I honestly can't believe how many are "reviewing" the movie based on the trailer. THE TRAILER! Which is tailored to meet marketing needs, not storytelling ones.
May I remind you, Up's trailer wasn't great either. It looked like a random old guy would be trading jokes with a 8-year old kid in a floating house and they would learn about respecting age differences or whatever.
It turned out to be my favorite Pixar movie. It's way up there, in a slap battle with Wall-E for the #1
The Brave trailer (not the teaser one) is also pretty shitty. Makes the movie look like another story about women's rights. After the flaming turd that was Cars 2, I surely hope they are pulling an Up with that trailer.
Because by the time Brave hits theaters, no one will remember who Steve is. "Steve who?" they'll say. \
Oh yeah? How many people do you think stick around to read the credits of an action flick? I do when it's a Pixar film because I know they put some extra bits in the credits but I'm usually long gone before the first line scrolls to the top of the screen on most other films.
I wish people would stop living their lives through Jobs, and get a life of their own (as he advised).
Well I, for one, am anxious to see the movie and how closely it follows Edgar Rice Burroughs' novel "A Princess of Mars." I have read all eleven novels of Burroughs' John Carter on Mars series and found them to be very entertaining. I liked them a lot more than his Tarzan novels. But then I'm a sci-fi fantasy nut job a anyway.
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.
I can see your point as every railer Disney has released has been awful. Just abysmal. But I came across a fan-made trailer that is leagues better. Of course any trailer can mislead but after watching the fan-made trailer my attitude towards John Carter has changed for the better and I'm actually looking forward to the film now. Check it out at the link below.
Actually, Star Wars is a complete rip off of this movie. The John Carter novels were written before Lucas was born and Star Wars shows heavy reliance on some of their themes. \
Actually, Star Wars is a complete rip off of this movie. The John Carter novels were written before Lucas was born and Star Wars shows heavy reliance on some of their themes. \
Yes, it was an influence, as was Akira Kurosawa's The Hidden Fortress (which is a nothing short of amazing movie by itself).
I remember when Stardust came out and the trailers looked terrible. I absolutely loved the book and couldn't believe they ruined it so completely. Then I actually watched the movie and amazingly enough I loved it. So instead of relying on watching the trailers and saying "this movie is terrible, its not worthy of SJ", how but we give it a chance. It has a great pedigree(author and director both), and the early buzz is overwhelmingly positive.
Don't get me wrong, I hope there is something special at the end of Brave also since Steve was paramount in the success of pixar
I remember when Stardust came out and the trailers looked terrible. I absolutely loved the book and couldn't believe they ruined it so completely. Then I actually watched the movie and amazingly enough I loved it. So instead of relying on watching the trailers and saying "this movie is terrible, its not worthy of SJ", how but we give it a chance. It has a great pedigree(author and director both), and the early buzz is overwhelmingly positive.
OK. Fair enough. We all love positive surprises, so I hope I am proved wrong.
JOHN CARTER was amazing! I have not felt so genuinely surprised in a movie theater since seeing the original MATRIX. I saw STAR WARS through JEDI in their original runs at their formative ages of 4-10, and I lost my damn fool mind. Kids today will be doing the same thing for JOHN CARTER. This is their STAR WARS. Twelve year olds will lose their shit.
If the previews are representative of the film, only the fact that Mr. Jobs is dead and beyond all pain leaves us free to laugh rather than cry.
Then again, he'd surely appreciate the irony of being associated with a film genre that calls itself "fantasy" even as it castrates the imagination of any source material it touches. Still, I'm glad he's beyond knowing that his name has been attached to an insipid piece of uninspired, derivative, soft-core trash excreted by an industry whose motto should be "Think Identical."
Poor Edgar Rice Burroughs, poor Frank Frazetta, poor us? But not poor Steve. He's dead, and presumably beyond all such idiocy.
Increasingly, I take a lot of pleasure from the fact that those who benefit from my work don't know my name, and am willing to expend some effort to keep it that way. In a culture where to be known for anything at all is to have is to have both one's self and once's achievements debased, anonymity becomes a great gift.
