Speculation Is Disney Capable of Learning the Lessons of John Carter and Phantom Menace?

Discussion in 'Star Wars: Episode VII and Beyond (Archive)' started by Jabbadabbado, Nov 1, 2012.

  1. Lars_Muul Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Oct 2, 2000
    star 6
    We must also not forget that a whole batch of new fans will pop up at the same time.





    There will always be new fans
    /LM
  2. Big Bad Yoda Daddy Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 8, 2000
    star 4
    After TDKR, my facebook was lit up with people raving about it. I thought it was okay, at best. Certainly not better than the prequels that the same people seem to hate. Everything is crap, people just like different flavors of crap. I'm excited for more Star Wars flavored crap!

    VMeran and The-Eternal-Hero like this.
  3. Krueger Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 9, 2004
    star 4
    Yeah, John Carter is not a bad film at all. It deserved to find an audience. Unfortunately it’s now got this stigma attached to it that will take years to shake off. The only thing Disney should learn from that is that a poor marketing strategy will usually lead to poor box-office. Also, Andrew Stanton was far too cavalier with his attitude towards the making of the film itself and his over-bearing ego wanting to be in charge of the marketing. He thought that everyone knew as much about John Carter as he did. That worked well.
    FRAGWAGON likes this.
  4. DARTHVENGERDARTHSEAR Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jun 8, 2002
    star 4
    I've waited since '83 for all this to happen and so glad we're getting episodes 7 and beyond, regardless of who makes them. GL has done a great thing, but there are some here that feel different. Oh well, you can't win them all.

    It's funny how so negative a lot of us can be for the future of Star Wars, now. Yeah, I would have to say the Prequels weren't as good as the OT, but growing up in that era when they were first released, and being at a young at the time (I was 6 when ANH came out) I always knew they wouldn't be.

    The one thing I wanted the Prequels to be is more serious and violent, and therefore more mature than the OT, mainly because I had grown up, too. But that wasn't the case, was it? The other thing we always forget is that Star Wars was always meant for all ages, and that means there would be a kiddish feel to the new films, as well. Now, you can say, "Well, that's fine and all, but it doesn't explain why the films had to be so different from the OT and why it didn't live up to expectations". But the problem is, people would have complained if it was too similar to the OT. anyway; e.g. ROTJ's storyline concerning the threat of another Death Star. And the expectations? Well, they were impossible to meet anyway, so it's your fault if you thought they would.

    I believe Star Wars interest has indeed lessened, but no more so than what it was in the late 80's. The good thing about all this is that GL has passed the torch to others and we're getting new Star Wars movies real soon, and from new creative minds, no less. It's what we always wanted and it's better than not having anything.
    Last edited by DARTHVENGERDARTHSEAR, Nov 4, 2012
    Merlin_Ambrosius69 likes this.
  5. IsoBanValian Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 5, 2004
    star 1
    Hey...I liked John Carter. It wasn't a bad movie in the slightest. Disney's marketing of that film was a fiasco...they used Arial as the promotional title font, for pete's sake.

    In fact, when JC was in theaters, all I heard from everybody I knew was "Hey...I saw John Carter....why is it doing so badly? I thought it rocked!"

    "I know, right?!"
    FRAGWAGON likes this.
  6. IsoBanValian Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 5, 2004
    star 1
    Have to disagree there. The prequels and the original trilogy have the same formula in the same way that both a T-Rex and a fruit fly are made of DNA. :)
  7. yodasbum Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 4, 2004
    star 2
    Interesting post on Total Film today- DoesJar Jar Binks deserve a bit more love? In the main article it's says "The Phantom Menace was pants". Of the twenty or so replays here is a selection of comments:

    Jar Jar was the straw that broke the camels back.

    Hmm...... How to put this..... NO! **** NO!

