893 replies to this topic

[amster]

Huffington Post: John Carter “Surprisingly Strong” in China

http://thejohncarter...trong-in-china/

nice link dude...the article says the movie has made 264 million worldwide so far with a few contries yet to go, including Japan

Considering how surprisingly well the film has done in some overseas markets despite the worst marketing campaign in history, and considering the small but fanatically loyal fanbase it's already gained here in the states, it makes me wonder if anyone at Disney is kicking themselves and contemplating what would have happened had they truly believed in the film and put everything behind it both prior to and after the release. What if they had called it John Carter of Mars? What if their trailers had given unitiated audiences a clue as to what the film is about? What if they had released a bunch of cool toys and had gotten children excited to go see it (as a fan of Planet of the Apes since the age of five, I know that a film doesn't have to be childish to have broad appeal for children)? I breaks my heart to think of what may have been.

[johnnypt]

Huffington Post: John Carter “Surprisingly Strong” in China

http://thejohncarter...trong-in-china/

nice link dude...the article says the movie has made 264 million worldwide so far with a few contries yet to go, including Japan

Considering how surprisingly well the film has done in some overseas markets despite the worst marketing campaign in history, and considering the small but fanatically loyal fanbase it's already gained here in the states, it makes me wonder if anyone at Disney is kicking themselves and contemplating what would have happened had they truly believed in the film and put everything behind it both prior to and after the release. What if they had called it John Carter of Mars? What if their trailers had given unitiated audiences a clue as to what the film is about? What if they had released a bunch of cool toys and had gotten children excited to go see it (as a fan of Planet of the Apes since the age of five, I know that a film doesn't have to be childish to have broad appeal for children)? I breaks my heart to think of what may have been.

Well someone in the organization gets how to do it: they have $100 million in marketing tie-ins for Avengers, from Dr. Pepper to Norton's Antivirus. I know Marvel's still its own entity in some ways and they've had five movies leading into this so it's a very imperfect comparison. But the only outside thing I saw or heard for John Carter was a reading PSA on radio.

It really would've been nice to have had the company actually work FOR the film's success. When you look at Disney's webiste to see John Carter binders and little else, somebody had to want this to fail, there's simply no other explanation. I just took a look at the daily chart for box office mojo, it's still hanging on as the #4 movie each day (at least thru today when a new slew of movies open up). So despite their efforts, this film has found an audience. Smaller than it should be, but a solid one. There's so much upside for this film in the months and years to come when it hits homes and will find an new audience on its own.

[username]

Well someone in the organization gets how to do it: they have $100 million in marketing tie-ins for Avengers, from Dr. Pepper to Norton's Antivirus.

Yes, The Avengers is a film that actually feels like a marketing campaign of $100 million is behind it.

I'd love for someone to actually question where a similar amount was supposedly spent on promoting John Carter. As it is, most analysts can't even seem to agree on how much the film cost to make. I've seen figures ranging from $250 to $400 million being reported.

[Kortoso]

Looks like Disney had to deal with ERB, Inc. this time, not Marvel.
http://www.tarzan.or...ut_erb_inc.html
Maybe they had differing philosophies regarding the marketing approach.

[johnnypt]

Looks like Disney had to deal with ERB, Inc. this time, not Marvel.
http://www.tarzan.or...ut_erb_inc.html
Maybe they had differing philosophies regarding the marketing approach.

Yeah, and they've been very careful about their brand. Far as I know, their experience with Tarzan was OK (Broadway flop notwithstanding). I can't imagine them being an impediment to a larger merchandising strategy (You want to make a Woola toy? Absolutely not!), but stranger things have happened.

Someone is going to have to do a book on this someday.

[amster]

The Blu Ray/DVD is available for preorder on Amazon. No release date, though. The bonus features look pretty extensive. At least it's not a bare bones release. No extended version, as Stanton has already stated that the version in theatres was the Director's cut. I hope the deleted scenes are completed, though. I really can't stand watching deleted scenes with unrendered CGI characters. What's the point?

[johnnypt]

The Blu Ray/DVD is available for preorder on Amazon. No release date, though. The bonus features look pretty extensive. At least it's not a bare bones release. No extended version, as Stanton has already stated that the version in theatres was the Director's cut. I hope the deleted scenes are completed, though. I really can't stand watching deleted scenes with unrendered CGI characters. What's the point?

Even though I don't have a 3-D TV, I'm going with the 4-disc version. That digital copy is going right onto my iPod!

[amster]

The Blu Ray/DVD is available for preorder on Amazon. No release date, though. The bonus features look pretty extensive. At least it's not a bare bones release. No extended version, as Stanton has already stated that the version in theatres was the Director's cut. I hope the deleted scenes are completed, though. I really can't stand watching deleted scenes with unrendered CGI characters. What's the point?

