"John Carter" bombs
- Thread starter shavedape
- Start date
YoshiKart64
Well Known GateFan
Bloated budget, poor advertising and average reviews = this.
Don't know what Disney were thinking with this to be honest. Luckily the international markets have faired better, with Russia in particular going nuts for it. It still has $100 million dollars or something crazy to earn before it actually turns a profit though. Disney is going to loose a whole chunk of change on this one.
Don't know what Disney were thinking with this to be honest. Luckily the international markets have faired better, with Russia in particular going nuts for it. It still has $100 million dollars or something crazy to earn before it actually turns a profit though. Disney is going to loose a whole chunk of change on this one.
heisenberg
Earl Grey
Damn! The poor sales is because of the time of which the movie was released. No one is going to watch this movie in America during march when winter is just about to end. Especially one that's meant to be a big budget movie. It's still snowing and not during summer season. If they had put it during the summer break then it would have been a different story.
SciphonicStranger
Objects may be closer than they appear
Honestly, I saw a lot of advertising for this movie and none of it really got me psyched up to go out and actually watch it. I think I'll just wait for it on cable.
Disney does not know how to do science fiction. Ever since The Black Hole bombed, I see that Disney has no clue what science fiction is. They had Tron in the 1980s, but still that movie was more popular for the music than anything else. It was one of the first with its own video game, its own toy line and action figures, themed school lunch boxes, cereal boxes, etc. Tron II same thing. They dont know the underlying appeal of science fiction, and instead they produce science-fiction-y garbage which is set in space with aliens or spaceships, but has no science. I cannot think of anything from Disney remotely resembling the real thing. Touchstone does not count. 
Illiterati
Council Member & Author
Part of the issue, I think, is that the promotion of the movie was done so very badly. I saw a trailer that a fan had put together and it made the movie look a LOT more interesting than the crap Disney put out to advertise the film.
They're calling it Ishtar In Space now, I think.
They're calling it Ishtar In Space now, I think.
Disney does not know how to do science fiction. Ever since The Black Hole bombed, I see that Disney has no clue what science fiction is. They had Tron in the 1980s, but still that movie was more popular for the music than anything else. It was one of the first with its own video game, its own toy line and action figures, themed school lunch boxes, cereal boxes, etc. Tron II same thing. They dont know the underlying appeal of science fiction, and instead they produce science-fiction-y garbage which is set in space with aliens or spaceships, but has no science. I cannot think of anything from Disney remotely resembling the real thing. Touchstone does not count.
The Black Hole had some entertaining parts. Maximillian Schell did his part well and the scenes of the Cygnus being pulled apart by the gravity were well done. But overall it lacked logic and compelling characters (kind of like the Star Wars prequels - I wonder how Harry Plinkett would have reviewed The Black Hole?).
Illiterati
Council Member & Author
As I recall, that was a time when Disney wanted special effects so much that story suffered as a result of their wanting to jam as much "pretty stuff" in there as they possible could.
Tony Perkins was SO oddly cast in that thing.
Rac80
The Belle of the Ball
Disney does not know how to do science fiction. Ever since The Black Hole bombed, I see that Disney has no clue what science fiction is. They had Tron in the 1980s, but still that movie was more popular for the music than anything else. It was one of the first with its own video game, its own toy line and action figures, themed school lunch boxes, cereal boxes, etc. Tron II same thing. They dont know the underlying appeal of science fiction, and instead they produce science-fiction-y garbage which is set in space with aliens or spaceships, but has no science. I cannot think of anything from Disney remotely resembling the real thing. Touchstone does not count.
They think in terms of merchandizing and yes that is where the money is, but it does not always equal good scifi. all IMHO. of course.
Part of the issue, I think, is that the promotion of the movie was done so very badly. I saw a trailer that a fan had put together and it made the movie look a LOT more interesting than the crap Disney put out to advertise the film.
They're calling it Ishtar In Space now, I think.
GREEN!
so true. I wasn't a fan of tron (never bothered with the sequel)...they take a "disney story"(imho a "family" story, kind of sappy) and try to set it in space....never works for them!
in general this movie isn't just bombing...it's going down like the titantic! it's expected to lose $200million! it cost about $350 mil. to make. http://www.montrealgazette.com/ente...ld+Hollywood+biggest+loser/6340424/story.html
YoshiKart64
Well Known GateFan
Disney knew a while ago this movie was going to bomb. It went way over budget as the director considered it a passion project, being a fan of the author and the book (which I believe is one of the earliest examples of sci-fi).
Still most of the commentary on the whole event suggests that book was more influential than it was actually compelling and that the project was no longer relevant.
Still most of the commentary on the whole event suggests that book was more influential than it was actually compelling and that the project was no longer relevant.
Rac80
The Belle of the Ball
I can understand deisney's desire for John carter movies...edgar Rice burroughs gave us Tarzan you know. Classic scifi can be a real bonus for moviemakers- Jules verne movies have done quite well. I think Disney saw an untapped market with John carter and hoped to be able to make a series of john carter movies. I think the problem is he was an unknown character. my hubby is a scifi fan and never heard of john carter. it has been 100 years since burroughs wrote his first john carter novel and if disney had played it right- maybe done a tv documentary on Burroughs and the character, this movie could have been a boon for them.
Illiterati
Council Member & Author
[video=youtube;pkSRF-uHlWk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkSRF-uHlWkThey think in terms of merchandizing and yes that is where the money is, but it does not always equal good scifi. all IMHO. of course.
GREEN!
so true. I wasn't a fan of tron (never bothered with the sequel)...they take a "disney story"(imho a "family" story, kind of sappy) and try to set it in space....never works for them!
in general this movie isn't just bombing...it's going down like the titantic! it's expected to lose $200million! it cost about $350 mil. to make. http://www.montrealgazette.com/ente...ld+Hollywood+biggest+loser/6340424/story.html
shavedape
Well Known GateFan
Yeah, they could have built a fan base around this movie instead of just expecting it to sell itself via TV commercials. A slow, steady introduction to the general public, most of whom have no clue who John Carter is, would have done much to sell this movie in the long run.
mzzz
Well Known GateFan
I went and watched it anyways, and it wasn't half bad. Think more people would maybe like it if they actually went and saw it instead of buying into all the news surrounding it. It has good potential for future stories. Had a little bit of everything, mystery, action, humour, aliens, tech, etc.