    The Phantom Menace was horrible from frame one

    little Jake as Anakin that put me off Phantom Menace

    Isn't most people's hate for Episode I based mainly on nostalgia and love for the first film? I watched it again the other day for the first time in around about ten years and it's not actually that bad of a film, all it takes is to not think about the original trilogy. Watch it again without thinking about how much you hate it.

    reason people hate jar jar and the whole of the phantom menace

    The Phantom Menace was a pretty rubbish movie

    Ep 1 had one redeeming feature and it was Darth Maul, rest was tripe!
  8. yodasbum Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 4, 2004
    star 2
    The Phantom Menace and indeed all the prequels are primary examples of lazy awful big budget film making- quote from poster on Total Film


    So reading this and other sites today reveals an impact of The Phantom Menace. No film since since Titanic has been watched by more people than The Phantom Menace. the concern I have isn't about bashing the TPM it's what will happen if there is a repeat of its flaws with episode VII. As a fan I would want many many excellent Star Wars in the years ahead but Disney are not putting their eggs just into the ST. For $4 billion they want and need a lot more. That will only happen with a good/great first film in this trilogy. I'll bet that the wider audience will not go to see VII on brand faith alone and will take closer attention of the reviews and word of mouth. Attack has stronger reviews than TPM yet it's box office dropped by $300million. Why did that happen?

    I am more satisfied with Kathleen in charge, although she is no automatic guarantee (Airbender) and with George doing what he was always doing best- thinking up the story.

    Phantom may have had fantastic short term success but it has done lasting damage. A repeat of Phantom would do damage that Star Wars will carry on but would never recover from.
  9. fenton Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 29, 2001
    star 3
    I liked John Carter as well.

    ONe of the firs tthings I thought of whe nI heard Disney bought Lucasfilm was, I wonder if its a responce to John Carter tanking. They tried to launch their own sci-fi fantasy epici film franchise, it flopped, so they spent the money to buy one.
  10. Lee_ Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 3, 2012
    star 4
    My thought exactly. It is Kathleen, George, and the new/ current makers that need to get it right.

    I agree with what some are saying about John Carter that it is more the marketing; that was not a horrible movie. It raked in a lot of money, would have been a success but for the fact so much was spent on it (took in $283 million, costed $250 million to make). If you are going to spend that much money on a movie, you have to come through with everything that will sell it.

    And, although I am a fan of the PT (especially Sith), I definitely agree Phantom is in the cellar of all Star Wars movies, and they must learn from their mistakes and do better.

    I think they will.
    Last edited by Lee_, Nov 5, 2012
  11. ezekiel22x Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 9, 2002
    star 5
    I hope they make so much from the ST that they give John Carter another go as a nod to the cult following that actually appreciated it.
    VMeran and FRAGWAGON like this.
  12. Jabbadabbado Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Mar 19, 1999
    star 7
    If the theory is correct that John Carter and Mars Needs Moms are sci fi/fantasy masterpieces, but Disney screwed up the marketing for both, what does that mean for Star Wars? I'm sure Star Wars really does sell itself, to some extent, but there must be qualitative differences in film content that matter too, otherwise Attack of the Clones wouldn't have made so much less than the other two prequels.
  13. Lee_ Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 3, 2012
    star 4
    I don't think anyone is saying they were masterpieces, you are strawing us a little there. John Carter had a bunch of well-known flubs in marketing, but was not a bad movie. Mars needs Moms was just a bomb, bad marketing or not.

    Clones sold the least because it was not the first in the prequels (everyone hotly anticipated the first movie) and its quality was much lower than Sith. It actually got a little better reviews than Phantom.

    Overall, sure quality has something to do with it. The point is there are more factors to good sales, and Disney has been making decent films in general.
  14. SuperWatto Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Sep 19, 2000
    star 5
    Jabba, I'll forgive you your John Carter bashing and concentrate on The Phantom Menace.
    Let me tell you: the way you're thinking is what led to The Phantom Menace. You insist rehashing a success is a guarantee for success.
    That's Lucas's mind right there.
  15. Jabbadabbado Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Mar 19, 1999
    star 7
    That's very generous of you. But I have not advocated rehashing anything.

