|
this movie sucked rear end
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 04:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 22:01 |
|
|
Would more movies be improved if they went the further step of being self-parodies?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 07:14
|
|
|
Burkion posted:John Carter was a doomed movie. It had way too much baggage on it just from all of the different attempts to make it and it was always going to struggle to make its money back, and then there's the half hearted way they actually attempted to make it. The scene near the beginning where he keeps jumping out the window was pretty good. It should have been the opening scene, it would have opened with a ton more energy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 04:53
|
|
|
John Carter has so many good scenes that it's a shame half of them seem to be good scenes from a different film. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zndz7IfDiI
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 15:41
|
|
|
I got a blu-Ray copy which came with a 3D Bly-Ray copy I can float someone's way for a reacharound
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
Hbomberguy posted:John Carter has so many good scenes that it's a shame half of them seem to be good scenes from a different film. I hate to admit it , that movie has so many flaws but i still like it a lot.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 23:41
|
|
|
Goons hate everything. Movie was fun. Fight scene was incredibly bad rear end, especially the kill snipe. The Pratt/raptor dynamic kinda felt like it went beyond pack mentality and into destructive children acting out, but I still thought it was neat. What up T-Rex. Stroll in, gently caress some poo poo up, get help from Blue, stroll out. Needs a banner falling.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 03:39
|
|
|
Does anyone mind summing up the past 120 pages for me? I'm hoping they validate my opinion that this is the most offensively stupid film of the last twenty odd years.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 05:17
|
|
|
Simiain posted:Does anyone mind summing up the past 120 pages for me? I'm hoping they validate my opinion that this is the most offensively stupid film of the last twenty odd years. TheHoosier posted:Goons hate everything. Movie was fun. Fight scene was incredibly bad rear end, especially the kill snipe. The Pratt/raptor dynamic kinda felt like it went beyond pack mentality and into destructive children acting out, but I still thought it was neat. There ya go. Both goonpinions in a single post.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 06:25
|
|
|
Simiain posted:Does anyone mind summing up the past 120 pages for me? I'm hoping they validate my opinion that this is the most offensively stupid film of the last twenty odd years. Have you seen Paul Blart 2
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 06:29
|
|
|
Burkion posted:John Carter was a doomed movie. It had way too much baggage on it just from all of the different attempts to make it and it was always going to struggle to make its money back, and then there's the half hearted way they actually attempted to make it. I know he was a confederate in the books but they didnt really mentiin it in the movie did they?
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 06:49
|
|
|
Animax posted:I hate to admit it , that movie has so many flaws but i still like it a lot. John Carter was better than Jurassic World.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 08:10
|
|
|
Uncle Wemus posted:I know he was a confederate in the books but they didnt really mentiin it in the movie did they? Being a confederate veteran is still, for some drat reason, the done thing. See also, Hell on Wheels. Steve2911 posted:John Carter was better than Jurassic World.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 12:37
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:Being a confederate veteran is still, for some drat reason, the done thing. See also, Hell on Wheels. Someone told me Hell on Wheels is a tv show that is basically "What if the Outlaw Josey Wales went to work for the railroad companies?" and that has been pretty well apt. I stopped watching when Common went insane after killing a bear with a knife though. Last thing I remember is "crazy swede" is a Mormon and "Bohannon" is a mormon with a teenage wife now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 13:29
|
|
|
Burkion posted:Instead they both tried to ground it in reality while simultaneously doing nothing of the sort in regards to his nearly literal cartoon animal sidekick, our hero fails at drat near everything he does and almost never wins a single fight, and the tone is weird as gently caress. It tried to appeal to a lot of different ideas and instead tore itself apart. You know the old experiment where you play the various tones of a trombone (or other instrument) and overlap them, and right before your brain realises it's a trombone sound, it's just this hideous mess of unrelated noises that could be from anything? John Carter is like a trombone. Ya gotta listen, but also with your eyes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 15:08
|
|
|
Here's the problem. John Carter isn't funny. You know what mixes genres like that VERY well? Evil Dead 2. At least I don't find John Carter funny so for me the mix just did not work.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 15:52
|
|
|
Pulpy stuff doesn't have to be funny though, and indeed making pulpy stuff funny just leads to crap like Kung Fury. The key characteristics I see is that a pulp work has to have basic genre archetypes (little to no subversive takes on those archetypes ), and it has to use those archetypes with genuine sincerity. The difference between something like Star Wars and something like the Prince of Persia movie is that while both feature a traditional hero's journey, the latter seems embarrassed with itself. There's a comic relief character that comments on the supply and demand of ostriches, as though the filmmakers are saying "hey isn't this wacky! We have a merchant character except he talks like a modern day guy!" C-3P0, by contrast, bitches and moans all the time but he doesn't stick out as distinct from the narrative. For whatever flaws it might have, John Carter is made with sincerity and there's no elements I can think of off hand that really stick out in a "this is wacky " way. I also haven't seen it in forever so I might have a bad memory though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 16:19
