John Carter (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity



Message

DesFIP -> John Carter (3/10/2012 9:11:33 PM)

Has anybody seen it yet? Is it any good. I have to admit a sneaking fondness for all the books but wouldn't want to ruin a perfectly good guilty pleasure if it's a turkey.



LadyHibiscus -> RE: John Carter (3/10/2012 9:19:50 PM)

I am a fan of Burroughs, too, and yeah...it kills me whan a book gets trashed. One person I know saw it and liked it.



kalikshama -> RE: John Carter (3/11/2012 1:42:17 PM)

The trailer looked Hollywood-ified and the clip I saw on The Daily Show looked Disney-fied.

There's a convo in the Gorean Forum.

[image]http://litreactor.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/header/images/column/headers/book-vs-film-john-carter.jpg[/image]

http://litreactor.com/columns/book-vs-film-john-carter

Overall John Carter succeeds more as an adaptation of Burroughs’ book(s) than it does as a film unto itself. Fans of the Barsoom series will be amazed at how much of its seemingly unfilmable material Stanton has managed to get onto the screen. And while the sweeping changes to the story might anger purists, I felt as though most made good sense and some actually improved matters.



LadyHibiscus -> RE: John Carter (3/11/2012 1:52:39 PM)

I have avoided the Gorean convo... because, well, Gor.

CGI is pretty remarkable stuff, and while I heart ERB, there are elements of his storytelling that required a certain amount of suspension-of-common-sense. Since I almost never make it to movies, I expect I will see it on TV one year [:)]



SexyLilFannie -> RE: John Carter (3/11/2012 1:53:11 PM)

I have had three people say that it is really bad. Don't know myself though.



Endivius -> RE: John Carter (3/11/2012 2:34:39 PM)

It was ok. Could have been better, could have been worse. Some parts were slow, some were pointless, the end was rushed. If it had been rated R it would have been a far better film, but that's disney for you.



kalikshama -> RE: John Carter (3/11/2012 2:48:17 PM)

I thought "The Fellowship of the Ring" did just fine with a PG-13 rating.

ETA - referring just to action due to the lack of sex.






LadyHibiscus -> RE: John Carter (3/11/2012 2:49:14 PM)

There is no sex in Tolkein!! And not a ton of violence, either.



kalikshama -> RE: John Carter (3/11/2012 2:51:49 PM)

The Two Towers was a yawnfest of battle scenes.



LadyHibiscus -> RE: John Carter (3/11/2012 2:53:09 PM)

The Two Towers just blew me away... it was the first of the three that I saw. I was really disappointed in Return of the King, far too much of the story was removed for the ending to make sense as filmed. I fear for The Hobbit.



kalikshama -> RE: John Carter (3/11/2012 2:57:24 PM)

The only thing that kept me going in The Two Towers was the Ents.

I think the Hobbit lends itself well to film.



LadyHibiscus -> RE: John Carter (3/11/2012 3:06:01 PM)

Those ents were great. I am not sure about the Hobbit as film just because the story as written is so flimsy, and in the hands of someone Other... well I am hoping it's not turgid ick.



r1a2y3m4o5n6d7 -> RE: John Carter (3/12/2012 3:24:44 PM)

Forget John and watch Raymond. At least you get to see him in person.



LadyHibiscus -> RE: John Carter (3/12/2012 4:09:45 PM)

I want Culvers Rayray!



ShaharThorne -> RE: John Carter (3/12/2012 4:37:46 PM)

Des, some people are saying that its a flop, some are saying its good.

I am not going to see it because the price is too high for me. I'll wait until it gets to the discount theater.



DesFIP -> RE: John Carter (3/12/2012 4:41:36 PM)

We went last night. It was okay, not great. Not enough wit for me. And yes, I know it's an action flick but they still talk so they could have been witty. I was also expecting better dialogue because Michael Chabon, one of my all time fav authors was one of the screen writers. Dejah Thoris pontificated her way through which was not at all attractive.



Aylee -> RE: John Carter (3/12/2012 4:53:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyHibiscus

I am a fan of Burroughs, too, and yeah...it kills me whan a book gets trashed. One person I know saw it and liked it.


I was a fan. Then Dejah Thoris laid eggs. That makes her a bug. That means that John Carter had SEX WITH A BUG!!!!!

EWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!

Your kink is SO not my kink at that point.



LadyHibiscus -> RE: John Carter (3/12/2012 5:04:41 PM)

Birds lay eggs! Echidnas and platypi lay eggs and they are MAMMALS!

Though the link between bug sex and tentacle sex is making me more interested...



Winterapple -> RE: John Carter (3/12/2012 6:04:07 PM)

FR
Michael Chabon was one of the screenwriters?
That's interesting. But when there's more
than one screenwriter you can never know
who contributed what if anything.
The script could have passed through
multiple hands.
I don't think I'm going to go see it in the
theater. It takes a lot of enthusiasm
for me to go the movie theater.
I like Burroughs. Next to the early
and mid Tarzan films I like the
schlocky 70's takes on the People
and Land Time Forgot. Movies of his
work seem to benefit from a layer
of cheese.
This new one gives off a bit of a
sober vibe.
The Hobbit might be ok. I'm interested
to see what they do with it.



DarkSteven -> RE: John Carter (3/12/2012 6:59:34 PM)

It's not looking good. It cost $250 million to make and $100 million to promote, and doesn't look to recover it.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125