Amph John Carter (of Mars)

Flash Gordon may be a bit cheesy, but I still think it's more engaging than JC (at least for me personally)

 

I have a pretty fair number of films like that too, but Flash is where I draw the line.

 

We all know you're a better man than I am, but "Go Flash, Go. Go Flash, Go!" still brings tears to my eyes. It also sports some of the very worst Queen music, which raises its stature just a little bit more.

 

lol, yeah. True about the Queen music.

Just remember: Football moves=realistic fighting style.

 

Well, that was the charm of it... it was one of those "so bad, it's *good*" movies, one of the earliest ones I can remember to have actually been released during my lifetime.

 

The movie could be on course to be the biggest flop in cinema history, although it might break even.

Strange that Disney has had problems with movies set on Mars - Mars Needs Moms, Mission to Mars & My Favourite Martian were all flops. I assume that is why they removed the "of Mars" from the title.



Disney wanted Avatar, they look set to get Waterworld.

 

Which is a shame. It's a plenty fine movie and gorgeously shot at times; since iTunes supports 1080p now, this might very well be my first purchase of a film from the iTunes Store; have a feeling the extra pixels crammed in there will be alot of eye fun. Plus, my nine dollars might help get a sequel. Which I would like.

Has anyone actually read the books? I downloaded Princess Of Mars from Gutenberg the other night. Only as far as the prologue now, but so far it seems like the film was pretty faithful.

 

I have absolutely no problem with you not liking the movie, or not being able to get into it, but I just can't wrap my head around the reason, I guess. It's like saying you can't suspend your disbelief enough to enjoy Star Wars because you're quite sure there aren't humans in another galaxy, and besides, that Force stuff isn't really compatible with what we know of physics. Or that you can't enjoy any historical film since you know that the characters have since died and, in many cases, that their nations have since changed. Or that you can't enjoy pretty much any sci-fi, fantasy, action or adventure film ever made because they take too many liberties with physics. I mean, nowhere does John Carter claim to be a serious sociological look at civilizations on Mars, or even to be anything like a hard sci-fi film. It's an adventure based on a planetary romance, a science-fantasy serialized in a pulp magazine!

 

I agree, at least be like other people and say you don't like it because it's long and boring

 

Well, I also didn't like that it was long, tedious, and pretentious.

The thing is, I find it easier to suspend disbelief if I'm told right at the outset that what I'm about to see took place "a long, long time ago... in a galaxy far away", or even if I'm just watching what could become of Earth people in the 23rd or 24th century, and even believe that the Starfleet HQ might be in San Francisco in that far-off future.

But the situation in JC is just plain silly... it starts out in the past, then goes to Mars... which, by the way, we now know to be uninhabited. Then it goes back and forth between the Earth and Mars? And the Earth character can breathe w/o any problem in Mars? Sorry, that is too much of a stretch for me. I don't buy it.