RATINGS RAT RACE: ‘Hannibal’ Hits Low, … 
‘Fast & Furious 6′ Opens To Big $6.5M … 
‘Katie’ Shakeup: Rachel Miskowiec Replaces … 
Hammond On Cannes: French Hero Jerry Lewis On His Return To … 
Cannes: Another Jewelry Heist? $2.6M Necklace Missing After … 
Hammond On Cannes: Leo DiCaprio’s Moon Trip Tops … 
Specialty B.O. Preview: ‘Before Midnight’, … 
2012-2013 Season Network Rankings: CBS Sweeps In Final … 
Full 2012-2013 TV Season Series Rankings 
TOLDJA! Paramount Pocketing $190M From Disney For Marvel … 
‘Good Morning America’ Hits 19-Year Viewership … 
MGM Buys ‘Modern Family’ Producer Ben … 
‘Fashion Police’ Writers Chant On Picket Lines: … 
Universal Makes Seven-Figure Deal For ‘The School For … 
Steven Soderbergh Will Interrupt Retirement To Direct And … 
Cannes: EOne Announces Itself As Player In U.S. … 
Will LIN TV Stations Go Dark On Time Warner Cable? 
RATINGS RAT RACE: ‘Modern Family’, ‘Law … 
Hammond On Cannes: Paramount’s ‘Nebraska’ … 
Hot Trailer: Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s ‘Don … 
Hammond On Cannes: A New Day Comes To The Fest As HBO and … 
March 9-11 Weekend Actuals
1. The Lorax (Illumination/Universal) Week 2 [3,746 Theaters] PG
Friday $9.6M, Saturday $17.9M, Sunday $11.4M, Weekend $38.8M (-45%), Cume $121.7M2. John Carter (Disney) NEW [3,749 Theaters] PG13
Friday $9.8M, Saturday $12.3M, Sunday $8M, Weekend $30.2M3. Project X (Warner Bros) Week 2 [3,055 Theaters] R
Friday $4M, Saturday $4.4M, Sunday $2.7M, Weekend $11.1M (-47%), Cume $39.7M4. Act Of Valor (Relativity) Week 3 [2,951 Theaters] R
Friday $2.0M, Saturday $3.1M, Sunday $1.9M, Weekend $7M (-49%), Cume $56.1M5. Silent House (LD Entertainment/Open Road) NEW [2,124 Theaters] R
Friday $2.7M, Saturday $2.7M, Sunday $1.3M, Weekend $6.7M6. A Thousand Words (DreamWorks/Paramount) NEW [1,890 Theaters] PG13
Friday $1.9M, Saturday $2.7M, Sunday $1.5M, Weekend $6.2M7. Safe House (Universal) Week 5 [2,144 Theaters] R
Friday $1.3M, Saturday $2.2M, Sunday $1.2M, Weekend $4.8M (-35%), Cume $115.6M8. The Vow (Screen Gems/Sony) Week 5 [2,478 Theaters] PG13
Friday $1.3M, Saturday $1.7M, Sunday $866K, Weekend $3.8M (-36%), Cume $117.5M9. This Means War (Fox) Week 4 [1,949 Theaters] PG13
Friday $1.2M, Saturday $1.7M, Sunday $846K Weekend $3.8M (-33%), Cume $46.9M10. Journey 2 (Warner Bros) Week 5 [2,525 Theaters] PG
Friday $874K, Saturday $1.7M, Sunday $1M, Weekend $3.6M (-45%), Cume $90.6M
9TH UPDATE, SUNDAY AM: Disney just released international figures from 55 territories, representing about 80% of the foreign market where 
John Carter was released this weekend. It opened to $70.6M. Combined with its domestic cume, the 3D sci-fi epic has now made $101.2M. “John Carter opened in Russia on March 8, and had the highest opening day in Russian cinema history and went on to be the #1 opening weekend of the year,” the studio said “John Carter was the #1 U.S. film in all of our major opened markets in Asia, Latin America and Europe.” Globally, IMAX’s box office take this weekend was $9.5M, with Russia the standout market. (3D-crazy China opens March 16th.) IMAX accounted for 64% of North American business in 3D, or $5M, and its 289 domestic screens represented a disproportionate 17% of the film’s overall GBO. Exit studies confirmed that IMAX’s core audience of fanboys were the film’s most supportive audience.
8TH UPDATE, SUNDAY AM: So 2012 keeps posting strong 
box office, and this weekend’s $140M is up +8.6% over last year. Universal’s $70M-budget holdover Dr Suess’ The Lorax is a huge #1 again. But Disney’s 3D sci-fi newcomer John Carter finished a feeble #2 considering its whopping $250+M cost. Friday’s domestic box office numbers for director Andrew Stanton’s actioner came in even weaker than predicted but rival studios tell me the loincloth epic experienced an unexpected double-digit bounce on Saturday. Clearly word of mouth, like the ‘B+’ CinemaScore from audiences, is helping although reviews were decidedly mixed. Only Monday actuals will confirm whether Disney got its “miracle” and John Carter‘s North American box office opening this weekend had a ’3′ in front of it. But that still means a massive $100+M writeoff for the parent company if this dismal opening affects the new pic’s international fortunes. The studio’s Prince of Persia, for instance, opened similarly weak in North America, then made up its domestic deficit overseas. Disney made a gigantic worldwide day-and-date push for John Carter and says Russia was especially ”very strong”. “We have some good starts in Europe, with some softer than we hoped. A few Asian territories are strong where this type of film plays well,” an exec tells me.
To summarize: this flop is the result of a studio trying to indulge Pixar… Of an arrogant director who ignored everybody’s warnings that he was making a film too faithful to Edgar Rice Burroughs’s first novel in the Barsoom 
series “A Princess of Mars”… Of the failure of Dick Cook, and Rich Ross, and Bob Iger to rein in Stanton’s excessive ego or pull the plug on the movie’s bloated budget … Of really rotten marketing that failed to explain the significant or scope of the film’s Civil War-to-Mars story and character arcs and instead made the 3D movie look way as generic as its eventual title… Disagree all you want, but Hollywood is telling me that competent marketing could have drawn in women with the love story, or attracted younger males who weren’t fanboys of the source material. Instead the campaign was as rigid and confusing as the movie itself, not to mention that ’Before Star Wars, Before Avatar‘ tag line should have come at the start and not at the finish. But even more I think John Carter is a product of mogul wuss-ism as much as it is misplaced talent worship. More detail to come.
