JOHN CARTER: Over 10 MINUTES now online!

[The Shadow]

[MekaGojira3k]

[MouthForWar]

[king_ghidorah]

[The Real McCoy]

[Dr Kain]

[canofhumdingers]

[The Real McCoy]

[MekaGojira3k]

If this is just Attack of the Clones rehashed, then they've drastically altered the story.

[The Real McCoy]

[jellydonut25]

[king_ghidorah]

Wow...once again some of these people (Devin from Badassdigest.com) trick me into seeing a movie I don't like with enthusiastic reviews about a film that's luke-warm at best.

Really didn't like this film. Feels like the National Treasure of sci-fi films. That's not a complement mind you. Just peeved I payed money to see this film. Again, not horrible, but deff not great. Maybe worth a rent.

[jellydonut25]

[Mac]

[king_ghidorah]

[canofhumdingers]

[The Shadow]

I very much liked John Carter; it's a great movie and fun to watch -- I've no qualms giving it a solid 9 out of 10.

I have no idea what movie half the reviewers were watching -- the only way their reviews make sense is if some evil prankster had it in for Andrew Stanton and ran Asylum's dreadful DTV version for them (I'm sure SyFy is showing it again if you're intent on watching it).

John Carter is a good book adaptation, particularly considering it only runs around 2 hours and 10 minutes. The heart of the story is there, and of course the entire story has been streamlined for the movie. The story flows along at a good pace; in fact the movie was 3/4 of the way through before I knew it. If I had to compare Stanton's pacing of John Carter I guess I'd say it's similar to the original Star Wars movies -- the movie shifts between plot driven sections, to humorous bits culled right from Edgar Rice Burroughs's story, and to action scenes with fluid grace. John Carter is a pleasure to watch, particularly when action movies today are often plagued with split second jump cuts and persistant shakey cam -- oh and desaturated color, can't forget the desaturated color with a touch of over-exposed picture (*cough* something Titans *cough*).

Like I said earlier, the story of John Carter has been streamlined from the Edgar Rice Burroughs's novel. Quite frankly I'm dumbfounded that any professional reviewer could seriously call it "convoluted" and "difficult to follow". There were two boys, about 6 & 8, sitting with their mother across the aisle from me and they were positively enthralled with the movie, if the film was the least bit difficult to follow certainly those two would have noticed it right off. The story Stanton presents viewers is no more complicated than that of Star Wars: A New Hope.

Stanton makes good use of ERB's world building in the movie. You really do get a sense that Barsoom is a greater world beyond the immediate story, that it's an ancient world with hidden mysteries waiting to be uncovered. It's exactly the sort of 'feel' you want in watching the movie -- I hate to bring up Star Wars: A New Hope again but it's an excellent reference point.

All in all, I think if Stanton had been allowed another half-hour to an hour more he could have brought in more of Barsoom from A Princess of Mars and made the movie richer still. But as it stands, by the end of the movie John Carter leaves the viewer wanting more which is perhaps the best sign of excellent storytelling.

How about some specifics on aspects of the movie.

Some reviews dumped on Tars Tarkas's exposition in the beginning -- again I have know idea why. If the exposition went on for several minutes I could understand the complaints -- but it's just a few sentences. Irulan's opening in the extended cut of Dune runs far longer, even the opening crawl from any of the Star Wars movies lasts longer. Tarkas's exposition is just a few sentences that are spoken to the audience, if that's such a burden then surely George Lucas should be slammed for daring to have movie-goers actually read the opening crawl in the Star Wars movies for a bit of background.

As you can see in one of the released clips, Tars Tarkas begins the movie as Jeddak of Thark instead of just Jed of his particular group. Tal Hajus is now an antagonist who covets the title of Jeddak. While I would have liked to have seen bloated and corrupt Tal Hajus of the novel that inspired the creation of Jabba the Hutt, the change works well in the movie and allows the conflict between Tars and Tal to remain without overtaking the main plot.

Tars Tarkas's and Sola's unique relationship remains in the movie, like with other parts from APoM it has been leaned down and it is well intergrated into the movie's story. Even aspects of Tharkian society like the pervasive cruelty, and Tars hopes for a better future for the Tharks are retained and smoothly intergrated into the adaptation.

