I saw this movie before I had read the books, so I wasn't comparing it to the books and noticing all the changes; I was simply taking it on its own merits, and I loved it. To me, it was just a fun sci-fi adventure movie. I love the music. I love the scene where Carter takes on the whole Thark army to defend Dejah, while remembering how he couldn't save his wife and child. The music during that sequence gives me chills every time I watch it. I love the story within a story structure. I love Carter's jumping power on Barsoom. I love the flying ships, weapons, and technology of Barsoom. I love the Tharks and Tars Tarkus and their mythology/religion about the river Is. I love the Thurns. I see them as representing Fate. The hero must turn back the will of the Fates; very classic, very mythological. All in all, I love this movie and rewatch it often.
I read the books first, and still enjoyed the movie - yeah, it had its problems, but I think it meant well on the whole and where it worked, it worked pretty well as an escapist fantasy film. Had this movie been released in the '80s alongside the likes of "Flash Gordon", "The Dark Crystal", the Schwarzenegger "Conan the Barbarian" movies, and "Big Trouble in Little China", I think it would be remembered today as an entertaining little '80s fantasy cult classic.
@@KyloRenRadio The score is great. In addition to the music from the scene I mentioned in my comment above, I love the Thurns theme music; it's very mystical sounding. I am always humming that music after watching this movie.
My dad died in 2012. He loved Edgar Rice Burroughs' books and, for a few years before, had got me to look for John Carter books "on that internet you buy stuff from" (ie, Amazon). I was able to get a number of them second hand. I'm quite glad he didn't see the film if they went with the tortured hero cliche. He had loved Tolkein's books all his life, and he hated the Peter Jackson films, for changing the depiction of Frodo from an unlikely hero to "a whiny wee guy moanin' a' the time". Old Glaswegians like their heroes uncomplicated and stoic!
Spot on analysis as always. They pulled that reluctant hero crap with Luke Skywalker in their so-called Star Wars movies too. It’s just another case of the filmmakers “knowing better” than the authors.
I watched a "behind the scenes" clip with Andrew Stanton (because he directed Finding Nemo) and he mentioned that what brought all the Pixar crew together, specifically directors was their mutual love for Burroughs's Princes of Mars. It was their little inside joke and inner reference. He said he knew that this was a gargantuan task and no matter what he did it would never live up to what it had been in his heart and imagination. I didn't "love" the movie and he is one of my favourite directors, but I respected his self-awareness when it came to it, and his expression for how much he loved it. Great video
Actually, there,was a DTV version of Princess of Mars made a few years ago. It had Antonio Sabado Jr. and (get this) Traci Lords in it. What a total mess it was. You'll appreciate John Carter totally after seeing that.
I liked it. I was very amused when I found out that Michael Moorcock, who is a Barsoom ultra fan, bought a blu ray player just so he could watch the film as many times as he could at home.
It's a bit like the Solomon Kane, Conan the Barbarian, and Golden Compass movies from about the same time: they weren't perfect, but they weren't bad little fantasy movies. The term "underrated" gets overused a lot in movie criticism, but I think all four movies can be fairly said to be "underrated" - they were mostly harmless, and definitely didn't deserve the abuse they got from the few people who did see them.
I just finished the 2nd John Carter book yesterday, so this was a timely video. Comparing the movie to the books, sure sounds like comparing apples to oranges. I haven't seen the movie, but I think with today's tech, they could do an awesome version.! The film industry can be blind to some sure fire winners.
It's a fun movie but strongly agree about the reluctant hero cliche, which really dragged on the movie. I also think the presentation of Dejah Thoris highlighted one of the problems with the modern fixation on Strong Female Characters - in the book, she isn't a fighter at all but she does stuff like volunteering to be an emissary to the Green Men to broker peace with them. She does this knowing she could very well be going to her (rather horrible) death but she does it because it could help and her people are running out of options. In the movie, she's a scientist and a swordfighter, but when it comes to her sense of duty she runs away (gets caught anyway) and when she's confronted about it she breaks down crying. "I WAS SCARED!!!" she shrieks. Which of these two is actually a stronger person? I loved Woola, though. He reminded me so much of one of my dogs.
I loved the book so much. The movie is definitely not close to the book, but I love it for what it is. I do think Hollywood must have Joseph Campbell's hero's journey list as check boxes to check off, which is lame. Why does Carter have to refuse the call at first. No reason for him to do that.