Ooops. Here's the link:

http://www.amazon.co...33154014&sr=8-2

Nice cover, by the way. i love how they managed not to include a photo of Lynn Collins/Dejah Thoris on the cover, one of the best things, if not the best thing about the film, and while we're on the subject, I love how they don't (again) play the romance angle (the heart of the story) in order to attract some female interest. The marketing guys at Disney really are a bunch of wankers.

Edited by amster, 31 March 2012 - 01:39 AM.

[Brule80]

Add their cut of my tenner. Going to see John Carter tonight!

Sadly got my dad to agree to see this over the phone a week ago.

Now it's not showing at the local multiplex.

[amster]

After being available for pre-order for one day, the Blu Ray is already the #1 bestseller on Amazon.

[Majere]

What if they had called it John Carter of Mars?

Or what if they had just called it by its proper name, a Princess of Mars? It certainly couldn't have done any worse with that title.

[Taranaich]

The more I read about Disney's handling and ideas, the more I'm reminded of The Producers.

That said, this five-year-old IMDB post is very telling:

Although Disney/Pixar's Ratatouille crossed the $200-million mark at the domestic box office over the weekend, some Pixar executives are blaming Disney's marketing staff for failing to create a promotional campaign for the movie that would have pushed it into the top-five for the year, as Toy Story was in 1995 (No. 1); A Bug's Life was in 1998 (No. 4); Toy Story 2 was in 1999 (No. 3); Monsters, Inc. was in 2001 (No. 4); Finding Nemo was in 2003 (No. 2); The Incredibles was in 2004 (No. 5); and Cars was in 2006 (No. 3). According to Disney watcher Jim Hill, Ratatouille currently ranks eighth at the domestic box office and might wind up out of the top ten entirely by the end of the year. As a result, he says, Pixar execs are now overseeing the marketing campaign for the upcoming WALL-E, something that has apparently infuriated the Disney marketing staff. Hill quotes one unnamed studio insider as saying that Ratatouille "was a very difficult picture to sell during an incredibly competitive summer. ... They're now being complete bastards about the WALL-E trailer, insisting that only they know the proper way to promote their next picture. ... But that's okay. Let them call the shots on WALL-E's marketing campaign. Next year, they'll be the ones who'll be taking the fall when that Andrew Stanton film doesn't measure up to expectations."

I should point out that Pixar then decided to market Wall-E without Disney's input. It went on to be the sixth biggest opening weekend for the studio and grossed more than Ratatouille.

Remind me who did John Carter's marketing again?

Yeah, and they've been very careful about their brand. Far as I know, their experience with Tarzan was OK (Broadway flop notwithstanding). I can't imagine them being an impediment to a larger merchandising strategy (You want to make a Woola toy? Absolutely not!), but stranger things have happened.

Someone is going to have to do a book on this someday.

It would be extremely strange. Perhaps since Tarzan was a multimedia phenomenon in Burrough's lifetime, they had different expectations for a Disney film and the related merchandize, and didn't want Carter to be "subjected" to the same thing. That'd be the only reason it'd make sense.

As for a book, I think the chap who does The John Carter Files would do a pretty good job.

[Alien]

The Blu Ray/DVD is available for preorder on Amazon. No release date, though. The bonus features look pretty extensive. At least it's not a bare bones release. No extended version, as Stanton has already stated that the version in theatres was the Director's cut. I hope the deleted scenes are completed, though. I really can't stand watching deleted scenes with unrendered CGI characters. What's the point?

The standard DVD is barebones.

[Taran]

Michael Moorcock liked John Carter so much he watched it twice.

(It's in the comments)

[Almuric]

Saw it for the third time this afternoon with my dad (who also enjoyed it). The scene with Carter and Woola tearing through the Warhoons as he remembers his family remains my favorite. I love how it takes a minor scene from the novel and turns it into one of the most exciting and moving parts of the entire movie. That's how you adapt something, dammit.

[Dark Mark]

Michael Moorcock liked John Carter so much he watched it twice.

(It's in the comments)

That doesn't surprise me, I knew Moorcock was both a fan and has been influenced by Burroughs in his own writing...though you could say that about very many SF/Fantasy authors.

[sheets75]

I finally saw it yesterday afternoon and really liked it. My wife enjoyed it, too. Loved Woola (reminded us of our own dog)

I thought Kitsch was okay as Carter but Lynn Collins deserves to be made a star from this.

[Ningauble]

That doesn't surprise me, I knew Moorcock was both a fan and has been influenced by Burroughs in his own writing...though you could say that about very many SF/Fantasy authors.

He even wrote an explicit JC pastiche, the Kane of Old Mars trilogy.

[Alien]

http://boxofficemojo...arterofmars.htm

Total Lifetime Grosses

Domestic: $66,439,100 26.1% + Foreign: $188,300,000 73.9% = Worldwide: $254,739,100