Disney wasn’t the only studio mourning. Eddie Murphy has yet another bomb in DreamWorks/Paramount’s A Thousand Words which received a ‘B-’ CinemaScore. “A Thousand Words is the last live action movie to be released by Paramount that was produced by Dreamworks,” the studio made a point of telling me. Directed by Brian Robbins, the PG-13 comedy (with a zero score on Rotten Tomatoes) demonstrates the tragic degree to which reviewers and audience have deserted Eddie Murphy. Paramount marketing targeted a 4 1/2-week campaign to reach all African American adult audiences and older women. But I found that the spots never explained the movie’s premise adequately. On the other hand, no one cared. The trailer debuted last November. Lots of TV and radio were bought for female-oriented programs as well as high-profile NBA games. A week-long BET promotion released this past week along with promotions on Lifetime and Comedy Central. Paramount also made use of Tyler Perry’s popularity by piggybacking with his cable show House Of Payne and movie opening Good Deeds. Individual TV shows included BET’s The Game, VH1′s Basketball Wives, E!’s Khloe and Lamar and Ice Loves Coco. There was a “best of” Eddie Murphy content piece, with slideshows and additional videos. “With the scale of all partners combined, these placements potentially reached an audience of over 97 million monthly unique visitors online,” an exec tells me. Eddie himself did an extensive publicity campaign for the pic. And yet the movie tanked. Where Eddie’s career goes from here will be debated. He should have hosted the Oscars. Now he really needs to go back into television…
Open Road made a point of telling me it was only distributing the R-rated horror pic Silent House as “a service deal for our friends at LD Entertainment (formerly known as Liddell Entertainment”. Embarassing that audiences gave the genre film Silent House the dreaded ‘F’ CinemaScore. The film was budgeted at under $1M and and acquired by LD Entertainment at Sundance 2011 where the indie remake of the acclaimed ultra-low-budget Uruguayan film La Casa Muda (based on true events) premiered. In 2003 directors Chris Kentis and Laura Lau enjoyed huge success with the low-budget thriller Open Water. Genre movie fans take their horror seriously.
Here’s the Top 10:
1. The Lorax (Universal) Week 2 [3,746 Theaters]
Friday $9.8M, Saturday $19.3M, Weekend $39M, Cume $121.9M
2. John Carter (Disney) NEW [3,749 Theaters]
Friday $9.8M, Saturday $12.3M, Weekend $30.6M
3. Project X (Warner Bros) Week 2 [3,055 Theaters]
Friday $3.9M, Saturday $4.5M, Weekend $11.5M, Cume $40.1M
4. Silent House (LD Entertainment/Open Road) NEW [1,890 Theaters]
Friday $2.6M, Saturday $2.7M, Weekend $7M
5. Act Of Valor (Relativity) Week 3 [2,951 Theaters]
Friday $2.0M, Saturday $3.1M, Weekend $7M, Cume $56.1M
6. A Thousand Words (DreamWorks/Paramount) NEW [2,124 Theaters]
Friday $1.9M, Saturday $2.7M, Weekend $6.3M
7. Safe House (Universal) Week 5 [2,144 Theaters]
Friday $1.3M, Saturday $2.2M, Weekend $4.9M, Cume $115.7M
8. The Vow (Screen Gems/Sony) Week 5 [2,478 Theaters]
Friday $1.2M, Saturday $1.7M, Weekend $4M, Cume $117.6M
9. Journey 2 (Warner Bros) Week 5 [2,525 Theaters]
Friday $850K, Saturday $1.8M, Weekend $3.6M, Cume $90.7M
10. This Means War (Fox) Week 4 [1,848 Theaters]
Friday $1.2M, Saturday $#1.6M, Weekend $3.7M, Cume $46.8M
4TH UPDATE, FRIDAY 5:30 PM: Nothing changed. My sources are still predicting box office results for Walt Disney Studios’ John Carter (playing in 3,749 theaters) around $9.5M to $11M today and $27.5M to $33M for the weekend. For a smaller budget film, that would be considered a good opening — but not one costing $250+M. That’s well behind Universal’s holdover hit toon Dr Seuss’ The Lorax (3,746 theaters) which based on the noon averages will finish its second weekend with between $38M and $40M, an excellent hold of -46%. Today’s numbers for the $75M-budget Illumination Entertainment fare are estimated between $9M and $9.5M but will rise significantly on Saturday because of the parents-with-kids bump. As for other major releases today, Paramount’s A Thousand Words (1,890 theaters) sstarring Eddie Murphy and Open Road’s Silent House (2,124 theaters)appear about $10M for the weekend.
2ND UPDATE, 9:15 AM: Disney wants me to know that The Avengers trailer that broke records online last week is going up on John Carter in theaters this weekend. It’s a blatant attempt to use the enormous anticipation for the Marvel movie to pump up what box office predictions say are the sagging fortunes of Finding Nemo and Wall-E director Andrew Stanton’s live action turkey. John Carter‘s biggest problems, aside from the fact that no women want to see it, is its inability to attract young males — which is Marvel’s sweet spot. (What’s weird is that as recently as midweek, Walt Disney Studios told me it had no plans to play The Avengers trailer with John Carter even though that move worked well when Warner Bros’ The Dark Knight Rises footage unveiled with for Paramount’s Mission: Impossible 4.)
UPDATE 8:50 AM: Disney just told me that John Carter has made $13M so far overseas with the biggest news from 3D sci-fi-loving Russia where the movie had the highest opening day in history with $6.5M. The studio is reporting solid starts in Asian markets. But rival studios are warning me of soft starts in Europe.
FRIDAY 8:30 AM: It looks like the moviegoing public is going to bury this 3D sci-fi actioner just as everyone thought. So don’t expect any eulogies from me. The studio is expecting only $24M-$30M despite a whopping budget of $250M, and this start of $500K midnights is weak considering that cost. Rival studios tell me that foreign numbers are starting out soft as well. Disney is uncharacteristically mum despite planning a gigantic worldwide day-and-date push for John Carter with all the frills no matter how dismal its prospects look. All in, this could mean a $100M writeoff for the Walt Disney Co. Box office for this bomb is making rival studios just a little too gleeful considering that probably 1,000 of their Hollywood brethren were gainfully employed during a dismal economy.
Priceless ‘John Carter’ Email From Disney
‘John Carter’ Tracking Shockingly Soft: “Could Be Biggest Writeoff Of All Time”
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.