I enjoyed the movie too. A lot of details were different but it kept the overall look and spirit of the original. My fear had been that they would do it like Star Wars. My friend thought they should've done it like SW. Most people just don't realize that SW is a rip-off of Flash Gordon and FG is a rip-off of JC!
Star Wars owes SO much to John Carter and also Dune, and never really gets called out as much as it should for being a "rip off" of those sci-fi classics!
Hi, Mike. Lynn Collins wasn't naked enough. That's why J.C failed at the box office, despite me waiting for this film since my teens (I'm 70 in November).
I wanna see a Thark design that actually appears the way Burrough describes them: with the middle limb being neither arm nor leg, but usable for either purpose.
I agree with a lot of what you said. You are right on the pacing, unnecessary exposition, and extra plots, and not making it more pulpy (and I totally agree with the idea of having us experience Mars through John Carter's eyes, like in the book). I am torn between the tortured hero archetype here because I did at least love the scene where he fights off the Tharks and it montages him burying his family, showing he has a new purpose. Besides that scene, the arc was unnecessary. In the end, though, I do have a soft spot for the movie and really like the cast. Solomon Kane did the same thing too (another movie with James Purefoy I liked, where they did the unnecessary reluctant hero trope). I think these movies, just like The Shadow and The Phantom before, needed to really embrace the strange pulpiness with delicately updating the material, like Batman: The Animated Series or the original Indiana Jones Trilogy did. And Woola is the best boy and deserves to be super popular along the ranks of Appa and Baby Yoda.
The stories will be filmed again because few people in the business have new ideas. But a streaming series could be a lot of fun, given good actors and a healthy budget. 😺✌️
I loved the John Carter books. Like Tarzan, some of the material may seem inappropriate today. I'd be surprised if it returns to the silver screen, but the books remain a great read!
Me and my wife watched it recently, she really liked it. But it helped that I could explain what was happening and why to her as the movie is rushing so quickly through the story. I just had a thought, super mario is basically John carter. He has super powers in a strange land too and sets out to rescue a princess from the green bad guys. 😂
If I recall, 2012 era: Disney sacked a few top execs, movie div. They spent 💰 on ads, hype. I think too the future plan was 3-6 full John Carter adventures. Extended story.
I'm always wary of film or TV adaptations of books and I'm almost always disappointed when they're made but occasionally I'm pleasantly surprised. The Lord of the Rings was great and Jeremy Brett as Sherlock Holmes and David Suchet was Poirot were awesome however most attempts at adapting books seem to fall short. I've never seen this particular film but I agree with your original assessment that the book is unfilmable but I thought that about LotR too
Back in the days the movie was still being filmed, I was sitting in a bar with a friend of mine who is an Imagineer for Disneyland. I was excited the movie was being made, and asked him what plans were in the works to bring it to life in Disneyland itself. You know, like Disney ALWAYS did for a major new movie, at least for a promotional period. So ... any kind of attraction or show? Walk-around characters? Would it be in Tomorrowland or Adventureland? How will it be fit into the Disneyland landscape? What's up? He just laughed and said, "Nothing! It's going to bomb." What! It won't even be out till year after next! Yeah, the Powers That Be had already scuttled it internally, with absolutely no efforts being made to have a glimmer of the movie anywhere in Disneyland. Just think ... Dejah Thoris could have been a bonafide Disney Princess. What would THAT have been like?
When I first saw the poster it took a minute for it to click and get me excited for the film. I always thought that I was one of 5 people my age or younger who would make the connection based on the title. I assumed they chose not to use “A Princess of Mars” to avoid being connected to the earlier adaptation featuring Traci Lords. I enjoyed the film well enough. I’ve seen enough sci fi/fantasy films to understand how little respect Hollywood studio execs had for the genre and the fandom, even after the success of Star Wars. I can’t fault anyone for having issues with the adaptation of source material. I have 2 pet peeves that really bug the hell out of me and keep me from watching the films: Baron Harkonnen flying about like a Goodyear blimp; and Soylent green being made out of people. I also have a problem with projects that take established adult characters and throw them all together as teens or children (Smallville, Muppet Babies, etc.). Sorry for the tangential rant.
