893 replies to this topic

[ambiente]

In my experience, any film with a Rotten Tomatoes score over 40% is watchable. So, I'll be there...

[Almuric]

Well, the tweets on Twitter concerning the movie are not too bad. Lots of people eager to see it, people who have seen it saying how much they like it. It might be enough . . .

Oh yeah, for all the talk that women have no interest in seeing this film, two of my female coworkers have told me they're going to see it, one with a group of (female) friends and the other with her daughter. So there!

[Kane]

Just got back from a midnight showing.
I have to say that i was blown away. Is it a perfect movie? No.
Is it a good representation of Burroughs work? IMO, YES!!!
From late 1800's United States to the deserts, ruins, and cities of Barsoom the production values of this movie shine.
In particular I loved the scenes that helped to establish Carter's character before he gets to Barsoom. I though they were an excellent addition.
Woola was a big hit with the crowd I saw the movie with. I think the little fella got as many cheers as the main characters. The alterations to Dejah were well done. No palace breed pricness here. Obviously this Princess of Mars was taught how to hold her own.
I'm already planning to find the time to see this again before the weekend is over.[/indent]

Edited by Kane, 09 March 2012 - 09:38 AM.

[Ironhand]

And this on here is a huge piece of PC Bullshit. She even uses the "N" word! "Nuance"!!! AARRGGHHH!!!

http://www.flickfilo...l#axzz1oX73Jgwh


take care.
Doug

This is Maryann Johanson's review, just to be clear.
"He’s a white man, so he must be right, is the evergreen underlying assumption, and even intelligent civilizations on other planets know this."

Kinda funny, that it's a whim of Hollywood that Wil Smith wasn't picked for this. So then what would she have said?

Will Smith as a Confederate officer?

[amster]

Well, the tweets on Twitter concerning the movie are not too bad. Lots of people eager to see it, people who have seen it saying how much they like it. It might be enough . . .

Oh yeah, for all the talk that women have no interest in seeing this film, two of my female coworkers have told me they're going to see it, one with a group of (female) friends and the other with her daughter. So there!

It seems to me like a lot of critics, the media, and a lot of the people you find on imdb are more interested in a mean spirited narrative (Andrew Stanton tries to direct a live action flick and fails miserably/Disney's 300 million blunder the new Waterworld/an uninspired CGI fest that steals from Star Wars, Avatar, and a half dozen superior films - take your pick) than judging a film on it's own merits. Roger Ebert's review was particularly idiotic. Since he couldn't find an actual pulp character to back up his swords vs. rayguns point (he would have actually had to have read some pulp fiction to pull that off), he simply made one up. Of course, anyone who's read his reviews of the previous three conan films knows that this is vintage Ebert. Why not just be honest and say "I understand that this film is taken from the Mars series by Edgar Rice Burroughs, but I've never actually read them"?

[theagenes]

Well, the tweets on Twitter concerning the movie are not too bad. Lots of people eager to see it, people who have seen it saying how much they like it. It might be enough . . .

Oh yeah, for all the talk that women have no interest in seeing this film, two of my female coworkers have told me they're going to see it, one with a group of (female) friends and the other with her daughter. So there!

It seems to me like a lot of critics, the media, and a lot of the people you find on imdb are more interested in a mean spirited narrative (Andrew Stanton tries to direct a live action flick and fails miserably/Disney's 300 million blunder the new Waterworld/an uninspired CGI fest that steals from Star Wars, Avatar, and a half dozen superior films - take your pick) than judging a film on it's own merits. Roger Ebert's review was particularly idiotic. Since he couldn't find an actual pulp character to back up his swords vs. rayguns point (he would have actually had to have read some pulp fiction to pull that off), he simply made one up. Of course, anyone who's read his reviews of the previous three conan films knows that this is vintage Ebert. Why not just be honest and say "I understand that this film is taken from the Mars series by Edgar Rice Burroughs, but I've never actually read them"?

I've never been a fan of professional critics, but I'm really starting to loathe them now with the treatment of this film. They are, for the most part, a spineless, bitter, cannabalistic bunch profitting off the denigration of other's creative works.

Reminds me of an old Barsoomian joke: What do you call an airship full of movie critics at the bottom of the River Iss?

[Doug]

Well, the tweets on Twitter concerning the movie are not too bad. Lots of people eager to see it, people who have seen it saying how much they like it. It might be enough . . .

Oh yeah, for all the talk that women have no interest in seeing this film, two of my female coworkers have told me they're going to see it, one with a group of (female) friends and the other with her daughter. So there!

It seems to me like a lot of critics, the media, and a lot of the people you find on imdb are more interested in a mean spirited narrative (Andrew Stanton tries to direct a live action flick and fails miserably/Disney's 300 million blunder the new Waterworld/an uninspired CGI fest that steals from Star Wars, Avatar, and a half dozen superior films - take your pick) than judging a film on it's own merits. Roger Ebert's review was particularly idiotic. Since he couldn't find an actual pulp character to back up his swords vs. rayguns point (he would have actually had to have read some pulp fiction to pull that off), he simply made one up. Of course, anyone who's read his reviews of the previous three conan films knows that this is vintage Ebert. Why not just be honest and say "I understand that this film is taken from the Mars series by Edgar Rice Burroughs, but I've never actually read them"?

I've never been a fan of professional critics, but I'm really starting to loathe them now with the treatment of this film. They are, for the most part, a spineless, bitter, cannabalistic bunch profitting off the denigration of other's creative works.

