Disney's new 'John Carter' film dedicated to Steve Jobs

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 61
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Sol77 View Post


    Point granted, but I think he has good reason to expect this movie to be horrible. In my experience, when a movie trailer is incredibly heavy on action sequences while the plot or general story conceit is in no way discernible, the movie is horrible. A few recent examples: Green Lantern, Transformers 2 and 3, any Saw movie, the latest crap Dwayne "the rock" adventure movie, etc... If I knew of a less crass way to do it, I'd literally bet fifty dollars the John Carter movie will fail to score 60% on rotten tomatoes...as it is, there's really no way to make good on that bet, considering the forum.



    As I said, however: point granted. It might be brilliant. I think the odds are against it.



    Edit: That guy directed Nemo and Wall-e? I'll still bet the fifty, but I'll consider myself warned.



    All fair points, but I remember people saying things like that about Iron Man when it came out, and it turned out to be pretty good. I am looking forward to John Carter. I'm a younger sci-fi fan (25), but the history always interests me. And anyone who's ever watched Friday Night Lights (the tv show) will tell you that Taylor kitsch is a hell of an actor. I hope the writing and choreography are good so this can be his breakout movie.
  • Reply 22 of 61
    I for one am very enthusiastic about the movie. I actually read the book (E.R. Burroughs: A Princess of Mars) some time ago and loved it. It was written almost 100 years ago and it indeed has all the things in it that are visible in the movie trailer. There is no rip-off here. This is the real deal, the original. The trailer looks awesome, very similar to how I imagined this fantasy world while reading the book.



    By the way, for those who don't know E.R. Burroughs: he is better known as the creator of Tarzan. The John Carter books came first but the Tarzan series made Burroughs real famous.
  • Reply 23 of 61
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Goldenclaw View Post


    What I have found interesting is all of the people who are predicting the movie will bomb.



    Some go on to be classics. It is best to worry about the effort a few years from now when crowd mentality has ebbed.
  • Reply 24 of 61
    19841984 Posts: 955member
    Just saw the trailer for it. Yikes. That looks awful. Usually the trailer makes a movie look better than it is not the other way around so not a good sign. I guess we'll see soon enough.
  • Reply 25 of 61
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post


    It's being released in March, not summer and not Christmas. This is usually not a good sign. If Disney thought it could go toe to toe with, say, Prometheus, they would release it in May, June or July.



    The studios are really suffering, all one has to do is to go to a movie theater on a Friday or Saturday night and see new release playing to quarter full houses or less. The old strategie will not keep a studio afloat, instead of competeing they need to release when competition doesn't exist. The need to maximize the number of people through the gate has never been greater, you can't do that if you run against competition that can't fill the theaters either.



    In many ways the movie industry is a lot like Kodak, so stuck in their ways that they can't get past the old ways. The old ways being every rising ticket prices, high paid actors and other costly practices. The industry is being beaten by alternatives they have never had to deal with that are for more cost effective for the consumer. I wouldn't be surprised to see many studios going the way of Kodak, chapter 11 or even 13. They need to adjust their business models to enable reasonable pricing and profotability for the theaters.
  • Reply 26 of 61
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by 1984 View Post


    Just saw the trailer for it. Yikes. That looks awful. Usually the trailer makes a movie look better than it is not the other way around so not a good sign. I guess we'll see soon enough.



    I think I've seen two different trailers now in theaters and frankly neither where inspiring. However I think the target audience is probably 35 years younger than I. In my case I will likely go see it no matter what, I'm itching for some fresh SciFI movie content.
  • Reply 27 of 61
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,729member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    Even with that in mine one can't definitely say that the movie won't be good, won't be enjoyable, won't have certain elements and aspects that are appreciated from an asrtiic or technical point of view, or that it will bomb, a term I assume is referring to not being able to recoup its financial investment.



    Really all one can say is they are not interested, it doesn't look good, or any number of similarity stated comments that suppose that something on a basis of assumed probability.



    Absolutely agree. If you have the ability to predict when a film will bomb or become a blockbuster you have a very bright future indeed! And a good story is not necessarily a good indicator of success, critical or financial. In fact my idea of a good story seems of little importance for my kids, great acting seemingly even less so, to my chagrin. But judging from the trailers I am not expecting this to be a hugely interesting movie for myself.
  • Reply 28 of 61
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by paxman View Post


    Absolutely agree. If you have the ability to predict when a film will bomb or become a blockbuster you have a very bright future indeed! And a good story is not necessarily a good indicator of success, critical or financial. In fact my idea of a good story seems of little importance for my kids, great acting seemingly even less so, to my chagrin. But judging from the trailers I am not expecting this to be a hugely interesting movie for myself.



    I remember a trailer that made my Wife and I want to go see a nice feel good comedy... that trailer was for Leaving Las Vegas.
  • Reply 29 of 61
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Ugh. Looks like loser of a movie. What an insult.



    I wish people would stop living their lives through Jobs, and get a life of their own (as he advised).



