Why did this movie fail?
I've read a few of the books and I liked it. Sure, that part where he used his nephew as bait to catch a Thern made no sense, but it was pretty good otherwise.
Just watch this scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7ZeptdPPrU
Disney totally fucked up the publicity.
It should have been called John Carter of Mars for a start. Then they should have hyped the shit out of Deja Thoris as strong woman and a princess.
Same for Sola.
This is a more imaginative film than TFA by a big margin.
Ironically, some fuckwits actually lambasted this film for being too like a Star Wars film even though the source material is 100+ years old
The director didn't really know what he was doing with the special effects and it over-ran in costs.
Then one of the Disney execs decided to do everything in his power to make it fail so his predecessor would look bad and he would look good by comparison.
It's actually a pretty good movie. At least a solid 7/10. Sank the careers of Kitsch and the Princess though.
im pretty sure Battleship sank his career more.
hehe did you get it? battleship sank his career? lol are you aware of the joke i'm trying to tell here? battleship sank. it's like a play on words of the game. cause it's the battleship that sank the career instead of the battleship getting sanked? let me know if you don't understand
Contrarians on here will defend it, but the source material was a bunch of nonsensical garbage. The main character is an immortal dude who gets teleported to Mars each time he 'dies' on Earth. His main power was being able to jump really high. There really isn't anything more interesting to say. Considering the books were 100 years old, critically panned, and unheard of outside the US, it was a bizarre choice for a movie adaptation.
I don't know who Taylor Mitch is beyond this film but that shouldn't make much of a difference.
I see nothing bad about his Carter portrayal and I honestly don't know what a famous name could add to role.
trailer didn't do shit to get me interested
and posters just had 'jc' or just john carter like i was expected to know.
there was no background, nothing
trailer should've shown clips of directors/or movies and then said they all had one thing in common... these stories/directors/writers grew up reading edgar rice burrows' john carter of mars.
then showed clips of john carter (of mars).
making me read or looking up john carter online put me off from seeing the movie.
I don't really understand people that say this movie was good.
Do they say so because nobody watched it so they can be different?
Cause I watched it, and while the setting was interesting, it was in no way different from the "big dumb space action movie" blockbuster.
Story made no sense, characters were cliches, there's no emotion or depth to anything, and you find yourself bored quickly.
You know the best thing I can say about John Carter is that for about an hour and a half I stopped thinking about banal real life shit and just thought about how cool it would be to wake up on Mars and wander the desert finding awesome alien ruins and lost technology, befriending Tharks and romancing hot martian women.
Then the film ended and I felt kind of sad and sense of loss. Which is more than I got from watching Avengers Age of Ultron, or The Force Awakens.
it looked like a good sci fi. but the name itself (title of movie) was just 'john carter'. like that's all i'm suppose to know about the movie or get an idea of what it's suppose to mean.
marketing was bad. simple.
spoonfed excuse is stupid.
This is the only real answer, and everyone else is being contrarian for the sake of it. It's a lifeless, boring shell of a movie, just as much of an assembly line production piece of shit as every other blockbuster /tv/ likes to hate.
it was based on an extremely famous SF novel by one of the most famous fantasy authors of all time
who is also even more famous for creating Tarzan.
From the creator of Tarzan of the Apes, Edgar Rice Burroughs comes the science fiction series which invented the space opera genre!
John Carter of Mars!
You wouldn't think you could totally fuck that up, but they did.
nobody fucking knows about john carter and no one knows about the author. Just because Tarzan is a popular disney cartoon for kids doesn't mean most people even fucking know it's based on a book
>Do additional research
>On a movie poster or trailer
>That does nothing to invite interest
Holy shit, how much of a corporate studio slave are you?
They weren't nekkid.
if you are going for a mass appeal especially for suppose to be blockbuster movie you got to give audience everything about the film well not everything something less vague more approachable
>just a popular Disney cartoon for kids
Tarzan is one of the most well known fictional characters of the last century. As easily recognizable as Tom Sawyer or Conan. It's because of literary figures like Tarzan that we even have "capeshit" today for you to mindlessly consume.
Don't mind me, just posting the best cover art.
They've been making Tarzan movies since the 30s. For you to just brand it as a cartoon for kids is deplorable. You bang on your chest and make that noise and everyone knows your aping Tarzan. Stop being such a contrarian.
>3rd link is to the wiki page for the literary character, with further links to every book, movie, comic, etc. etc. that has featured the character
Anyone who isnt a kid or a mindless millennial knows that the only reason Disney even considered making that movie and cartoon series, was because of how massively popular the character is.
And this new movie is basically doing all the stuff that wasn't in the Disney cartoon.
>memelords and /capeshit/ers pretend not to know who Edgar Rice Burroughs is