That's just how excited I am about the movie. Perhaps in a previous life I was an ancient Greek by the name of Hyperboles? Anyway, see the movie. I guarantee that even if you don't like it as much as I did, you'll see where I was coming from with this gushing review.

Edited by Jack LesCamela, 29 February 2012 - 01:00 AM.

[amster]

Great review, Jack! I'm almost beside myself with anticipation!