Hello my friend, hello... I definitely enjoyed the film more than you did since I never read the books so I had no expectations.. I was way more disappointed with Solomon Kane.. the first half was great then it fell apart hard in the second half.. the first Arnold Conan film is one of my favorite films of all time.. Arnold, James Earl Jones, the soundtrack.... what's not to love...
I liked this film. haven't read the books at all but enjoyed the film enough to be interested in the source material. Just like with Hellboy and with the Conan the adventurer animated show funnily enough
I’ve known of JC since 1960’s and not a fan. Nobody knows who he is and I thought it would fail but I loved the movie. Its Disney so some crap but great all around and enjoyable.
This is not the first time I have heard someone say, (or thought myself), that they totally changed a character. In a couple of cases, it was an improvement, (like Forrest Gump), but to take a classic, a well-known and well-loved character...what were they thinking? I had no idea who John Carter was, although my husband did,and no, we never saw the movie and now we never will.
The original movie poster was hopeless, too. I, myself, knew instantly who John Carter was, because for one thing I've completely absorbed THE VISUAL ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF SCIENCE FICTION. If you were anybody else, the movie poster was completely uninformative. Also I think the movie was one hour too long. They could have cut one hour of it, and it would have been improved, and it wouldn't have lost anything. They spent so much on this movie - 250 million dollars I think - they made it hard to make their money back. There is a joke in India - that they (India) sent a science mission to the real Mars for US 180 million - a lot less than the Hollywood movie. I do like it that the flying ships were like an Edwardian concept of spaceships in the time of the writing of the novel - they did not try to modernise them - there was a steampunk aesthetic. I liked the production values and period detail in the Earth scenes. I think it is possible that over many years the movie might develop a cult following. And now Disney owns DOCTOR WHO!
This reminds me of a movie made, I think, in the eighties from one of Asimov's robot stories. It was a great action movie but as I remember it had nothing to do with the actual book. It was both good and disappointing at the same time.
Great video. Really enjoyed it. I feel that ERB has always suffered at the movies but feel John Carter was probably the best attempt with the Legend of Tarzan with Alexander Skasgard in a close second. Would love to hear your opinion on that film as I feel its the closest we have come to the Tarzan of the novels. Shame they all "bombed".
@ Michael - First off, nothing should ever look like the SW prequels? What the heck. I thought you liked the prequels. Your videos normally make me happy, but that makes me sad. They were right up that pulpy Sci fi avenue we often walk. Second off, ah the John Carter movie. I remember it well. As mentioned before, this was right before the break up of a very long relationship, and that movie was probably the last good, semi happy date we ever had. And then I had all the books to read and get me through said break-up. So without the movie, I may never have begun a big ERB fan nor found your channel! Third off, now I'm a librarian, and the summer reading program theme this year is Adventure. So who better to do a program about than the Master of Adventure himself? So I talked my branch manager into letting me do an ERB program one Saturday in July, followed by a screening of the movie just for kicks. Needless to say, I will also be showing a video clip from you too during the program. So I hope you and Roger are ready for the big screen!
That did make it sound like I didn’t like the Star Wars prequels. What I was thinking was that those films had, to my mind, a very distinctive look and feel. If you try to copy that look it’s obvious and will fall short. I was thinking of the arena scene in Attack of the Clones in particular because that scene is great and feels very ERB inspired. Then we have the JC arena scene and it just looks like a watered down version of the clones scene. It looks like a Star Wars prequel retread. It should have looked and felt entirely different. JC should have had a distinct and unique style that reflected ERB and not George Lucas.
@michaelk.vaughan8617 Ah, I see. It's been a stressful week. Anyway, I think you would appreciate the John Carter fan trailers that were made by the same guy that wrote JC and the Gods of Hollywood, which is a great book. You would enjoy them, and they make it clear JC and ERB inspired a century of Sci fi and not the other way around. Cheers my friend.
Disney REALLY didn't try to get this movie out there! I have several multiplexes in my local area. And I had to drive fifty miles to see it. Was it worth it? Nope. Best John Carter of Mars movie? Avatar.
I haven't watched your review yet. (but will) I liked this movie. I feel like we should at least be on the 5th movie by now. Any way on ward to watch your review now.
I didn't mind it. I would have liked a D cup minimum standard, but otherwise it was ok. 🤭 I hadn't read the books (still haven't) and didn't know who John Carter was, so the way they portrayed him didn't matter to me. If they could get the writers/creators of Rome to do Conan - that'd be great.