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.
Thank you SolipsismX for injecting sound thought and reason into this. I was going to reply, but this was all that was needed. Thank you.
JOHN CARTER was amazing! I have not felt so genuinely surprised in a movie theater since seeing the original MATRIX. I saw STAR WARS through JEDI in their original runs at their formative ages of 4-10, and I lost my damn fool mind. Kids today will be doing the same thing for JOHN CARTER. This is their STAR WARS. Twelve year olds will lose their shit.
Wow the comparison to the original Matrix? I'll reserve my enthuasism for now, though in all honesty I haven't watched John Carter, and I'm not willing to risk $15-$20 to find out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukeskymac
I honestly can't believe how many are "reviewing" the movie based on the trailer. THE TRAILER! Which is tailored to meet marketing needs, not storytelling ones.
May I remind you, Up's trailer wasn't great either. It looked like a random old guy would be trading jokes with a 8-year old kid in a floating house and they would learn about respecting age differences or whatever.
It turned out to be my favorite Pixar movie. It's way up there, in a slap battle with Wall-E for the #1
The Brave trailer (not the teaser one) is also pretty shitty. Makes the movie look like another story about women's rights. After the flaming turd that was Cars 2, I surely hope they are pulling an Up with that trailer.
That's the challenge, it's impossible to know what's going to come up until you plonk down a good dinner's worth of money. Even the stars in it are highly misleading nowadays, we all know of the recent movies which advertise a big actor's name, only to watch them appear in just 15 minutes of the movie with everything else being cloying filler. Sorry, movie industry, we had some good times, but I'm moving on.
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.
Below is a behind-the-scenes video of The Hobbit. It shows a lot of what you mention, including the need for scaffolding on one set in order to reduce the impact to the natural habitat. From the looks of it that was a good day of setup by a lot of people and that's without considering finding and securing rights to shoot and any permits, requirements and guarantees for shooting on that location.
Comments
May I remind you, Up's trailer wasn't great either. It looked like a random old guy would be trading jokes with a 8-year old kid in a floating house and they would learn about respecting age differences or whatever.
It turned out to be my favorite Pixar movie. It's way up there, in a slap battle with Wall-E for the #1
The Brave trailer (not the teaser one) is also pretty shitty. Makes the movie look like another story about women's rights. After the flaming turd that was Cars 2, I surely hope they are pulling an Up with that trailer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=orGXOMqi8yo
Yeah, seems like an odd tribute. If it were a Disney Pixar movie then that would be more appropriate. Alas, it is just a Disney flick.
I agree. It should have been a Pixar movie.
Because by the time Brave hits theaters, no one will remember who Steve is. "Steve who?" they'll say.
Oh yeah? How many people do you think stick around to read the credits of an action flick? I do when it's a Pixar film because I know they put some extra bits in the credits but I'm usually long gone before the first line scrolls to the top of the screen on most other films.
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).
Well I, for one, am anxious to see the movie and how closely it follows Edgar Rice Burroughs' novel "A Princess of Mars." I have read all eleven novels of Burroughs' John Carter on Mars series and found them to be very entertaining. I liked them a lot more than his Tarzan novels. But then I'm a sci-fi fantasy nut job a anyway.
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.
I can see your point as every railer Disney has released has been awful. Just abysmal. But I came across a fan-made trailer that is leagues better. Of course any trailer can mislead but after watching the fan-made trailer my attitude towards John Carter has changed for the better and I'm actually looking forward to the film now. Check it out at the link below.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BxeHQY1NuM
In many ways looks like a lame Star Wars esque style of special effects movie...
http://www.google.com/aclk?sa=L&ai=C...om/johncarter/
Actually, Star Wars is a complete rip off of this movie. The John Carter novels were written before Lucas was born and Star Wars shows heavy reliance on some of their themes.
Because by the time Brave hits theaters, no one will remember who Steve is. "Steve who?" they'll say.
Ha! Great slapppy impression, but we're kind of beyond that since his passing.