Loading ...
I don’t understand all your hatred for this film. I went in thinking I would not like it and ended up love every minute of it! I can only hope it makes enough for a sequel.
yeah, i enjoyed it. better than avatar.
Agreed! I just saw it and had more fun than watching Avatar, which was cringe-inducing. The story, acting, and SFX were great.
I really think whoever marketed John Carter should be taken to the woodshed. She/he was incompetent.
Avatar cringe-inducing? ROFL.
Yes, cringe-inducing. It was all spectacle and little else. Avatar was simply awful. Big box office returns are not an indication of quality.
I believe the commenter was speaking as an actual human filmgoer with an opinion on the film’s content, not a studio person who cares only about how much money the movie made. AVATAR had a great return on its cost. AVATAR was not a particularly good movie.
If only the poster and trailer weren’t so bad. This movie is really great, I was completely surprised, thanks to all the negativity surrounding it.
AVATAR was a cinematic masterpiece.
You can hate on it as much as you want,but you cant change this fact.
Oh and when John Carter,which is the progenitor of the “derivative” Avatar,reaches Avatar’s $2.7b aka the whole world loved it,then wake me up.
This movie is 1/10 as good as Avatar. The 3D was *so dark.* I should’ve listened to the comments on here: *do not pay for 3D for this movie.* worse 3D than Ghost Rider 2.
What turn of the century theater did you go to?
The showings I went to in 3D were just fine, bright and vivid.
Yes, you definitely need to talk to the theater manager. I’ve had the same problem in some 3D movies especially in smaller cities.
I wish these 3D movies would come with detailed instructions to set contrast and brightness for the projectionist and theater management. It’s amazing some of them still don’t know how to deal with the special filter for 3D movies….and know they have to remove the filter for 2D movies in the same room.
I’ve actually heard really good things about it too. I think because the trailer kind of sucked a lot of people are expecting this movie to be a waste of time, but this may end up being one of those movies that you WISHED you saw in theaters.
Give it a chance people.
It is hard to give a movie a “chance” that has an inept, boring trailer, a dull lead, 3D prices, and is currently at a 51% on rottentomatoes.
I wasn’t planning on seeing this movie, but I had to babysit this weekend so I thought, Why Not? He can handle PG-13.
The 3D did ABSOLUTELY nothing. It’s just a money grab. The movie itself wasn’t so bad. The princess was super hot and Taylor was alright. And they can act. But it just felt like one big anti-climatic battle after another and WAY TOO MANY let’s talk about technical s**t & our feelings…
There were some BLATANT scenes stolen directly from Star Wars, not that I care, but I half expected Yoda to POP out and say, “MMMM, you’re on Mars you are, John Carter!”
Felt a lot more Prince of Persia than Avatar; meaning, we did not exit the theatre saying, “That was “AWESOME”!”
And that’s what was needed.
Sorry, Disney. But it deserves to BOMB.
If it reminded you of “Star Wars,” it’s because George Lucas ripped off Edgar Rice Burroughs, not the other way around. The “John Carter of Mars” novels predate the Lucas universe by well over three decades. It is well known that George Lucas “borrowed” quite a few scenarios from prominent science fiction and fantasy writers.
For Your Consideration: “Worst Performance by an Ad Campaign in an Undermining Role.”
I was at Starbucks yesterday and overheard the girl at the next table say, “I kind of want to go see John Carter, but everyone’s bagging on it so much that I would feel stupid spending the money.”
I have nothing to do with this movie, but that broke my heart a little (particularly as a member of this industry). Here is someone who wanted to see the movie, but the haters have been so vocal that she was scared away. It smells of orchestrated PR by a competitor. Sure, the marketing was incompetent, but the backlash has been extraordinary.
Also, the local CBS news broadcast last night had a 3-minute segment about how much money the movie is going to lose. Way to go, VIacom. Keep the hate alive.
The Interwub continues to be a great tool for destruction.
Word of mouth is toxic. It happens to all bad movies. DUH. Her friends said, “Say away. It’s a waste of money.” Happens every month. Do you do the same song and dance, wringing of the hands every time, or only on Disney bombs?
I took my son to see it yesterday, and even though I didn’t care for it too much, all the kids in the audience liked it and the audience clapped at the end. (Oh, and the theater was full). Am I living in an alternate reality? As I said, I didn’t like it, but I’ve seen a lot worse. Oh, and the title really stinks.
You have got to be kidding me? We saw this movie last night and were amazed at how absolutely horrid it is. The storytelling is all over the place. The acting is flat. The tone is wildly uneven. Characters come and go with no explanation. And this is AFTER a 28 day re-shoot??? One can only imagine what a train wreck it must have originally been. It will be interesting to see if the pompous and untouchable Lassiter and crew are hurt by this, because make no mistake, this is their mistake, 100%.
REALLY?? 100% Lassiter and crew?? Um, last time I looked, not a PIXAR film – story not generated by them, not written by them and not subject to Pixar’s stringent (and near bulletproof as you can be in Hollywood) 4 year production process, which included numerous rewrites to get THE SCRIPT right), not an animated film and I believe it was greenlit and championed by Disney studio’s (now ex) LIVE ACTION head of production. True, given his track record/connection with Pixar, Stanton got Team Pixar to offer “story notes” (much like they did on “Tron: Legacy”) on his first cut, which were mostly listened to for the 28 day reshoots. But as “Legacy”s crap final product proved, getting a crack story team to offer”story notes” so late in the process is like trying to band aid a slashed carotid artery: Far too little, far too late. Just because you’re a jealous troll when it comes to a true talent like Lassiter and the super successful corporate culture he creates, don’t try and blame the “John Carter” debacle on him/Pixar. This is squarely DISNEY (aka “Live Action division”) Studios (even if it was a different regime who greenlit it) boondoggle. You’re “logic” holds about as much weight as blaming Bruckheimer/Disney’s “Prince of Persia” crapfest on Pixar.