I remember seeing the trailer at the cinema, and hearing a couple of guys next to me scoffing at the dull title and that it was a Disney movie. This was prior to the MCU so Disney was still known for kid's movies. I eventually saw it on DVD and thought it was pretty good. Still haven't read any of the books.
A long Awaited video, Michael. Thanks for the Wagnerian Introduction. Wagner is always to me at least the best to suit the matters of real importance and seriousness. I think the movie was a disappointment to me. Your analysis is very interesting
Who was John Cater? John Carter 1905-1975) was a bibliographer. He wrote essential books about book collecting and exposing forgeries in 19th century pamphlets. Odd that Disney made a movie about him. It's hard to recognise him from your description of the movie.
Good review! I think I liked it a little better than you. A few scenes were really powerful--to me--but it wasn't a GREAT movie. All in all, a fair summary.
Well said, if there going to make a movie just make a movie with their own characters, don't place Iconic book characters in the title and script, to make the movie even more notably crap.
Fortunately, I did not spend a dime on this film. Borrowed the DVD from the library and gave up watching it after about 20 minutes. It's amazing how many videos there are on YT about why John Carter failed. And yeah, what a dumb title. In the words of Stan Lee, 'nuff said.
Fan of John Carter since the mid-70s. I eagerly anticipated this movie and... well, I liked it well enough. It just wasn't what I wanted. Same as they did with Howard's Conan and Solomon Kane. Good movies, mind you, just not true to the source. Therein lies the bitter rub.
The movie was “ok” but only because I knew about the subject matter. Someone who was not into JCoM would have little understanding and interest. To me they should have toned down the jumping aspect which seemed totally overdone and took away from the believability (yes I know it takes place on Mars) and should have focused more on his fighting ability and speed. It should have been “get him to Mars and start fighting and how he impresses everyone”. Agreed this was not John Carter. He was not the warrior he is in the books. I’d like to write more but I’m on my phone.
It would be ok if you never read the books or know Edgar Rice Burroughs. If they remade it, it would be so far out that we still wouldn't know the real character or story. Homonigized.
Disney bit off too much too early, bloating up and shedding weight. Do you invest money for readers, or, for a return and profit from a larger audience? A hard call that was probably avoided by relegation to committee think. Like most adaptations, only partially successful, but the result is still good entertainment. One more lost opportunity. Better vision to the next welder of rights & $$$.
I would have made a better movie than this because I am a fan. The John Carter movie was trying to build a franchise, not tell a coherent story. Bringing things from book three into the origin story destroyed whatever narrative continuity this movie may have had. "John Carter" the movie is an amateur mess made by someone who did not love the books.
I enjoyed it. It dragged a little bit and it was impossible to keep up with all the janathedds and karathons whiddlycoons of barsoom or whatever...but it was fun.
I saw this movie before I had read the books, so I wasn't comparing it to the books and noticing all the changes; I was simply taking it on its own merits, and I loved it. To me, it was just a fun sci-fi adventure movie. I love the music. I love the scene where Carter takes on the whole Thark army to defend Dejah, while remembering how he couldn't save his wife and child. The music during that sequence gives me chills every time I watch it. I love the story within a story structure. I love Carter's jumping power on Barsoom. I love the flying ships, weapons, and technology of Barsoom. I love the Tharks and Tars Tarkus and their mythology/religion about the river Is. I love the Thurns. I see them as representing Fate. The hero must turn back the will of the Fates; very classic, very mythological. All in all, I love this movie and rewatch it often.
Same. I saw JOHN CARTER before reading any of the books & loved it. Still do, esp. the score.
I read the books first, and still enjoyed the movie - yeah, it had its problems, but I think it meant well on the whole and where it worked, it worked pretty well as an escapist fantasy film. Had this movie been released in the '80s alongside the likes of "Flash Gordon", "The Dark Crystal", the Schwarzenegger "Conan the Barbarian" movies, and "Big Trouble in Little China", I think it would be remembered today as an entertaining little '80s fantasy cult classic.
In my experience I'm usually better off being ignorant when watching a film
@@KyloRenRadio The score is great. In addition to the music from the scene I mentioned in my comment above, I love the Thurns theme music; it's very mystical sounding. I am always humming that music after watching this movie.
Movie was good sci-fi movie. I have it in my collection.
