>action packed scifi fantasy
>huge production values
>no "forced diversity"
>no lgbtq
>biggest box office flop of all time
explain that chuds
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_biggest_box-office_bombs
>action packed scifi fantasy. >huge production values. >no "forced diversity". >no lgbtq
The problem is that the cast wasn't naked enough.
Disney actually believed people wanted to watch a movie based on a novel from the 1910s. Their producers are extremely out of touch
Should've adapted pic related instead.
Not once but twice. They did it the next year with The Lone Ranger.
boomer kino, if they introduced it ten years earlier it would have down well, it was basically the prototype for anime where loser teleports to a new world and gets a sexy waifu
The shitty part is it was pretty fricking good and was another contribution to ruining Taylor Kitcsh's career even though he's a competent actor.
nobody fricking cares about barsoom, and i say that as someone who liked this movie. it's a well executed movie with bad source material that has zero modern appeal.
bad marketing
Dejah Thoris was wearing clothes
Movies with "Mars" in the title do poorly.
>forgetting Sarah Marshall
>more than triples its production budget
ur a cheeky one m8
The very problem about the title was that it didn't even have Mars in it. It was just John Carter
What are you, a marketing exec? That's exactly the problem, fricking Mars Needs Moms bombed and some pencil-pusher mong decided that Mars was the problem, resulting in its removal from the title.
>John Carter
Okay, it's just some guy?
>John Carter and the Princess of Mars
Holy shit sounds like some pulp kino
homie
it says martian, "mart", not mars. no s.
The action was weightless and lacking tension or stakes, not only because its impossible to give a shit about the character, he's also quickly established to be invulnerable, he's the title character, and the entire movie is structured as a flashback
the "forced diversity" comes from making deja thoris a genius but then they have no choice but to botch it with "no papa don't make me marry the bad man!" because otherwise john carter would have no role.
this is all talking around the problem the entire script was seminal pulp. You've seen every aspect of it done better elsewhere, making the movie just a collection of weaker execution of everything you've seen elsewhere.
>banking on name recognition of a niche sci-fi protagonist from books written nearly 100 years before the movie was released.
>and all this stuff too
He's not fricking Tarzan ffs.
was john wick banking on name recognition?
of the lead actor, yes
I need to ask my doctor about this seminal pulp I’ve been having
>The action was weightless and lacking tension or stakes, not only because its impossible to give a shit about the character, he's also quickly established to be invulnerable, he's the title character, and the entire movie is structured as a flashback
sounds like every modern movie
I love this movie and watch it every year. Not a huge fan of the brooding reluctant warrior thing when book John Carter was Chad McBadass who gloried in his martial abilities and considered Mars to be his god. Also ripping off Josey Wales with the dead family was weak, but overall one of my favorite movies. Deja was hot
so how autistic are you?
Why you gotta come at me like that dawg?
Its an honest question, no offense intended. I'm not autistic at all and it took effort to watch it once.
I actually watched this movie sitting next to an autistic person, and THEY DID NOT LIKE IT ONE BIT.
About 20 minutes in they started loudly complaining in the theatre about unrealistic depictions of gravity and things rapidly went downhill from there
Andrew Stanton was convinced everyone and their mothers knew who John Carter was. They should have just called it Warlord of Mars or some other pulpy shit.
Needed a better name. John Carter makes me think it's some random movie about a black guy played by Denzel Washington.
what does john wick make you think of?
checkmate atheist
the first John Wick didn't do that great at the box office. It's saving grace was that the budget wasn't high and people remember Keanu from The Matrix. No one knows Taylor Kitsch.
Or a sequel to Get Carter set on Mars
i thoroughly enjoyed pluto nash
Black person
easy, it went way over budget and its marketing was absolutely botched
it had about the same amount of marketing as avatar.
And? No one said anything about a lack of marketing, it's famous for bad marketing and you can find numerous articles written on it. Disney had no idea how to even cut a trailer for it and they went all over the place trying to make one that worked to the point that no one had any fricking clue of what kind of movie it was supposed to be
its only "famous for bad marketing" from people who insist its a good movie. it isn't a good movie. avatar had the same amount of quality of marketing, because james cameron was confident that all the marketing it needed was "its in theaters." and he was right.
the first avatar film had horrendous marketing kek
the movie had a higher second weekend than first weekend because it took a ton of word of mouth to get people to even know it exists
>the first avatar film had horrendous marketing
Hence why its being brought up as a counter-point to the claim john carter failed because of "bad marketing."