Come on, pixarian….everyone in town knows that whenever anyone from rich Ross’s live action group tried to rein in Stanton, tried to help clear up storytelling issues, tried to control the budget, that Stanton ran to Lassiter, who went directly to Iger. Now that the film is both a critical and a financial debacle, Lassiter and Stanton will deny this. But when they look inside their pampered, protected, dark little hearts, they will know the truth. No amount of spin will ever change that…
I agree that the tone was uneven, but I still thoroughly enjoyed John Carter. IT WAS FUN. And even though it was a little campy, it was not stupid campy like Transformers. At its worst, John Carter is reminiscent of the 1980s Flash Gordon – which was still campy good. At its best, it’s like a Star Wars movie remade to the beat of an Indiana Jones film. The trick to enjoying a movie is to leave your checklist at the door. And don’t be afraid to let your inner child watch it too. If you go in with a checklist, almost any movie will suffer. Star Wars didn’t have the best acting, Lawrence of Arabia is too slow-moving, Gone with the Wind is too long, Casablanca had … no wait, that one was perfect.
Talk about SPIN…yours verges on Science Fiction. Lassitar and Pixar will be fine (despite your “glee” at their perceived “failure”…again, DISNEY STUDIOS failure, NOT Pixar’s) thank you very much and you’ll still be an no talent angry troll posting anti-pixar sentiments here (what, did they fire you, a no talent inbetweener, when they took over Disney animation? LOL). Spin that.
Agreed, I mean I think the price tag was absurd on a franchise of which no one has ever really heard. And the marketing was pathetic. But as for being a decent movie, well, it was pretty damn good.
Because some people just want to be there to pee in your eye when you fail. Didn’t Hugo (which I also loved) have a similar budget and even worse box office?
I think the lesson here is that there is no reason to spend $200,000,000 making a movie unless its a sequel.
Anybody else think it’s the title’s fault? It’s not very appealing. They should’ve left it JOHN CARTER OF MARS.
The poster made it look like “John Carter of DUNE”!
Even that wouldn’t have done it. Sounds like [Boring Guy] OF MARS to me.
Nope, what they needed was WARLORD OF MARS. You can’t afford to be shy. This is a badass war story set on an alien world. And for the ladies, make sure the marketing hypes Dejah as a badass warrior woman who is fighting for her people and getting help from a hunky Earthman with a tragic, romantic past.
Also, cast a real man as Carter, not a boy from some TV show nobody watches. So no, the marketing isn’t 100% to blame for this debacle.
Every movie with “Mars” or variants like “Red Planet,” etc. in the title tanks. I can see why they didn’t name in “John Carter of Mars.”
There was an article in the latest EW that said as much. The only Mars-set movie that made money in their research was “Total Recall.”
I couldn’t agree more. “John Carter” is a terrible name for a movie (with all due respect to anyone whose actual name is John Carter)
I was cynical until I saw it. At the end, I found myself hoping for a sequel. Get over yourselves. when you can make a movie halfway decent as this, then talk. Until then…
I’m sure for a quarter of a billion I could make a “halfway decent” movie. Too bad this one wasn’t.
Poor Eddie, another bomb, guess texting did not exist when they started production. Someone from CAA pickup the phone and go save him.
Nobody wants to see this movie.
Try it out. You might be pleasantly surprised.
Yeah, pleasantly surprised at how much less painful having teeth pulled w/out anasthesia is compared to this abortion…[BOOM!]
I think Nathan drank the Kool-aid. Keep it away!
Nobody wants to see this movie and no one is interested in Taylor Kitsch, who has to be one of the most boring people to get a big PR push. I hope this puts the brakes on the trend of shoehorning him into every other film in development.
I’ve seen it twice already, and will be back.
Highlights: Thark babies, Woola, air battles, Warhoon battle
Plots a little convoluted, but made more sense the second time around.
I enjoyed it, i though it was going to be awful but it was actual good.
I never trust rotten tomatoes any more they’re o biased and only rate certain type of movies highly.
HAHA… BOMBS AWAY!
Can’t wait for your autopsy report Nikki.
Heed Nikki’s warning about rival studios being “a little too gleeful.” If this movie bombs it will be a fascinating story for many reasons, but it won’t be a happy story. Put away the schadenfreude.
I wish the previews were better because it seems like the people who did see it liked it. Anyways, half a million is not too bad — and yes the budget is 250 million but it seems certain to make that up internationally. Wish that a movie opening at 25 million is not considered a disappointment when many thought it would open to even half of that.
Did you just not read that whole “BOMBING INTERNATIONALLY” part, Mr. Plant?
Did you not read the part about huge numbers in Russia?
“huge numbers” out of Russia is a relative thing. Tickets cost 120 roubles and that equates to about four dollars per seat. The all-time highest grossing film in Russia made something like 25 million after its complete run in theatres.
They pirate EVERYTHING over there.
If you’re counting on the Russian B.O. to bail you out, you’re in big f**king trouble.
Yeah, tell me. Tickets cost 250-330 roubles = 8-11 dollars. And an Avatar made a gross more than 100 thousand dollars. So, tell me, yeah.
John Carter is going to take 20 million dollars on this weekend. (13 were taken by 2-3 days)
@Harry47
Maybe in certain parts of Moscow, yeah you’re right.
Though, I just picked up a DVD in the subway cost me 80 rubles, not 80 roubles…
But Jack’s right. Don’t count on Russia.
And yes. The movie is overrated.
Dude, before posting do the research!
The highest grossing movie in Russia is Avatar and it made something $117million in box office.
A movie with a budget of $250+ million that opens to $25 million is definitely a disappointment. And who thought John Carter would open to $12.5 million??? There is no good way to spin this opening.
People, people. Remember TITANIC? 23 million opening weekend. Hindsight is always best.
At least Disney has Avengers to look forward too.
Yeah, and Avengers is going to be far worse drivel than this movie.
Regardless of whether this film is good or bad, a lot of folks worked hard to make it and Disney paid them, so people got to eat and pay their bills. The level of schadenfreude here is disturbing, and may point to unresolved personal issues that need to be addressed.
yeah yeah yeah…and at 250million, a lot of those people were OVERPAID! so who pays in the end…the schmuck public!
Uh, welcome to Hollywood?
I respect your opinion, but I suspect the reason the industry and its fringe (that’s everybody else who reads DEADLINE) are reacting like blood-thirsty Romans in the Coliseum is not because they want to see commercial product fail but rather they want to at least believe there is serious intent and respect for an audience on the part of the studios. They smell neither with CARTER. It’s source material that’s been floating around for years and probably came attached with some ticking bomb that the previous Disney regime left under Ross’ chair as they fled the lot. And don’t EVEN get people started about Kitsch. Who thought THAT guy could be a star? That’s bad soothsaying on the part of the powers-that-be and, realistically, pressure from the major agencies. This whole package stank like a rotting corpse from day one, yet Disney followed through because that train couldn’t be stopped. All they could do is avoid looking at the massive destruction in the wake of a collision. So, I think that’s the reason people are deriding this movie — it reeks of a decision based on fear and numbers without regard for the bread-earning Joe who buys that ticket.