My dad died in 2012. He loved Edgar Rice Burroughs' books and, for a few years before, had got me to look for John Carter books "on that internet you buy stuff from" (ie, Amazon). I was able to get a number of them second hand. I'm quite glad he didn't see the film if they went with the tortured hero cliche.
He had loved Tolkein's books all his life, and he hated the Peter Jackson films, for changing the depiction of Frodo from an unlikely hero to "a whiny wee guy moanin' a' the time".
Old Glaswegians like their heroes uncomplicated and stoic!
Woola, Best Supporting Actor.
We ❤️ Woola
Spot on analysis as always. They pulled that reluctant hero crap with Luke Skywalker in their so-called Star Wars movies too. It’s just another case of the filmmakers “knowing better” than the authors.
The most woefully underserved sci-fi movie classic ever....
It wasn’t a bad movie. Disney just made a generic action film with ERB window dressing.
Well, maybe they'll do Gullivar Jones and get that one right. Lynn Collins was a good Dejah though. Underrated actress.
I watched a "behind the scenes" clip with Andrew Stanton (because he directed Finding Nemo) and he mentioned that what brought all the Pixar crew together, specifically directors was their mutual love for Burroughs's Princes of Mars. It was their little inside joke and inner reference. He said he knew that this was a gargantuan task and no matter what he did it would never live up to what it had been in his heart and imagination. I didn't "love" the movie and he is one of my favourite directors, but I respected his self-awareness when it came to it, and his expression for how much he loved it. Great video
Actually, there,was a DTV version of Princess of Mars made a few years ago. It had Antonio Sabado Jr. and (get this) Traci Lords in it. What a total mess it was. You'll appreciate John Carter totally after seeing that.
Oh man…I put that one out of my mind.
I liked it. I was very amused when I found out that Michael Moorcock, who is a Barsoom ultra fan, bought a blu ray player just so he could watch the film as many times as he could at home.
I love this movie
It's a bit like the Solomon Kane, Conan the Barbarian, and Golden Compass movies from about the same time: they weren't perfect, but they weren't bad little fantasy movies. The term "underrated" gets overused a lot in movie criticism, but I think all four movies can be fairly said to be "underrated" - they were mostly harmless, and definitely didn't deserve the abuse they got from the few people who did see them.
And btw everyone, there is a great book on the film called John Carter and the Gods of Hollywood.
I'm going to look for it. Sounds mighty interesting.
@@buckocean7616 It's by the same guy that did this -ruclips.net/video/OzPVYy7LHIo/видео.htmlsi=xFxXnIT2QWckwspM
I enjoyed this video much more than the 18 minutes I lasted watching John Carter.
I just finished the 2nd John Carter book yesterday, so this was a timely video. Comparing the movie to the books, sure sounds like comparing apples to oranges. I haven't seen the movie, but I think with today's tech, they could do an awesome version.! The film industry can be blind to some sure fire winners.
It's a fun movie but strongly agree about the reluctant hero cliche, which really dragged on the movie. I also think the presentation of Dejah Thoris highlighted one of the problems with the modern fixation on Strong Female Characters - in the book, she isn't a fighter at all but she does stuff like volunteering to be an emissary to the Green Men to broker peace with them. She does this knowing she could very well be going to her (rather horrible) death but she does it because it could help and her people are running out of options. In the movie, she's a scientist and a swordfighter, but when it comes to her sense of duty she runs away (gets caught anyway) and when she's confronted about it she breaks down crying. "I WAS SCARED!!!" she shrieks. Which of these two is actually a stronger person?
I loved Woola, though. He reminded me so much of one of my dogs.
Good point about Dejah Thoris.
I loved the book so much. The movie is definitely not close to the book, but I love it for what it is. I do think Hollywood must have Joseph Campbell's hero's journey list as check boxes to check off, which is lame. Why does Carter have to refuse the call at first. No reason for him to do that.
The abrupt endings always get me I’m never ready
Every time I hear "John Carter", my brain goes to ER!
Not all movie flops are to do with the quality of the movie, this is a perfect example - it's a good movie!
I liked the Therns because they were not conquerors but manipulators working behind the scene.
Exactly why I dislike them.
I enjoyed the movie too. A lot of details were different but it kept the overall look and spirit of the original. My fear had been that they would do it like Star Wars. My friend thought they should've done it like SW. Most people just don't realize that SW is a rip-off of Flash Gordon and FG is a rip-off of JC!