It failed because its a bad movie.
what was avatar competing against that allowed it to gain steam a week after its initial release?
movies just as forgotten by non-autists as john carter was.
you left out that the heroine was a total smokeshow
she was mid and wearing far too much clothing. like they couldn't decide if they wanted her outfits to be revealing or frumpy.
There wasn't >$600 million worth of fans for an adaptation of a 100 year old novel that had largely been forgotten outside of nerds. The name not being evocative of an action scifi epic, but rather a docudrama, didn't help. Disney was having a hard time launching new action IP post-POTC, too. Prince of Persia, Tron, Lone Ranger - all flops.
If it makes you feel any better, there are plenty of woke movies on that list with more added every year.
is the name "avatar" evocative of "action scifi epic?"
It could be, Avatar could mean many things. You ask me, I think a game character. Others probably thought of Aang. The appeal of the blue cat people franchise is its technical prowess. The first one benefited heavily from being a great experience in 3D.
>The first one benefited heavily from being a great experience in 3D.
Read: word of mouth.
Yes, of course
The real reason was because it got btfo by other movies it was sandwiched between. The Lorax was already dominating that month. Then John Carter released with a terrible name and marketing. Next 21 Jump Street released taking any wind out of its sails that it still might have. Then a week or two later the first Hunger Games movie released. By that point nobody was even talking about John Carter anymore
Might have had a more favorable run if it didn't release between a popular Disney movie, a popular comedy and the adaptation of the first book in a popular series that people were clambering for
>nobody was even talking about John Carter anymore
because it wasn't good.
It might've had a more favorable run if it was actually a good movie.
It was paint-by-numbers bland slop.
It was marked from the start because the protagonist was a confederate. They did everything possible to sink it
Just my observations while being vaguely familiar with JC
>Mars looks boring, since you already portray it as having alien life, why not make it more visually striking, it just looks like a random desert.
>another "let me do something and become a part of your tribe and gain respect" plots
>villains and their plans are not interesting
>jumping around like a spaz is not cool
>lots of stupid gag stuff
>main actor is too bland
It just needed to pack more punch and also be more visually striking.
morons will foam at the mouth decrying MUH WOKE when looking at the sorry state of current media but its shit like john carter and solo that proved to studios that people are just bored of whiteoid lead movies and dont want to see this shit anymore
>whiteoid
Get fricked, shit colored clown
Disney tanked it on purpose so its sequels wouldn't compete with the franchise named "Star Wars" that they'd recently purchased.
Sometimes advanced Kino just doesn't stick in the zeitgeist.
See: Dredd movie.
Bringing back Caesar was a pretty weird plot point.
HE WAS A CONSUL OF MARS
Wait till you see Brutus redemption arc
the "bad marketing" revolved solely around its name
John Carter is just a boring name that can mean anything and nothing.
Meanwhile Princess of Mars immediately conveys adventure and fantasy.
They simply fricked up.
And they did the name change because there was a recent string of flops related to Mars-themed movies so they thought they were being smart about it.
Either way the movie itself is pretty generic. It's not a bad movie, just generic.
you're an idiot. the movie didn't flop because it didn't mention mars, it flopped despite the fact that it didn't mention mars which guarantees a flop. normal people are not fricking elon dicksuckas who think mars is interesting. local space is extremely unpopular in fiction in our time
it was kino, and i'm tired of pretending otherwise
its just weird because everyone knows this shit is not on mars now. 1800s you could fantasise but now it's like come on. it just doesn't feel fun to have to deliberately pretend to not know what you know. a movie is supposed to make you automatically think 'well, what if...??'
>its just weird because everyone knows this shit is not on mars now
>a movie is supposed to make you automatically think 'well, what if...??'
Do you even read the shit you write? The entire point is that its not real, its literally a what if scenario
its a "what if" scenario built around a ton of shit most people know is wrong. the mobile city was supposed to be the explanation for "the canals of mars," for instance. mars has no canals.
and people even today believe the stars, the planets and month you were born in rule your life. Whats your point?
that you can only make movies around concepts people can either suspend their disbelief over or don't already objectively know is false.
If they said avatar was set on IO people would call bullshit.
And yet they're just fine flocking to theaters to watch blue cat people and plumbers fighting turtle dinosaurs
yes, people believe there might be humanoid aliens on life supporting planets outside our solar system and don't expect stylized movies to be completely realistic.
Oh but imagining a universe where Mars actually has multiple intelligent species living there is just way too much right?
Yes. Because we know mars doesn't. Furthermore, the movie doesn't even try to imply they live underground. Nope, just tons of intelligent life running around on the surface, in plain view. complete with cities coliseums scattered about.