Look. I’m sure you’re an intelligent person and all. But if you were to actually, ya know, see the film, perhaps at a decent theater, with good popcorn, your misguided rant would’ve been subverted by the true cinema lover / movie fan hopefully dwelling inside you. If there is one.
See the film. And I hope you come back and read what you read above, because your going to feel like a fucking idiot.
And if you work in the industry with us, it’s this type of shit (your weak, thin albeit obvious argument with glaring inaccuracies) that’s making things hard. Hard to work. Hard to appreciate my peers. Hard to enjoy Deadline. Cause your negativity is a cancer that is infecting even those who work in the movie business love from the medium itself.
It’s hard having a fun at the movies with a stick up your ass.
Richard313, you win BEST POST OF THE YEAR!!! Amen, amen, amen! I have never understood why people root for things to fail or be bad – especially when they haven’t even seen them. This movie is fantastic in the best sense of the word, and you know what? It’s FUN!!! As long as I have worked in the business, I am proud to say that I have never lost the ability to shut it all off and go to the movies with the same love for the magic of Hollywood that got me into the business in the first place. I wish the “oh so cool” hipsters who think they’re too good for this kind of movie would just go do something else with their time. And as for the rival studio plants just here to bad-mouth the competition…LAME! What goes around comes around, and you do nothing to make the world a better place. GO SEE “JOHN CARTER”! I’s great!
“And don’t EVEN get people started about Kitsch. Who thought THAT guy could be a star?”
Um, any/everybody who saw “Friday Night Lights”?
So, a total of 5 people then?
ZING!
Right…because we all know the best shows have the highest ratings, and vice versa.
Friday Night Lights was one of greatest TV dramas ever, and Taylor Kitsch was one go the main reasons why.
I’m sure the 4 other people who watched the show share your opinion. Just like everyone watching Two and a Half Men are convinced it’s the best comedy ever. The 300 million people who rejected Kitsch for years may think otherwise. But who cares what they think? They are the unwashed dirty masses… who Disney hoped to bilk money from. oops.
youre right. every movie should cost $250 mil! good idea!
VERY well said!
I don’t think the kid/family audience is going to go to a midnight show of this. VERY positive tweets coming from last nights screening though. It’s going to take VERY strong word of mouth to overcome the hate put forth by black hearted websites like this.
49% Rotten Tomatoes. John Carter is one of the worst films of the year. Disney plants are being very silly.
And Audience 72%. I know this is hard for old media to comprehend, but general audiences are giving less and less credence to “professional” critics these days. Look at Drive. Critics wet themselves over that turd, which went on to bomb with audiences and at the box office. Ask any Top Critic though, and they’ll tell you it was the best film of 2011.
For what it’s worth, I saw a midnight showing of John Carter last night, and thought it was great. The trailers were horrible, telling us absolutely nothing about what the movie was about, so I’d say Disney needs to fire whomever put them together. Hugo faced the same problem last year, so you’d think the studios would have learned. Removing “of Mars” from the title also hurt the films perception among young males as well. Hopefully word of mouth will turn things around, but this is a hell of a ditch it’s landed itself in, and 250+ million makes for a steep climb.
Drive cost 15 million to make and made 74 million. With DVD, Digital, Blu-Ray, and TV sales it’s at a 100 million. How the f is that a bomb?
Agreed Jon… But this is the era of I don’t like it so it’s a bomb regardless of numbers.
For the sake of comparison, “The Lorax” also had an audience score of 72% on Rotten Tomatoes. And the critics gave it just a 57% fresh.
All the while, people are gushing over “The Lorax.”
Can we just agree that the audience opinion means little on RT and move on from there? Very few people actually rate those movies. The numbers given (going into thousands) are mostly “Would like to see”/”Wouldn’t like to see” numbers. Compare with Metacritic for the actual numbers of reviewers.
And @sillybilly – the Rotten Tomatoes score doesn’t make it one of the worst movies of the year… there are FAR worse movies currently at the megaplex.
But it may be the years big loser. 2012′s “Cowboys and Aliens.”
Saw John Carter on Monday. Never read books or comics. Went into screening not expecting much but Movie was very enjoyable. Wouldn’t mind a sequel at all, but I guess I have better chance of seeing Project X2 or The Lorax Strikes Back. Ugh
Um…they already announced a sequel of Project X this week. Read the trades, bunky.
And Lorax II is a no-brainer. It’s the biggest hit for U since Jason Bourne got hauled onto that fishing boat and, couldn’t remember his past.
This movie will need an autopsy report with a full toxicology panel…yikes.
Whoever thought this was a good idea to greenlight must have been drunk.
That was the Modus Operandi of the entire Disney corporate family a couple of years ago. Why else do you think ABC had zero successes in two years of drama development? (BoP fan in the back – sit down. Your show will be canceled by the end of this year)
Right, cuz you wouldn’t greenlight a movie from the writer of Tarzan and the Oscar-winning director of Finding Nemo. Genius.
I would have greenlit this movie.
With a $70 million budget. Tops. TOPS.
The idea was fine. Edgar Rice Burrough’s sci fi novels are the inspiration for a lot of the sci fi and space fantasy we see nowadays. The similarities to Attack of the Clones are very much intentional.
But wow, did they botch the marketing something awful. For starters, they shouldn’t have named it after a character on ER. What was wrong with calling it Warlord of Mars? At least then people might have the first idea what the movie was about.
And the ugly orange-blob ads didn’t help. I noticed some where I honestly couldn’t have told you it was for a movie of any kind, if I hadn’t already been familiar with the character. I might have guessed John Carter was some new menswear designer.
The first book is A Princess of Mars. The director said if he called it Princess no boy would go. Disneys marketing people kept testing John Carter of Mars and finding just on title alone, no girls/women would go. So he decided on John Carter. Foolish imo. anyone who would not go because of “Mars” would bail when they see the trailer anyway because they hate aliens/sci fi. I would have named it ala Indiana Jones “John Carter and the Princess of Mars” or “John Carter: Warlord of Mars”
They didn’t want anything with “Mars” in the title. They were afraid after Cowboys vs Aliens.