Star Wars owes SO much to John Carter and also Dune, and never really gets called out as much as it should for being a "rip off" of those sci-fi classics!
I liked how they used the same framing device that was used in the novels
Hi, Mike. Lynn Collins wasn't naked enough. That's why J.C failed at the box office, despite me waiting for this film since my teens (I'm 70 in November).
I wanna see a Thark design that actually appears the way Burrough describes them: with the middle limb being neither arm nor leg, but usable for either purpose.
Fantastic movie. It’s one of the all time greats.
I agree with a lot of what you said. You are right on the pacing, unnecessary exposition, and extra plots, and not making it more pulpy (and I totally agree with the idea of having us experience Mars through John Carter's eyes, like in the book). I am torn between the tortured hero archetype here because I did at least love the scene where he fights off the Tharks and it montages him burying his family, showing he has a new purpose. Besides that scene, the arc was unnecessary. In the end, though, I do have a soft spot for the movie and really like the cast. Solomon Kane did the same thing too (another movie with James Purefoy I liked, where they did the unnecessary reluctant hero trope). I think these movies, just like The Shadow and The Phantom before, needed to really embrace the strange pulpiness with delicately updating the material, like Batman: The Animated Series or the original Indiana Jones Trilogy did. And Woola is the best boy and deserves to be super popular along the ranks of Appa and Baby Yoda.
The stories will be filmed again because few people in the business have new ideas. But a streaming series could be a lot of fun, given good actors and a healthy budget.
😺✌️
Loved this movie! Worthy of a sequel or series.
I loved the John Carter books. Like Tarzan, some of the material may seem inappropriate today. I'd be surprised if it returns to the silver screen, but the books remain a great read!
Me and my wife watched it recently, she really liked it. But it helped that I could explain what was happening and why to her as the movie is rushing so quickly through the story.
I just had a thought, super mario is basically John carter. He has super powers in a strange land too and sets out to rescue a princess from the green bad guys. 😂
Please return me to my regularly scheduled program......
...... Westerns! 😂😂
Oh, and even Peter Pan knew what made a red man red!
If I recall, 2012 era: Disney sacked a few top execs, movie div. They spent 💰 on ads, hype. I think too the future plan was 3-6 full John Carter adventures. Extended story.
I'm always wary of film or TV adaptations of books and I'm almost always disappointed when they're made but occasionally I'm pleasantly surprised. The Lord of the Rings was great and Jeremy Brett as Sherlock Holmes and David Suchet was Poirot were awesome however most attempts at adapting books seem to fall short. I've never seen this particular film but I agree with your original assessment that the book is unfilmable but I thought that about LotR too
Back in the days the movie was still being filmed, I was sitting in a bar with a friend of mine who is an Imagineer for Disneyland. I was excited the movie was being made, and asked him what plans were in the works to bring it to life in Disneyland itself. You know, like Disney ALWAYS did for a major new movie, at least for a promotional period. So ... any kind of attraction or show? Walk-around characters? Would it be in Tomorrowland or Adventureland? How will it be fit into the Disneyland landscape? What's up?
He just laughed and said, "Nothing! It's going to bomb."
What! It won't even be out till year after next! Yeah, the Powers That Be had already scuttled it internally, with absolutely no efforts being made to have a glimmer of the movie anywhere in Disneyland.
Just think ... Dejah Thoris could have been a bonafide Disney Princess. What would THAT have been like?
That’s really interesting.
When I first saw the poster it took a minute for it to click and get me excited for the film. I always thought that I was one of 5 people my age or younger who would make the connection based on the title. I assumed they chose not to use “A Princess of Mars” to avoid being connected to the earlier adaptation featuring Traci Lords. I enjoyed the film well enough. I’ve seen enough sci fi/fantasy films to understand how little respect Hollywood studio execs had for the genre and the fandom, even after the success of Star Wars. I can’t fault anyone for having issues with the adaptation of source material. I have 2 pet peeves that really bug the hell out of me and keep me from watching the films: Baron Harkonnen flying about like a Goodyear blimp; and Soylent green being made out of people. I also have a problem with projects that take established adult characters and throw them all together as teens or children (Smallville, Muppet Babies, etc.). Sorry for the tangential rant.