Ha! Great slapppy impression, but we're kind of beyond that since his passing.
Thanks, but I thought I was channeling Slurpy. Oh well, I always get them mixed up.
Thanks, but I thought I was channeling Slurpy. Oh well, I always get them mixed up.
I feel bad for Slurpy.
Actually, Star Wars is a complete rip off of this movie. The John Carter novels were written before Lucas was born and Star Wars shows heavy reliance on some of their themes.
Yes, it was an influence, as was Akira Kurosawa's The Hidden Fortress (which is a nothing short of amazing movie by itself).
Don't get me wrong, I hope there is something special at the end of Brave also since Steve was paramount in the success of pixar
I remember when Stardust came out and the trailers looked terrible. I absolutely loved the book and couldn't believe they ruined it so completely. Then I actually watched the movie and amazingly enough I loved it. So instead of relying on watching the trailers and saying "this movie is terrible, its not worthy of SJ", how but we give it a chance. It has a great pedigree(author and director both), and the early buzz is overwhelmingly positive.
OK. Fair enough. We all love positive surprises, so I hope I am proved wrong.
Nothing but raves
JOHN CARTER was amazing! I have not felt so genuinely surprised in a movie theater since seeing the original MATRIX. I saw STAR WARS through JEDI in their original runs at their formative ages of 4-10, and I lost my damn fool mind. Kids today will be doing the same thing for JOHN CARTER. This is their STAR WARS. Twelve year olds will lose their shit.
Then again, he'd surely appreciate the irony of being associated with a film genre that calls itself "fantasy" even as it castrates the imagination of any source material it touches. Still, I'm glad he's beyond knowing that his name has been attached to an insipid piece of uninspired, derivative, soft-core trash excreted by an industry whose motto should be "Think Identical."
Poor Edgar Rice Burroughs, poor Frank Frazetta, poor us? But not poor Steve. He's dead, and presumably beyond all such idiocy.
Increasingly, I take a lot of pleasure from the fact that those who benefit from my work don't know my name, and am willing to expend some effort to keep it that way. In a culture where to be known for anything at all is to have is to have both one's self and once's achievements debased, anonymity becomes a great gift.
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.
Thank you SolipsismX for injecting sound thought and reason into this. I was going to reply, but this was all that was needed. Thank you.
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).
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/53943
Nothing but raves
JOHN CARTER was amazing! I have not felt so genuinely surprised in a movie theater since seeing the original MATRIX. I saw STAR WARS through JEDI in their original runs at their formative ages of 4-10, and I lost my damn fool mind. Kids today will be doing the same thing for JOHN CARTER. This is their STAR WARS. Twelve year olds will lose their shit.
Wow the comparison to the original Matrix? I'll reserve my enthuasism for now, though in all honesty I haven't watched John Carter, and I'm not willing to risk $15-$20 to find out.
I honestly can't believe how many are "reviewing" the movie based on the trailer. THE TRAILER! Which is tailored to meet marketing needs, not storytelling ones.
May I remind you, Up's trailer wasn't great either. It looked like a random old guy would be trading jokes with a 8-year old kid in a floating house and they would learn about respecting age differences or whatever.
It turned out to be my favorite Pixar movie. It's way up there, in a slap battle with Wall-E for the #1
The Brave trailer (not the teaser one) is also pretty shitty. Makes the movie look like another story about women's rights. After the flaming turd that was Cars 2, I surely hope they are pulling an Up with that trailer.
That's the challenge, it's impossible to know what's going to come up until you plonk down a good dinner's worth of money. Even the stars in it are highly misleading nowadays, we all know of the recent movies which advertise a big actor's name, only to watch them appear in just 15 minutes of the movie with everything else being cloying filler. Sorry, movie industry, we had some good times, but I'm moving on.
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.
Below is a behind-the-scenes video of The Hobbit. It shows a lot of what you mention, including the need for scaffolding on one set in order to reduce the impact to the natural habitat. From the looks of it that was a good day of setup by a lot of people and that's without considering finding and securing rights to shoot and any permits, requirements and guarantees for shooting on that location.