One thing I did sort of wish played out more like the book was Kantos Kan killing Killing Sab Than on John Carter's behalf. I don't want to spoil it, but I will say that the tweaking done of this part of the story does work in the movie's adaptation. If the perchance the sequel, The Gods of Mars, is greenlight then we'll be seeing a whole lot more of Kantos Kan. As I recall Stanton was concerned that actor playing Kantos might feel he was in a throw-away type of role and wanted the actor to know the character would be featured prominently in subsequent installments.

John Carter's past, the dead wife and daugher, are only addressed in a few very short flashbacks (just like what you see in the 10 minute clip). And while I'm not entirely convinced the back story addition was needed, Stanton has ensured that these short flashbacks are few and entirely serve the greater story. I know this has been a sticking point for many an ERB fan, and I want fellow fans to know that it isn't the invasive addition many were concerned it might be.

As you have probably read elsewhere, the characters of Tardos Mors the grandfather of Dejah Thoris and Jeddak of Helium and Mors Kajak the father of Dejah and Jed of lesser Helium have been combined into one character -- Tardos Mors father of Dejah and Jeddak of Helium. It's an expected change, and minor one in the scheme of things, just part of streamlining the story for the movie. Neither character is one we really see much of in the books so combining the two characters into one makes sense

Also, Sab Than (prince of Zodanga) and his father Than Kosis (Jeddak of Zodanga) have been combined as Sab Than Jeddak of Zodanga. Another bit of streamlining that makes sense -- Than Kosis is essentially a third tier character in APoM and it's reasonable to combine him with Sab Than who plays a more notable role.

Seeing the Barsoomian airships and flyers on the big screen is great, sure they're different than ERB's descriptions but it's another reasonable change seeing as George Lucas had thoroughly mined those descriptions in creating Jabba's sail barge. Indeed, all the special effects work both CGI and practical is very well done and top notch. There are a couple times the compositing could use a bit more polish, I'm a little surprised these instances weren't noticed by the crew earlier.

And the Tharks are magnificent, they are probably THE best realized sentient organics brought to life on screen to date. The Tharks are always completely believable on screen and that is no small feat and unfortunately one that has been all too often been ignored by reviewers. Living beings are notoriously difficult to bring to life convincingly and realistically with CGI because there are so very many subtle complexities compared to inorganic objects or characters. A character such as Gollum is multiple orders of magnitude more difficult to bring to life compared to even complex inorganic CGI characters like Cybertronians (Transformers). While the CGI work for the Na'vi in Avatar is indeed very impressive, I can honestly say the the Tharks are superior. Part of this is because the Tharks are nearly entirely brought to life in filmed exterior scenes or on real sets whereas the Na'vi are largely confined to CGI environments where it is far easier to present the characters convincingly.

John Carter is well done, Andrew Stanton and his team have done wonderful job and deserve high praise. One of the greatest sins of moviemakers nowadays is to approach sci-fi and fantasy with less than 100%, something of a tongue-in-cheek exercise, or worse yet campy. It would have been so very easy, like with so many other sci-fi adaptations to do the minimum and give audiences something more like 1990's Captain America instead of 2011's Captain America: The First Avenger. Thankfully, Andrew Stanton and his team take no half-measures here and were fully committed in making John Carter/I] and it shows. As someone who approached the movie as an ERB fan it's easy, as Harry Knowles has said, to say I would have done this or done something like that instead and needlessly nitpick; I'm glad to say I enjoyed watching [I]John Carter, that it's a great film and well worth spending your hard earned dollars to go see.

EDIT: As an addendum I'd like to say that I think that, with John Carter, Andrew Stanton and his team have successfully held up the highest standards of Disney storytelling. I believe Walt Disney himself would be proud that such a movie came from his studio and that this movie will be as well remembered and as influential in the future as Disney's 1954 adaptation of Jules Verne's 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea. Further, I think that future viewers of John Carter will enjoy it as much and watch it as often as people do the Star Wars movies today. (Assuming Disney doesn't stifle the movie of course)

[Benjamin Haines]

This looks like it could be good. I'll watch it when it comes on Netflix.

[monster of dark]

[The Real McCoy]

[Dr Kain]

[Shonokin]

[MekaGojira3k]

[MouthForWar]

[king_ghidorah]