Hello my friend, hello... I definitely enjoyed the film more than you did since I never read the books so I had no expectations.. I was way more disappointed with Solomon Kane.. the first half was great then it fell apart hard in the second half.. the first Arnold Conan film is one of my favorite films of all time.. Arnold, James Earl Jones, the soundtrack.... what's not to love...
I liked this film. haven't read the books at all but enjoyed the film enough to be interested in the source material. Just like with Hellboy and with the Conan the adventurer animated show funnily enough
I’ve known of JC since 1960’s and not a fan. Nobody knows who he is and I thought it would fail but I loved the movie. Its Disney so some crap but great all around and enjoyable.
You should do a video where you compare all your favorite books with their movie counterparts.
Movies fail most of the time. Recent GOT author complaining about how they rewrite his great stories.
@@jamesholland8057 Planet of the Apes, Blade Runner, Goldfinger, LotR trilogy and many more.
This is not the first time I have heard someone say, (or thought myself), that they totally changed a character. In a couple of cases, it was an improvement, (like Forrest Gump), but to take a classic, a well-known and well-loved character...what were they thinking? I had no idea who John Carter was, although my husband did,and no, we never saw the movie and now we never will.
The original movie poster was hopeless, too. I, myself, knew instantly who John Carter was, because for one thing I've completely absorbed THE VISUAL ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF SCIENCE FICTION. If you were anybody else, the movie poster was completely uninformative.
Also I think the movie was one hour too long. They could have cut one hour of it, and it would have been improved, and it wouldn't have lost anything.
They spent so much on this movie - 250 million dollars I think - they made it hard to make their money back. There is a joke in India - that they (India) sent a science mission to the real Mars for US 180 million - a lot less than the Hollywood movie.
I do like it that the flying ships were like an Edwardian concept of spaceships in the time of the writing of the novel - they did not try to modernise them - there was a steampunk aesthetic. I liked the production values and period detail in the Earth scenes.
I think it is possible that over many years the movie might develop a cult following.
And now Disney owns DOCTOR WHO!
I really liked this movie and I watch it whenever it is on. I also don’t care if it wasn’t a financial success.
This reminds me of a movie made, I think, in the eighties from one of Asimov's robot stories. It was a great action movie but as I remember it had nothing to do with the actual book. It was both good and disappointing at the same time.
Great video. Really enjoyed it. I feel that ERB has always suffered at the movies but feel John Carter was probably the best attempt with the Legend of Tarzan with Alexander Skasgard in a close second. Would love to hear your opinion on that film as I feel its the closest we have come to the Tarzan of the novels. Shame they all "bombed".
I’m not sure you want to hear my opinion on Legend of Tarzan!
Now I really do. 😂
Did you like the Solomon Kane movie? And might you make a video about it, if you haven't yet?
I did like that movie.
@ Michael - First off, nothing should ever look like the SW prequels? What the heck. I thought you liked the prequels. Your videos normally make me happy, but that makes me sad. They were right up that pulpy Sci fi avenue we often walk.
Second off, ah the John Carter movie. I remember it well. As mentioned before, this was right before the break up of a very long relationship, and that movie was probably the last good, semi happy date we ever had. And then I had all the books to read and get me through said break-up. So without the movie, I may never have begun a big ERB fan nor found your channel!
Third off, now I'm a librarian, and the summer reading program theme this year is Adventure. So who better to do a program about than the Master of Adventure himself? So I talked my branch manager into letting me do an ERB program one Saturday in July, followed by a screening of the movie just for kicks.
Needless to say, I will also be showing a video clip from you too during the program. So I hope you and Roger are ready for the big screen!
That did make it sound like I didn’t like the Star Wars prequels. What I was thinking was that those films had, to my mind, a very distinctive look and feel. If you try to copy that look it’s obvious and will fall short. I was thinking of the arena scene in Attack of the Clones in particular because that scene is great and feels very ERB inspired. Then we have the JC arena scene and it just looks like a watered down version of the clones scene. It looks like a Star Wars prequel retread. It should have looked and felt entirely different. JC should have had a distinct and unique style that reflected ERB and not George Lucas.
@michaelk.vaughan8617 Ah, I see. It's been a stressful week. Anyway, I think you would appreciate the John Carter fan trailers that were made by the same guy that wrote JC and the Gods of Hollywood, which is a great book. You would enjoy them, and they make it clear JC and ERB inspired a century of Sci fi and not the other way around. Cheers my friend.
