Though I missed John Carter in the theatre, I did see it on DVD twice this Fall. Wow, what an incredible film, which truly exceeded my expectations! Amazing effects, incredible scenery, good story, and great acting! The film makers were very true to the original ERB story, while at the same time changing some things to make things more "cinematic":
- The green four-armed Tharks and the red-skinned/blue-blooded (but otherwise human-looking) people were close to what ERB described in the original books, and the vehicles/other tech seemed similar to the books as well. Also liked the elaborate costumes, amazing city-scapes, deserts, etc.
- The CGI was amazing, and you could really see texture in the skin of the Tharks, the fur of the white apes, etc.
- Though the whole film was excellent, two of the scenes that really stood out for me were the one where John Carter stayed behind to fight off all the evil Tharks alone (that were led by the bald Thurn), as well as the arena scene, where JC fought against the large, four-armed white apes - Incredible!
- I liked how they changed the explanation as to how JC was transported to Mars to make it more pseudo-scientific/magical, i.e., the medallion was what transported his "consciousness" to Mars; in the original ERB novel, I don't think much of an explanation was given here.
As to why JC didn't do better at the box office despite being such an incredibly visually stunning & amazing movie, I have some theories - some of these have already been mentioned:
1) Timing: The film was released in March, and though that would initially seem like a great time for release since it didn't have to compete against the blockbusters that were coming out in May - July, I'm not sure it was the right move. If the film had instead been released in August (while people were still in the mode of seeing summer films) it may have done better. Then again, maybe not...
2) Obviously, the marketing re: the title. After seeing the film, I really can't believe it was called "John Carter" instead of "John Carter of Mars" or, even better, "John Carter, Warlord of Mars". Though we fans of the ERB novels & Marvel comic would have been familiar with the story, the general public had no clue that "John Carter" was a sci-fi film. In any case, adding "Mars" to the title would certainly not caused the film to do any worse at the box office than it already did. And, it was interesting that at the very end of the film (before the credits), they did show the title "John Carter of Mars"...
3) Lack of a toyline: Sure, I completely understand that toy companies probably didn't want to invest in the film since they were uncertain of how well it would do, but IMHO a small, limited series of 4-5 figures and 2-3 creatures at stores stores like Target, Wal-mart, etc. a couple of months prior to the film's release may have gone a long way towards making kids want to see the movie before the release date. Of course, this may not have made much difference in this case, but it probably couldn't have hurt either...
In any case, it's unfortunate that the film didn't do better at the box office, which means there won't be any sequels. Like last year's excellent but underrated Conan film, for some reason JC never found it's audience (at least not while in the theatre)....
).
