John Carter

John Carter (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion

Message

doomtrader -> John Carter (3/27/2012 12:03:09 AM)
Just came back from the cinema, and I really must say that the movie was much better than I was expecting. I have read a lot how crap the John Carter is, so I choose it tonight as there was nothing better to see with my son. But hey, if you are not expecting complicated plot and deep characters, then the movie is really good. Personally I think it is a mix of Conan and Star Wars. Pros: good effects nice sights interesting worlds Cons: shallow plot some gaps in the plot Overall: 7/10

Gilmer -> RE: John Carter (3/27/2012 12:09:44 AM)
The books weren't real long on plot, either, but they were written in a simpler time. "Man falls in love with woman and then rescues her. Becomes a prince." Boom. There's your story.

ASHBERY76 -> RE: John Carter (3/27/2012 12:13:17 AM)
How come everybody knew this would bomb apart from Disney.

Mobius -> RE: John Carter (3/27/2012 1:41:51 AM)
I liked it.

warspite1 -> RE: John Carter (3/27/2012 6:32:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ASHBERY76 How come everybody knew this would bomb apart from Disney. Warspite1 Probably because Andrew Stanton was involved - and given his brilliant track record, maybe they could be forgiven for thinking they would have yet another monster hit on their hands. Oh well - no one is perfect....

ilovestrategy -> RE: John Carter (3/27/2012 9:03:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: edfgfdc if you are not expecting complicated plot and deep characters, then the movie is really good. Personally I think it is a mix of Conan and Star Wars. ___________________________________________________ bridal Dress Designers bridal Dresses Online discount Bridal Dresses Even the spam bot likes it!

martok -> RE: John Carter (3/27/2012 4:20:50 PM)
Given all the reactions I've read/heard so far, this must be one of those "love it or hate it" films. I've yet to see a review of this movie come down somewhere in the middle.

critter -> RE: John Carter (3/27/2012 5:32:01 PM)
Supp Martok? ^ I liked it. I thought they over did his jumping abilities, but the rest I could live with. Don't tell me you'd didn't want to see where the princess's tattoos went.

Capt. Harlock -> RE: John Carter (3/27/2012 8:41:39 PM)
quote: I've yet to see a review of this movie come down somewhere in the middle. Okay, because I always like to be a little different, I state that the major failure of the film was -- set design. It just did not convey the feeling of a genuine Martian civilization that you get from reading the Edgar Rice Burroughs books. And without a background to anchor the story in, the action becomes that much less believable. On the other hand, the representation on-screen of the four-armed Tharks was expertly done. After a few minutes, you stopped thinking about it, and accepted it as entirely natural.

doomtrader -> RE: John Carter (3/28/2012 1:02:27 PM)
There are many questions that the movie is not answering but I suppose that the producer/director wanted to tell more about them in the next parts. I assume there won't be any.

martok -> RE: John Carter (3/31/2012 3:55:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: critter Supp Martok? ^ Hey critter! Good to see you again. [:)]

Zap -> RE: John Carter (3/31/2012 8:38:59 PM)
Found it to be booring. Characters were'nt convincing. For a sci-fi the fantasy world created did not work for me.

Gilmer -> RE: John Carter (4/1/2012 12:26:17 AM)
What they need to do is make a movie out of "Norman of Torn". It would be a good costume movie set in medieval times. It was a good book.

Mad Cow -> RE: John Carter (4/2/2012 8:12:58 PM)
Pretty cool movie, imo.

ilovestrategy -> RE: John Carter (4/5/2012 3:51:11 AM)
Just saw it today. I liked it!

ilovestrategy -> RE: John Carter (4/5/2012 3:51:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ilovestrategy Just saw it today. I liked it! Just realized, that post made me sound just like a spambot! [X(]

warspite1 -> RE: John Carter (4/5/2012 4:38:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ilovestrategy quote: ORIGINAL: ilovestrategy Just saw it today. I liked it! Just realized, that post made me sound just like a spambot! [X(] Warspite1 Yes it does! - just needed the link to dvds and stuff and it would have been perfect....[;)]

martok -> RE: John Carter (4/5/2012 12:15:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: ilovestrategy quote: ORIGINAL: ilovestrategy Just saw it today. I liked it! Just realized, that post made me sound just like a spambot! [X(] Warspite1 Yes it does! - just needed the link to dvds and stuff and it would have been perfect....[;)] That, or wedding dresses. [:D]

ilovestrategy -> RE: John Carter (4/6/2012 3:14:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: martok quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: ilovestrategy quote: ORIGINAL: ilovestrategy Just saw it today. I liked it! Just realized, that post made me sound just like a spambot! [X(] Warspite1 Yes it does! - just needed the link to dvds and stuff and it would have been perfect....[;)] That, or wedding dresses. [:D] Oh man. I'd hate to be the spambot champion or something! [X(][:D]

Capt. Harlock -> RE: John Carter (4/20/2012 8:57:19 PM)
Late follow-up: "John Carter" will probably cost Disney $200 million in losses -- and has just cost Rich Ross, chairman of the film studio, his job.

Perturabo -> RE: John Carter (4/20/2012 10:05:31 PM)
Is it faithful to the novel?

parusski -> RE: John Carter (4/21/2012 1:12:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zap Found it to be booring. Characters were'nt convincing. For a sci-fi the fantasy world created did not work for me. I hated the movie.

ilovestrategy -> RE: John Carter (4/21/2012 2:47:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Perturabo Is it faithful to the novel? Not really no. I think the biggest difference was the lack of nudity in the movie. In the novels the nudity made the story seem macho and manly in my opinion. Maybe barbaric is the word I'm looking for. The movie just seemed too clean and PC. Well, it is a Disney movie after all. It just didn't capture the feeling of the novel the same way that the 1981 Conan movie captured the feeling of Robert Howard's Conan.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

3.640625