They were actually afraid after LAST YEAR’S 100 million dollar plus Disney-released bomb Mars Needs Moms. [that'd be more bazinga worthy if it wasn't the godawful truth of the matter]
Mars Needs Moms wasn’t a Disney production.
Which is hilarious when you think about it, everyone knows that it’s the cowboys that put people off, everyone loves aliens, ever heard of Avatar?!?! Morons!
It wasn’t called Avatar: Aliens. You’re completely missing the point.
Honestly, what did the marketing have to work with? The movie is a long, boring slog, with ugly alien character designs, not much action, and no stars.
They didn’t want to put “mars” in the title because it tested extremely poorly and remember, “Mars Needs Moms” is one of the biggest bombs in the history of film.
Plus they had what many were calling the worst commercial of the Super Bowl. They had a golden opportunity to set the movie apart from everything else and instead they gave us 30 seconds of indiscernible stills that come together to spell the meaningless “John Carter” title.
Yeah the title Disney settled on is flat as the Texas panhandle. I’m dubious of the whole “Mars = Failure” equation as the title someone suggested on this page — “Warlord of Mars” — sounded pretty damn good to me.
scifi_fan, you’re a complete MORON. THEY didn’t name it after a character on ER, they named it after THE MAIN CHARACTER IN THE BOOKS. I suggest you go to a library and learn something. Idiot.
Uh.. he was joking Fedora. He was speaking from the perspective of how the general public would interpret the title. He obviously didn’t actually think they named the movie after an ER character. This fact is especially obvious since he’s familiar with Burrough’s works. Less caps, more thinking.
Fedora, it was a joke (as if that wasn’t obvious) but besides that, if you didn’t read the book, how would you know who John Carter was? Terrible title.
If only people weren’t so stupid.
Why are people, so happy for this movie to fail? Unless your George Lucas or James Cameron and you want to pretend you had the original idea, I don’t see the problem that people are rushing for this movie to fail.
It’s a hundred years of coming to life, which inspired other movies, you would think people would be interested.
Seriously, if you can sit through Twilight and Transformers but not this? I really enjoyed it, and people should actually watch it before making any judgments. Don’t listen to the critics but again watch.
Before, you get too excited about the autopsy report on this, I’m still waiting on Cowboys and Aliens.
I really wish somehow, this movie becomes a hit in the long run. The hate on this movie before, it’s even been watched is amazing.
Yeah, the marketing wasn’t great but boy do certain corners want this movie to fail again why?
This is a brilliant post.
This sudden, fashionable hatred of John Carter has “herd mentality” written all over it.
Amen. One of the most succinct things ever posted in the history of this board.
This outbreak of Disney plants screams “paid manufactured herd mentality”. Only this technique doesn’t really work. Disney marketing fails again.
I really liked the movie and wholeheartedly agree with the earlier herd mentality comments. John Carter has its flaws but I enjoyed it and will see it again this weekend not just to annoy the haters but because I liked it that much.
The sadistic glee in hoping this movie potentially fails is ugly and maddening. Let movies rise and fall on their own merits and word of mouth. If one enjoys trying to be a tipping point – especially when it’s in the negative – then that persons lead a very sad life.
For those who suppose I might be a Disney plant, I can be reached at my work e-mail, mcarlockATthefloridacatholicDOTorg where I work as editor for a regional newspaper. It’s kind of hypocritical to call people out as being plants when many of the accusers are not even using their real names. Sad, sad, sad. That’s the problem with the Internet. Too many anonymous bullies who are afraid to back up their comments with their real names and reputations. As the saying goes, put up or shut up.
That said, I agree that the marketing was miserable. This movie was written a century ago like Lord of the Rings and came before and inspired all the later heavy-hitters. It should have been promoted like it was a really BIG deal that this movie was finally coming out and it should have capitalized on the history of ERB. But just because I disagree with the marketing approach is no cause to hope the movie fails. Are we fans of cinema or fans of marketing? You can’t eat sizzle, but you can eat steak. Just saying!
these people are SO OBVIOUSLY DISNEY PLANTS.
So “lolz” and “fred” – if those are your real names – how do we know you two aren’t plants from rival studios that want Disney products to fail? I supplied my real name and work e-mail address (see my above comment). Are you two “grownups” ready to do the same? Are you willing to stand behind your comments or do you run from your own words once the spotlight is turned on? Can you supply real contact information or are you just anonymous cowards who hide behind a digital curtain and throw out accusations? If you want to prove someone’s a plant, start with me. Man up or shut up.
As for me being a Disney disciple, I’m capable of criticisms of Disney. They charge too much for their theme parks, it’s atrocious how much they charge people to park in what is basically a shopping mall with theme park rides and they deliberately killed off local attractions in Florida by duplicating them on their own grounds. An example is Church Street Station in Orlando; they created Pleasure Island to squash it as they didn’t want tourists spending their dollars outside of their parks. Amusingly, Universal’s CityWalk came later and put Disney’s Pleasure Island out of business. Despite all that, I don’t let the bad blind me to the good. Or the truth that there is a herd mentality in effect out to throttle this movie for no good reason.
I chalk it up to the Seinfeld is Unfunny principle. The original property is 100 years old, and we’ve seen the basic story told w/ far more fantastical bells and whistles since (especially in the last 40 years). Not to mention the botched advertising made it look terrible. Heck, even the star’s own name was against it!
For me it’s the condescending attitude of the film’s fans, as well as of the director. I was actually inclined to go see it when I first started reading up on it. Now I’m on the side of the gleeful haters.
Plus, the fact that the trailers have shown really bad dialogue and acting didn’t help the matters at all.
What the hell does this even mean? You don’t want to see a movie because of the attitude of the director? Setting aside the question of where and how he’s been “condescending”…who cares? Who judges a movie based on what the director is like as a person? Who thinks like that?
It’s okay to dislike a movie, but try forming your own opinion. Sheesh. How weird.
“Who thinks like that?” Everybody. Avatar became the highest grossing film because of James Cameron’s winning personality, don’t you know?
Good one, Alan.
Yes, Bowler, the dialogue in the trailer was beyond bad! The pretty woman says, with wide-eyed amazement, “You’re John Carter – of Earth!” And he grunts “Yes.” It was like a preview for a daytime soap opera.
OK, since you’re obviously an Oscar-winning screenwriter, why don’t you tell us what’s so bad about that particular dialogue you quoted? Have you never seen and/or liked any action movies, or adventure movies, or science fiction movies? Or were you expecting something more akin to Aaron Sorkin or David Mamet dialogue in a movie about a soldier transported to Mars?