    Except ewoks. I want lots and lots of ewoks.
    Last edited by Jabbadabbado, Nov 5, 2012
    The-Eternal-Hero and yodasbum like this.
  16. Healer_Leona Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jul 7, 2000
    star 9
    Just watched John Cater last night. Wished I'd seen it on the big screen because it was really quite enjoyable. That coupled with my love of TPM should ensure a great movie right?

    Then I forget about AOTC and ROTS which lacked... well enjoyablitlity..
  17. SuperWatto Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Sep 19, 2000
    star 5
    That´s John advo-Cater. John Advocater to the audience. Is Jabba.

    Maybe not rehashing, but you sure seem to think there are rules for popular and critical successes.
    Last edited by SuperWatto, Nov 5, 2012
  18. JediGaskin Jedi Padawan

    Member Since:
    Nov 5, 2012
    They need to learn a lesson from the prequels, there should be no annoying characters and not squander their time on 3D because it sucks.
    Last edited by JediGaskin, Nov 5, 2012
  19. The-Eternal-Hero Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 3, 2012
    star 4
    Agreed. Same with me, everyone I know who saw it freakin' Loved it. And JC plastered "Avatar" in my opinion. It has some flaws (the threat should have been less ambiguous and more tangible, and I personally wouldn't have kept the wedding-suspense element, it's way way way too old fashioned now). But it was, on a visual level, on par with "2001" or "Blade Runner" for me. It was warm, funny, romantic, exciting, even moving. I think he pretty much knocked a very difficult "property" out of the park. Disney pretty much decided to kill it and they did just that, it was pointless and the movie deserved to be a hit.

    This from a Tolkien fan who dislikes the PJ movies. I know Burroughs equally well, and love it almost as much, and "John Carter" delivered.
    FRAGWAGON likes this.
  20. The-Eternal-Hero Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 3, 2012
    star 4
    I'm hoping they finally get the 12 hour epic miniseries they deserve ;)
  21. Jabbadabbado Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Mar 19, 1999
    star 7
    Yes, my friend. Which one of those rules do you disagree with? Granted, I probably disagree with number 1, given all the evidence piled against it.
    Last edited by Jabbadabbado, Nov 5, 2012
  22. Blur Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 11, 1999
    star 4
    Alright, I haven't read all of the posts here, but just to throw in my .02 :

    I truly enjoyed both TPM & John Carter, and felt both were tragically underrated films. Re: TPM, I've defended it too many times on this board to go over these points again here.

    Re: John Carter, I'm not sure why this film didn't do better; I loved it, but then again I enjoy films that others either dislike or openly hate. Also, I was a casual fan of the John Carter of Mars books & Marvel comics prior to seeing the film, so I'm sure that had a lot to do with my like of the film as well.

    IMHO, a lot of the problem was marketing - if you weren't already familiar with the story/character & heard of a new movie named "John Carter", you may just have thought it was a film about Noah Wylie's doctor character in "ER". It would have been far better to have called the film "John Carter of Mars".
    ezekiel22x and WIERD_GREEN_MAN like this.
  23. WIERD_GREEN_MAN Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Dec 16, 2010
    star 4
    Right. John Carter was marketed so badly. The only reason I went to see it was that I read a great WIRED article that talked about its pedigree and history, and that made me realize that this film was actually about something important. Without that article? Well, just looking at the poster, seems like a low-budget kiddie cartoon.
  24. Jabbadabbado Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Mar 19, 1999
    star 7
    I rented it, and it seemed like an extremely high-budget kiddie cartoon.
  25. WIERD_GREEN_MAN Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Dec 16, 2010
    star 4
    Oh, obviously the marketing campaign was sucky because it gave me the impression of a low-budget kiddie cartoon when it was actually high-budget!