|
|
|
Mean Bean Machine posted:this movie sucked rear end I agree. None of the main characters seemed to understand big loving dinosaurs are trying to eat them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 23:42
|
|
|
John Carter's only real problem is that it took way too long to get going. It started with no energy, and took a really long time to gain any.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 00:35
|
|
|
My biggest problem with John Carter was that the main character had zero charisma so I didn't give a poo poo what happened to him. My second problem was that the Princess/love interest also had zero charisma and the main villain never felt like much of a threat so I never give a poo poo about the plot woven around saving the Princess and restoring her kingdom. Most of the middle of the film with the big green Tharks was great (Sola and Tarkas were the only sympathetic characters for me) but once the plot moved out of the desert into the Red Martian cities and back to Earth I just couldn't care any more. Snowman_McK posted:John Carter's only real problem is that it took way too long to get going. It started with no energy, and took a really long time to gain any. It had three different beginnings: a flashback to an airship battle on Barsoom, a flashforward to Edgar Rice Burroughs receiving John's estate and starting to read his diary and then a jump to John in the 'present' in Arizona. John didn't really appear in the film until 10 minutes in (apart from voiceovers and a 30 second appearance where he escaped a Thern agent and sent a telegram in the flashforward) and when he did appear he was a morose jerk. They obviously wanted a framing device set on Earth but they also wanted to start with a big action sequence so they kept packing in scenes and pushing the introduction of the main character and the story further and further back. The introduction to John's character was lovely as well - at the start of the film he's a broken rear end in a top hat who has given up on the rest of humanity and only cares about gold. Because he's pretty much completely withdrawn they had to shoehorn in an awkward 'tell not show' description of how awesome he is via exposition (Bryan Cranston actually reads out a list of his past service awards and achievements) and they shove the loss of his family into the narrative in a really hamfisted manner: "Whatever you think I owe this country, I've already paid in full!" /extreme closeup on the two wedding bands on his finger) In theory it should have set him up as a badass man of action who'd had his spirit broken by the greatest possible loss but he just came across as an angry ranting jerk. computer parts posted:For whatever flaws it might have, John Carter is made with sincerity and there's no elements I can think of off hand that really stick out in a "this is wacky " way. I also haven't seen it in forever so I might have a bad memory though. There were a few scenes I'd class as 'wacky': John repeatedly failing to escape from the Union Colonel at the start of the film, the ugly six legged monster turning out to be a goofy puppydog who kept following him and ruining his escape attempt in the Thark village, the arena scene where he was bouncing all over the place but kept getting yanked back on his chain like the dog in the old Foghorn Leghorn cartoons, the scene where he messes up his introduction so the Tharks all think his name is 'Virginia' for the entire film ... But yeah, it actually was made with sincerity. Director Andrew Stanton had been a huge fan of the Barsoom books since he was a kid and he really leaned hard on Disney to greenlight the project. Stanton was a Pixar guy (he wrote Toy Story and Monsters Inc and directed Wall-E and Finding Nemo) but had never directed a live action movie (let alone a $250m+ tentpole!) so Disney were never really comfortable with the project but backed it because you don't say no to the Finding Nemo guy. Stanton decided that he didn't want any big name stars in the film, was allegedly constantly liaising with his Pixar buddies rather than people with experience with live action films and directed much of the advertising campaign himself. The Walt Disney chairman at the time was a new guy called Rich Ross who came from a TV background and the previous chairman had greenlit John Carter and then handed the entire mess over to him. The film opened on March 9 2012 and in just one day it fell to second place behind The Lorax and in the following weeks it got swamped by 21 Jump Street and The Hunger Games. Disney took an absolute bath on the film. Ross allegedly blamed Pixar and the Pixar guys told him to go gently caress himself. He resigned his position a month after the film was released. The film dropped out of cinemas before the end of April, The Avengers opened a few days later and the world forgot about John Carter. Andrew Stanton kept talking about how he was keen to do a sequel but Disney let the rights to the franchise lapse back to the Edgar Rice Burroughs Estate last year. Snowglobe of Doom fucked around with this message at 09:34 on Nov 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 09:05
|
|
|
I've been playing a lot of Witcher lately, and with the new movie on the horizon, I hope it ties in with Jurassic World 2 so we can have Geralt hunting dinosaurs. And of course, he's going to have to fight Noonwraith Zara.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2015 00:01
|
|
|
e: nm turtlecrunch fucked around with this message at 00:29 on Nov 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2015 00:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 22:01 |
|
|
That article is a joke.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2015 00:31
|
|