Reminds me of an old Barsoomian joke: What do you call an airship full of movie critics at the bottom of the River Iss?

I despise Ebert, but he didn't make up the rayguns and swords example. They were written by Reginald Bretnor. They are send up of SF&Fantasy tropes and were basicaly insider jokes for fans.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feghoot

These reviews still make me sick though. I loved it when he asks "Why do the Tharks need tusks?" As Bugs bunny once said "wadda maroon!"

take care.
Doug

[Doug]

I saw it last night and even though it is not a perfect film I couldn't believe my eyes and ears. It is so much more than I had ever hoped for. It made me remember what it's like to be 12 years old again. And for this I'm so very thankful.

take care.
Doug

[Almuric]

My day took some unexpected turns and I got to see it this afternoon.

It's great. They took some liberties. They don't matter. Most of them work. I loved it. More later.

[amster]

Sick as a dog. John Carter may have to wait.

[johnnypt]

Just got back from seeing it in the downstairs of the local civic center. Wow, it was like seeing things from my mind's eye up there on screen. This was how I saw it as I read the books and now there it was, right in front of me. It was a marvelous journey only a movie could take you on. Even the changes all worked to the story's advantage, like something Burroughs would've written anyway. Turns out I was wrong about several things:

A ) There are two rings on his finger, all for a reason. I'll leave it at that.

B ) I thought Mars should look more red, but it looked totally otherworldly as it was.

C ) Scenes like the one in the arena that look like previous films actually worked to its advantage in this way: this movie completes a circle. The novel inspired an entire genre and now those inspirations are refiltered through this movie.

If we can't have movies like this anymore because they're too old fashioned or whatever people want to complain about, then we're the worse off for it. The great thing is no matter what happens, they made it so that this movie will exist on its own and tells a complete story. I hope we get the other two movies and possibly other stories, but this is more than I could've asked for.

Edited by johnnypt, 10 March 2012 - 03:46 AM.

[Tex]

Before I go see it, I need to know if any of y'all saw it in 3D, and if so, how did it look?

I might only get ONE shot at seeing this in the theatre, and I want to do it RIGHT.

Tex
(going with The Tajia, who is 25 years old--she will probably want to borrow my Mars books afterwards)

[EM Erdelac]

I didn't see it in 3D, but I did see it.

And I enjoyed it. A lot of fun. Looked great, and you could differentiate the red Martians from Carter easily. There were some liberties (some I wish I hadn't seen because I haven't read past the third book yet and I think it might've spoiled things for me about the Therns), but nothing detracting. Carter was still a Confederate captain and there were still Apaches. The battle scenes were pretty great, the arena sequence turned out better than I thought it would, and the actors all did great jobs, particularly Dejah Thoris. The leaping scenes were right out of my dreams.

It wasn't entirely perfect, there were a couple of lulls and uneven pacing, but overall I really enjoyed it. Good humor, and a good heart too.

Plus at one point during one of the aforementioned 'lulls' a boy of about eight or nine a couple rows back blurted out 'Johhhnnn CAR-ter!' so I guess he enjoyed it.

[Ironhand]

The movie was everything I hoped it would be and more. Anyone who doesn't like it is a heartless, mindless, soulless calot. You hear that, movie critics? BTW, for those who are wondering whether they should take their GF's, there is a love story with a strong, intelligent female lead.

I deliberately went to the 10 pm show so I wouldn't be crowded into an undesirable seat. Nevertheless, the theater was well populated.

A number of prior questions and complaints were satisfactorily answered.

SPOILER WARNING
highlight to read.
Thark women don't have tits. They lay eggs which hatch into infants who can immediately crawl, and have a full set of baby teeth. So how come Tharks (both genders) have nipples?

Edited by Ironhand, 10 March 2012 - 09:29 AM.

[Doug]

As much as I love this film, I do have a single complaint. Why does Zodanga have legs? That's straight out of one of Lin Carters "Worlds End" books.
That's it. That's my only complaint! GO SEE THIS FILM!!

take care an enjoy the weekend.
Doug

[theagenes]

I enjoyed it tremendously, as did my wife and son. This is a good movie---the critics are morons. It's not flawless, but few movies are. I was okay with most of the changes from the book and understood why they made them (mostly to have a cohesive trilogy). I didn't think the story was too complex or confusing, nor did my wife who hasn't read any of the books. there was a lot story crammed into a 2-hour movie though. There were some pacing issues at a few spots as well. But those are really my only minor quibbles and they're easily rectified with a properly-edited extended edition.

The acting was good, especially Lynn Collins and Mark Strong. Kitsch was not as wooden as many have said, but maybe could have been a little more charismatic. Visually it was magnificent. The CGI worked, the "look" was spot-on, the cinematography was excellent. The ending, often the toughest part to pull off, was suburb. THis movie deserves sequels, dammit. If it fails it won't be because it's a crappy movie.

[Haemogoblin]

Saw it last night with some friends. I was really happy with it. It's not self-conscious or patronizing, as some "genre" movies can be, and it's done very well. My biggest problem was with Kitsch. While his look was good, there just seemed to be something missing from his performance most of the movie. I do really hope for sequels, this deserves them.

[Crom]

Saw it yesterday afternoon and really liked it. It was a first showing and the crowd was small, therefore quiet, so I couldn't gauge their reaction, but the guy I went with, who has never read Burroughs, now wants to read the books. Hopefully we get to see a sequel or two.

[Almuric]

See it this weekend, if you can. I'll see it again if possible.

[monk]

hope to go tonight! am looking forward to it.