Hahaha, great post.
Vet Assistant, It was RIDICULOUS, meaningless, out-of-context dialogue to use in the trailer. Instead of using a clip from the film that gave an idea of what the story is about, they chose “You’re John Carter – of earth!” With NO indication of who the woman is, where they are now, or how he got there. Your comment about have I written Oscar-worthy dialogue? It’s a big leap from the pathetic trailers for this film to an award win of any kind.
It’s a rental for me (a level of interest that Twilight and Transformers will never achieve with me). It sounds like a decent enough flick. The marketing is squarely to blame for this debacle.
I completely agree with mjrules about the nasty, gleeful hatred surrounding the release of this film. Perhaps Stanton and Disney gambled and missed (I haven’t seen it yet), but can’t it at least be seen as a noble effort? Can’t Ms Toldja credit Stanton, Chabon and company for taking huge risks and trying to put something they love onscreen? With this kind of toxic atmosphere, courage and passion will become as extinct in Hollywood as basic respect.
Great comments. Nice to see someone writing something sane about this movie. I haven’t been to any movies yet this year, but this one is a must. I anticipate being very entertained.
Believe it or not, many of the people who didn’t see ‘John Carter’ didn’t rush out to see ‘Twilight’ and ‘Transformers’ either.
Some of us are actually wishing that studios would return to putting quality first. Disney said with ‘Tron: Legacy’ that they wanted to scale back production of smaller films and instead focus on tentpole films that are created with the sole purpose of spawning merchandise sales and sequels. Nevermind that films like ‘Star Wars’ started out as great films, and that the merchandising and sequels came as a result of that.
If studios could learn one thing from ‘John Carter,’ I hope it is “more quality films and less cash grabs!”
Except that Disney has no merch for John Carter so you can’t blame it on that. This is a failure of storytelling and marketing. Period.
Wow. You know Disney marketing is bad, when pathetic board comments is the best they can do.
I wanted this movie to be good but I’m afraid it was a disaster. The acting was terrible, the action was lame, the story was boring. Believe the critics and don’t waste your time.
People are watching this movie bomb with glee because they work in an industry where ignorance and failure are not always punished, and are often rewarded.
So when out-of-touch studio execs greenlight a movie with a $200 million+ budget based on ancient source material with almost ZERO foothold in the popular consciousness, ZERO star power, awful marketing that consists mostly of a shirtless man no one knows breathing heavily in a desert, and release it to mediocre reviews… people are happy to see it fail because that’s what it DESERVES.
Shocking incompetence from top to bottom. I’m not saying this is a movie that should never have been made. But for it to be made on this budget is stupefying. Disney also made a movie they weren’t sure how to sell. Always risky, but again, on THIS budget!? Insane. Staggering.
So movies “deserve” to fail now? Interesting.
Just saw it with my kids. We all loved it. Not the greatest story structure in the world but very entertaining. The negative rants on here sound like a bunch of d-girls and d-boys doing what they do best – knifing people in the back over material they haven’t read or seen.
Yeah, I wasn’t expecting much but actually thoroughly enjoyed it. The buzz was all wrong.
Yeah, I wasn’t expecting much, but all these Disney Plants comments have helped me expect even less…
The marketing of this movie is to blame. It’s a GOOD movie. The fan made trailer is 10x better than the $100mil Disney paid for marketing.
49% Rotten Tomatoes. Be honest. It’s a rotten movie.
So if 50% of the critics loved something, and the other 50% hated it (Thus giving the RT score 50%) you’re automatically going to side with the negatives? You’re not the sharpest tool in the shed, are you?
Rottentomatoes has single-handedly neutered the critics as a whole. And your comment is proof of that. Please, enlighten us with a RT percentage number that you feel qualifies a movie as “good”. What is the lucky number that you see and say “Now I can go see that film!” Do you even like any films that are rotten? Do you even see films, or do just memorize the RT number? Seems preposterous given your logic. But looking at these comments from those who haven’t even see it, logic isn’t their strong suite.
If every critic gave it a 6.5 out of 10, the RT score would be 100% (I guess it would be your favorite move, then?) Can you seriously be dumb enough to not understand why RT is flawed?
The Metacritic score — which is a blended star rating — is 51%, indicating the average critic gave this movie 2 stars (out of 4), rendering your point about Rotten Tomatoes irrelevant for this film.
On average, this film is a consensus “mediocre”, not awful, not especially good. Very few films actually score 90% of Rotten Tomatoes without also scoring in the mid 70s (or better) on Metacritic.
Shockingly, there is a correlation between “thumbs up” and “really good” — in aggregate.
Critics aren’t what they used to be. Talk about dumbed down.
Interesting comments, Person. With a Tomatometer of 50%, thogh, that means that half of the critics didn’t like it. If only half of the people who’ve seen it think it’s a good movie, then at best, I’m likely to see it at a matinee. No way I’d pay full price for such a poorly received film.
I would think an RT score of 75 or better would tend to indicate something worth seeing for most people.
You’re looking at the wrong percentage. Look at TOP CRITICS.
The number is 35%.
-RnsW
I have to agree that what put this movie on the worng track was the marketing. Let’s break it down:
1) Superbowl Trailer -This trailer showed no hint what so ever that there was a plot, just lots of things fighting and exploding that looks like an outtake from Transformers or Dune.
2) The generic naming of the movie. “John Carter?” What is that about? If they were that worried about the “Mars Curse” Why not call it John Carter, Warlord of Barsoom? OR John Carter and the Princess, or Warlod John Carter? At least then you knew it was fantasy related.
3) How to get women to see it. They should have emphasized the romance between John Carter and Deja Thoris the Princess. She’s a strong, intelligent beautiful character in the movie, but the martketing barely even shows her. A missed opportunity here.
Good or bad as the film may be, few will ever find out due to the terrible marketing campaign. Whoever was in charge of that, should never be allowed to market any movie ever again.
Tossing a romance into an action movie isn’t going to get me to see it. It’s so insulting that Hollywood thinks women will settle for so little, even though Kitch is certainly hot.
I agree. The title is pathetically uninspiring. I am female and devoured the John Carter books in my early 20′s. I loved the adventure. I will go see the film having read the comments here, the sensible simple comments of pleasure rather than the nihilistic, mindless tripe that stands for critique these days. I want to give the film a chance. It’s worth the money to me, this one time.