I love the printing of the book you have. I’ve been wanting a copy since I started watching your videos.
Is it available anywhere?
Thanks!
😺✌️
Disney REALLY didn't try to get this movie out there! I have several multiplexes in my local area. And I had to drive fifty miles to see it. Was it worth it? Nope. Best John Carter of Mars movie? Avatar.
Now you have to review Asylum's A Princess of Mars (2009).😉
NO! 😫
I haven't watched your review yet. (but will) I liked this movie. I feel like we should at least be on the 5th movie by now. Any way on ward to watch your review now.
I’ve not read the books nor seen the movie nor do I plan to do but I’m on a comment spree so there you have it 🤪
I didn't mind it. I would have liked a D cup minimum standard, but otherwise it was ok. 🤭 I hadn't read the books (still haven't) and didn't know who John Carter was, so the way they portrayed him didn't matter to me. If they could get the writers/creators of Rome to do Conan - that'd be great.
I remember seeing the trailer at the cinema, and hearing a couple of guys next to me scoffing at the dull title and that it was a Disney movie. This was prior to the MCU so Disney was still known for kid's movies. I eventually saw it on DVD and thought it was pretty good. Still haven't read any of the books.
I love the movie. I love the books too. the books are better
we want a Roger story!!
"The Adventures of Roger & Mike"
I haven’t watched a film in over three years. 🤔
A long Awaited video, Michael. Thanks for the Wagnerian Introduction. Wagner is always to me at least the best to suit the matters of real importance and seriousness. I think the movie was a disappointment to me. Your analysis is very interesting
You should tell us the story of roger🤔
Reveal Roger’s secrets to the world!??
Not being good movies hasn’t stopped the Marvel and Star Wars film franchises going gang-busters at the box office
I’m not too sure about that.
Who was John Cater? John Carter 1905-1975) was a bibliographer. He wrote essential books about book collecting and exposing forgeries in 19th century pamphlets.
Odd that Disney made a movie about him. It's hard to recognise him from your description of the movie.
Movies always change things!
I actually enjoyed the movie, it’s not that bad
I enjoyed it. The title is horrible. Now do Saturn 3 😂😂😂😂😂
Good review! I think I liked it a little better than you. A few scenes were really powerful--to me--but it wasn't a GREAT movie. All in all, a fair summary.
Well said, if there going to make a movie just make a movie with their own characters, don't place Iconic book characters in the title and script, to make the movie even more notably crap.
Fortunately, I did not spend a dime on this film. Borrowed the DVD from the library and gave up watching it after about 20 minutes. It's amazing how many videos there are on YT about why John Carter failed. And yeah, what a dumb title. In the words of Stan Lee, 'nuff said.
Fan of John Carter since the mid-70s. I eagerly anticipated this movie and... well, I liked it well enough. It just wasn't what I wanted. Same as they did with Howard's Conan and Solomon Kane. Good movies, mind you, just not true to the source. Therein lies the bitter rub.
Agreed. It was “ok”.
The movie was “ok” but only because I knew about the subject matter. Someone who was not into JCoM would have little understanding and interest.
To me they should have toned down the jumping aspect which seemed totally overdone and took away from the believability (yes I know it takes place on Mars) and should have focused more on his fighting ability and speed. It should have been “get him to Mars and start fighting and how he impresses everyone”.
Agreed this was not John Carter. He was not the warrior he is in the books.
I’d like to write more but I’m on my phone.
It would be ok if you never read the books or know Edgar Rice Burroughs. If they remade it, it would be so far out that we still wouldn't know the real character or story. Homonigized.
Disney bit off too much too early, bloating up and shedding weight. Do you invest money for readers, or, for a return and profit from a larger audience? A hard call that was probably avoided by relegation to committee think. Like most adaptations, only partially successful, but the result is still good entertainment. One more lost opportunity. Better vision to the next welder of rights & $$$.
I highly doubt anyone read anything about john carter that worked on this film.
Disney.
I would have made a better movie than this because I am a fan. The John Carter movie was trying to build a franchise, not tell a coherent story. Bringing things from book three into the origin story destroyed whatever narrative continuity this movie may have had. "John Carter" the movie is an amateur mess made by someone who did not love the books.
I enjoyed it. It dragged a little bit and it was impossible to keep up with all the janathedds and karathons whiddlycoons of barsoom or whatever...but it was fun.