So all of fiction should be entirely discounted just because it isn't true. Got it
see
Please read and understand. Suspension of disbelief is not a right, it is earned.
i can't believe you would specially cut out the part of my post that reconciles the two parts you posted and then pretend that i just wrote two things that aren't reconciled with each other. lmao
Nah you're just realizing how badly you contradicted yourself in one post
Motherfricker did you think there was shit on mars before America landed? We knew there was mostly nothing.
yes, we, americans, had tons of high resolution images of mars before pathfinder. the last big dustup was the face and pyramids, which were also proven to be visual artifacts due to low resolution.
what? oh it's you, the person who cuts out part of the post and then responds to the other part as if that part isn't there. This is the strangest type of posting i've come across. Here let me put it back for you
>1800s you could fantasise
you forgot
>super hot lead actress
>sharp and bright visuals
"sharp and bright visuals" of a desert isn't impressive.
and the lead actress was a generic brown girl.
It was a film no one asked for and then it was badly marketed. An old fashioned flop. However it did cause the head of the studio to lose their job, unlike now.
well no one knew what the frick a john carter was
I thought it was a biopic or something
no one knew what a john wick was either. if the movie was good, they would've.
>action film starring keanu reeves
yeah I can't imagine that would draw audiences
if it wasn't good, it wouldn't've
They should have called it Princess of Mars
John Carter is a terrible title.
The marketing was also bad.
Imagine if the Dunc film was called Duncan Idaho (he's not the main character yet, but his name is terrible)
Or if they just called Dunc, "Paul". Man that would be lame.
dune was a pretty shitty name too. you only think its a good name, now, because the books are so well regarded.
Same with Holes
hah, the thumbnail cover looks like an anus
So many Disney shits on the list really makes you think...
Serious question... why are there so many versions of the same story where some white guy goes native and ends up fricking the native girl and saving her tribe from whatever.
because of edgar rice burroughs. he literally invented the trope.
the real reason is there was internal transition within disney and the producer who championed it initially exited by the time it came out and the replacement just dumped it
same shit when they bought fox and the last fox productions just got dumped
Chuds are moron only suited for mass graves.
I've seen it in the cinema with my godmother. It was great
both this and prince of persia deserved trilogies
>Prince of Persia
Let's not go crazy
The new bladerunner was a flop as well, doesn't make it any less kino
>>no "forced diversity"
>>no lgbtq
Nobody was worried about this in 2012. In fact 2012 was the year that started it when that paki woman sued WB for not casting her as an extra in The Hobbit
>Finding Nemo and WALL-E director
>music by Michael Giacchino
It deserved better
When I saw it for the first time two years ago I couldn't believe it was really good, even the mystery was pretty well set up
>muh name muh marketing
Shut the frick up, its just a bad movie. Poor acting, poor CGI, weightless action, boring plot, watching it is a complete waste of time.
>b-b-b-but its just called JOHN CARTER of course it flopped
A movie just called JOHN WICK did amazingly well and had 3 sequels. Borat and Bruno, is just a guys name. Logan is just a guys name. Rocky, Napoleon Dynamite, Johnny English, there's dozens of examples.
Its just bad.
>Shut the frick up, its just a bad movie. Poor acting, poor CGI, weightless action, boring plot, watching it is a complete waste of time.
all modern movies have that. You just pretend they aren't now
People thought of Coach Carter when hearing about this movie and the cross-contamination just killed the vibe
i liked it
i couldnt care less that you didnt troon
Terrible marketing.
Why the frick would they call the movie just "John Carter?" it doesn't make it sound like a space flick
The anons posting itt about the "Mars" part of the title being problematic are not wrong. The movie was originally titled John Carter of Mars but test audiences didn't like the title because they had recently seen Mars Needs Moms and didn't like it. It's a moronic reason but that's why they did it.
It was two things. The lack of promotion and, sadly, the name. Now the name is a classic franchise from the sci-fo golden era. Which means a long, long time ago. This movie literally needed the advertisers to explain to the americ**t cattle what it actually was. They all thought it was going to be a drama.
non existent marketing and the only one was "man jumps as some kind of flea and is named John Carter"
A Princess of Mars would work better than John Carter
Jimmy Carter from Mars and Forgettoland flopping cancels the TR3N. Pixar directors can't into live action.
>pic related this is what they took from you
Bad marketing
100 year sold property nobody knew
100% the problem was the literal title. And not advertising it enough as a space opera epic
John Carter is a terrible name. Hence why the original fricking stories were never called that
Where are The Marvels and Indiana Jones 5 on that list?
Its simple
The premise was beyond shit
>What if human in mars but he becomes a superhero for no reason?