    What are going on about? The director came from Pixar. Don't you believe he knew and appreciated Jobs?
  • Reply 30 of 61
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post


    Classy move. Just wished it was a better movie.



    I've heard nothing but positive advance word on this one.
  • Reply 31 of 61
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    Stanton has never directed a live action picture before this, and as he hints at in his remarks, working with a huge group of technicians and union guys and cast people and functionaries on location with a studio breathing down your neck is a pretty far cry from having the kind of complete creative control a Pixar movie affords.



    There's a kind of locomotive quality to a big effects heavy action movie. It just lumbers down the track whether there's anyone at the throttle or not. For someone who has never had the experience of having to act as general to a surly army that will run riot at the first sign of weakness. it wouldn't be surprising to find that little of his personal style made it to the screen.



    I mean, maybe he pulled it off, but I'm not particularly optimistic. Of course, another Pixar alum, Brad Bird, apparently did a pretty credible job with a freaking Mission Impossible movie, so I guess it's not out of the question. It's just that even under ideal conditions, Disney has a track record of making utterly soulless action movies that seem to have been crafted with no human intervention.



    He has an excellent track record with an excellent movie studio. Personally, I'm willing to give it a shot.



    Toy Story (1995) (Story, Screenplay, Additional Voice)

    A Bug's Life (1998) (Co-Director, Story, Screenplay, Cameo Voice of a Fly Near a "Bug Zapper")

    Toy Story 2 (1999) (Story, Screenplay, Voice of Emperor Zurg)

    Monsters, Inc. (2001) (Exec. Producer with John Lasseter, Screenplay)

    Finding Nemo (2003) (Director, Story, Screenplay, Voice of Crush, New England Lobster, and Numerous Other Characters)

    The Incredibles (2004) (Additional Voices)

    Cars (2006) (Voice of Fred)

    Ratatouille (2007) (Executive Producer with John Lasseter)

    WALL-E (2008) (Director, Writer, Voice of Human Character)

    Partly Cloudy (2009) (Executive Producer with John Lasseter)

    Up (2009) (Executive Producer with John Lasseter)

    Toy Story 3 (2010) (Story)

    John Carter (2012) (Writer, Director)
  • Reply 32 of 61
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,382member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Ugh. Looks like loser of a movie. What an insult.



    I wish people would stop living their lives through Jobs, and get a life of their own (as he advised).



    Yeah, because this is the 1st time in history that a movie has been dedicated to someone, right? God forbid.



    If it wasn't for SJ, Disney would not be what it is now. Jobs was a major factor in the founding and success of Pixar, and then he went ahead and brokered the Disney's purchase of Pixar. The company owes him a hell of alot.
  • Reply 33 of 61
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Ugh. Looks like loser of a movie. What an insult.



    I wish people would stop living their lives through Jobs, and get a life of their own (as he advised).



    In a way I agree. This sounds like they did it simply to do it. Instead of waiting for a Pixar film or such. It's like they figured they would get bad PR if they didn't mention him with the very next film and something about that irks me. Steve was a guy that didn't believe in hyping his or Apple's good works and making an act about getting your name on something. I think if they wanted to do something to honor Steve they could have done more than just his name on a movie. He was about growing tech and education, how about some kind of internship program for aspiring animators, maybe try to get Apple involved either with funding or maybe training (or both). That seems like more of what Steve would want.
  • Reply 34 of 61
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Ugh. Looks like loser of a movie. What an insult.



    I wish people would stop living their lives through Jobs, and get a life of their own (as he advised).



    Couldn't agree more. It's like dedicating Leonard Part 6 to Desi Arnaz. Sorry, it was the only person I could think of that passed away right before the movie Leonard Part 6 was released.
  • Reply 35 of 61
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


    In a way I agree. This sounds like they did it simply to do it. Instead of waiting for a Pixar film or such. It's like they figured they would get bad PR if they didn't mention him with the very next film and something about that irks me. Steve was a guy that didn't believe in hyping his or Apple's good works and making an act about getting your name on something. I think if they wanted to do something to honor Steve they could have done more than just his name on a movie. He was about growing tech and education, how about some kind of internship program for aspiring animators, maybe try to get Apple involved either with funding or maybe training (or both). That seems like more of what Steve would want.



    Why wait for a Pixar film? Pixar owns Disney and Steve's widow is Disney's largest shareholder. It's also his first release since Jobs's passing. It makes perfect sense to do it now.



    And it's not like they didn't know each other. They would have likely met by 1990 or 1991 at the latest. That's 20 years and a lot of films. You can't convince that Jobs didn't have this guy's contact information in his phone. Jobs directly influential in this guy's career.



    Have we forgotten that Toy Story was Pixar's first feature length film? It was hugely popular, profitable and changed the film industry for this type of movie making forever. It was a milestone release... and Stanton wrote it.





    Stanton is in the middle.
  • Reply 36 of 61
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    The studios are really suffering, all one has to do is to go to a movie theater on a Friday or Saturday night and see new release playing to quarter full houses or less. The old strategie will not keep a studio afloat, instead of competeing they need to release when competition doesn't exist. The need to maximize the number of people through the gate has never been greater, you can't do that if you run against competition that can't fill the theaters either.



    Well, not right now. The studios (and theaters) more than make up for it in the summer season.

    Your point is well taken, but that has nothing to do with how decisions get made in Hollywood. Movies are very seasonal, so studios always schedule them for release so that their strongest films will go in the summer season, then Christmas season, with weaker films being scheduled at other times of the year. Oscars contenders usually screen in the fall, close to the time the Academy starts voting. It's really about maximizing gains. The TV network do the same with their shows.



    BTW, "strong" or "weak" in this sense has little to do with whether the movie is good or not (it's a matter of personal and critical taste), but solely how well its studio thinks it will do at the box office relative to competing films.



    I hope the movie doesn't completely suck.
  • Reply 37 of 61
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Ugh. Looks like loser of a movie. What an insult.



    I wish people would stop living their lives through Jobs, and get a life of their own (as he advised).



    When you can pull your head out you'll understand Stanton was a personal friend of Steve's and this is his way of repaying him for the career Steve afforded him during the lows and highs and PIXAR.
  • Reply 38 of 61
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    Why wait for a Pixar film? Pixar owns Disney and Steve's widow is Disney's largest shareholder.



    Because by the time Brave hits theaters, no one will remember who Steve is. "Steve who?" they'll say. \
  • Reply 39 of 61
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,665member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    He has an excellent track record with an excellent movie studio. Personally, I'm willing to give it a shot.



    Toy Story (1995) (Story, Screenplay, Additional Voice)

    A Bug's Life (1998) (Co-Director, Story, Screenplay, Cameo Voice of a Fly Near a "Bug Zapper")

    Toy Story 2 (1999) (Story, Screenplay, Voice of Emperor Zurg)

    Monsters, Inc. (2001) (Exec. Producer with John Lasseter, Screenplay)

    Finding Nemo (2003) (Director, Story, Screenplay, Voice of Crush, New England Lobster, and Numerous Other Characters)

    The Incredibles (2004) (Additional Voices)

    Cars (2006) (Voice of Fred)

    Ratatouille (2007) (Executive Producer with John Lasseter)

    WALL-E (2008) (Director, Writer, Voice of Human Character)

    Partly Cloudy (2009) (Executive Producer with John Lasseter)

    Up (2009) (Executive Producer with John Lasseter)

    Toy Story 3 (2010) (Story)

    John Carter (2012) (Writer, Director)



    I'm a huge Pixar fan and well aware of Stanton's accomplishments, but directing animated features, particularly in the Pixar environment, is a different kind of experience from directing a live action film, particularly an effects laden blockbuster.



    When Stanton felt that a sequence in WALL-E, for instance, wasn't working, he could sit in a conference room with his artists and watch rough clips that could be reworked in real time. You're only a render away from completely reworking a scene. Vocal talent sits in comfortable studios down the hall from your office and you can record take after take with no more wear and tear than bringing in hot tea or having the kitchen make up some sushi.



    Compare that to the hair-pulling contingencies of live action (even heavily CG and green screen live action). It takes space, and time, and real people who have to coordinate schedules. Huge amounts of finicky, expensive equipment must be deployed, operated and struck, over and over again, every day. It would be like trying to make a Pixar movie if you had to haul all your servers and workstations around and set them up out of a truck and run them on generators, and then get your work done while the light was still good or the crew wasn't into overtime.



    Just a different deal, is all. Pixar has done wonderful things, and I don't regard live action as better or more authentic, but it's just a fact going out and capturing your images through a camera lens is a fundamentally different kind of endeavor than generating your images via software.
  • Reply 40 of 61
    maecvsmaecvs Posts: 129member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vagvoba View Post


    I for one am very enthusiastic about the movie. I actually read the book (E.R. Burroughs: A Princess of Mars) some time ago and loved it. It was written almost 100 years ago and it indeed has all the things in it that are visible in the movie trailer. There is no rip-off here. This is the real deal, the original. The trailer looks awesome, very similar to how I imagined this fantasy world while reading the book.



    By the way, for those who don't know E.R. Burroughs: he is better known as the creator of Tarzan. The John Carter books came first but the Tarzan series made Burroughs real famous.



    I first read the books in 1980. I loved them, and have re-read them every five years or so. I've been waiting for a movie to come out based on the series for just as long, but was not sure if animation would have done if more justice. The trailers look awfull. It looks like they are going to completely change the spirit of the entire movie, namely John Carter, alone on Mars, and how he slowly becomes friends with Tars Tarkas and turn him onto a quasi-action figure-slash-gladiator thing. Kind of similar to the shit they did to Sherlock Holmes, turning him into anything but the A.C Doyle detective.....
Sign In or Register to comment.