Thank You for a refreshing post from someone who actually seems to *like* going to the movies!
I personally want to see it fail because of it’s ridiculously bloated budget. So typical of America. It’s pathetic.
This movie employed a lot of people and put money in their pockets. I’m talking about the blue collar workers. And what’s with the dig on America? This place is great.
best post so far
What’s with the hate? Do Stanton and Chabon run some sort of puppy-fighting ring? It looks no different from the hundreds of other cynical Transformers/POTC wannabe blockbusters out there with a splash of Flash Gordon.
I will never celebrate an original idea failing…well, an “original-ish” idea anyway. About as close as we are going to get these days.
It really isn’t a bad movie, just far too expensive.
John Carter of Mars was created by Edgar Rice Burroughs (you know, the guy who also gave us Tarzan) over 100 years ago. It is THE original idea. Without JCoM, there is no Flash Gordon, and probably no Lucasfilm (Star Wars and Indiana Jones both show shades of the story), or Avatar.
This is very true, but the bottom line is, most of the audience isn’t aware of this. I get the director didn’t want to deviate from the source material, but to audiences, ‘its been done before, and better’. There should have been more of an effort to distinguish it from its ‘film predecessors’.
And yes, I’ve seen the movie.
It’s … just awful.
Why do you care what it cost to make? The only thing that matters is what’s on the screen. If it’s a good story, told well, I couldn’t care less about whether it was a micro budget indie film or a $200M blockbuster.
I really think when producers and creatives bring project ideas to studios, the studio heads should always ask the question: Who out there in the real world is waiting for this movie to be made? The number of people who remember, much less long for, film versions of Edgar Rick Burroughs space operas can only be minuscule. If no one is waiting for the movie to be made – don’t make it. Simple as that.
Please read the Steve Job’s book. Your post is very small thinking, and is why we have such bland, movies.
This is exactly correct. And well said. No decent human being wants to see someone’s passion project fail. However, this entire project came off like an obvious cash grab. It isn’t quite as bad as “Battleship” but it feels like the same faulty logic at work: a manufactured, pre-fab franchise fashioned out of an obscure brand. And I’m not blaming Andrew Stanton, exactly here because he says he is a fan of these books and has been. But this was just a bad idea from the get-go.
I see this idea a lot and I don’t get it. This was a fairly risky project because the heyday of ERB’s fiction was about 80 years ago. That makes it less a cash grab to my way of thinking, particularly given the huge budget for it.
I truly am baffled that Disney killed this movie, utterly killed it, with a dismal marketing campaign. Just makes me sick. What a waste.
What your question that studio heads need to be asking themselves (“Who is waiting for this movie to be made?”) fails to take into account is the fact that sometimes, indeed most of the time…
PEOPLE DON’T KNOW WHAT THE HELL THEY WANT!
Think about it. More often than not, we don’t realize what we want until we get it.
Who waited for STAR WARS to be made? Who waited for AVATAR? They were both complete surprises that the public embraced.
Yeah, that sort of makes sense until you actually think about it.
It’s ridiculous to compare Avatar and Star Wars to John Carter. For one thing those films were revolutionary when released. John Carter is not…it’s same old, same old.
The question Studio Execs should have asked – does the public really wanna see another space opera with lame ass 3D?
You miss the point entirely. The point being that these films were complete, unique surprises and the passions of extremely talented men. No studio would have taken these risks on their own. Research and focus groups would have killed them.
Yeah, and EVERYONE waited for Phantom Menace, Clones, and Revenge of the Sith for over TWENTY YEARS, and all (or at least most) were sadly disappointed. Just because you’ve been waiting a long time for something doesn’t necessarily mean you’ll like what you get.
same here (I thought it was cool), seems to be the general consensus that those who actually went to see it liked it…and in true hater fashion, the ones who are bashing it never even gave it a chance. Ignorance is bliss, but knowledge is power
Practically nothing would get made, then.
I saw it last night in IMAX 3D with very high expectations considering the talent involved…and I have to say I was regrettably disappointed. Its not a bad movie in any way shape or form, but the plot is so convoluted that your brain just checks out. The whole time I kept thinking to myself “man if they just kept things simple.” The biggest sin the movie commits though is that you don’t feel like you’ve been transported to another world. Say what you will about Star Wars and Avatar, but those movies transport you into another realm. With this one I felt like I was stuck in New Mexico. Fifteen minutes in I knew this is just not going to take off.
I think the fanboy critics are giving it a pass because it doesn’t embarrass itself, but boy does it get tedious. The villains. The locale. The chemistry between the leads…just bland. The highlight for me was seein the Avengers trailer in 3D which was utterly amazing.
And what did IMAX 3D set you back? 20 bucks? On top of that, god forbid you want a medium soda and pop corn, you just blew 33 bucks seeing John Carter…Around $65if you foolishly bring a date to the movies…and I dread to think about a family of 4!!!
It’s highly unlikely that there will be a ‘John Carter’ sequel, primarily because it cost way too much to make, and will take awhile to become profitable, if ever.
If it were brought in for at least half the production cost, I could see it.
As it stands, it’s almost as if the film were built to fail.
Honestly, the new Disney brass has been said to be treating it as such, since it was a holdover from the previous administration. A similar theory has been posited for the epic bombing of Mars Needs Moms a year ago.
That seems strange – I would be very surprised if Disney hadn’t planned the Avengers pairing all along.
It’s not so much hate for this movie…
But for many of us in the development community, we cannot wait for the day when Disney becomes a real studio again. Disney is a multi-billion dollar media company. Does Rich Ross really need to spend so little on his development slate? Maybe buying a few more projects and putting more money in the pockets of writers/diretors/filmmakers would lead to much less hate on your releases. If you expect to bat 1000, and you spend nothing on development because you think you are that wise, then everyone will root for your movies to fail.
Whatever it takes for Disney to become a real studio again, I’m all for it.
Bingo! Your spot on about why this is generating “hatred” from so many commenting here. How many movies could have been made out of that $250 million price tag?
Rich Ross was put in there to look after WDS not to make a bunch of movies, WDS doesn’t need to make movies, they have Marvel, Pixar, Distribute DreamWorks, and have the POTC franchise, along with what ever Johnny Depp wants to do, why in the world would they want to make movies? I hope they cut back even more, 10 is way too many movies a year to make.
Remember Walt Disney Studios is just one small part of Disney, the only reason why they make the things in the first place is to tie them into Parks, Television, Games, Cruise Lines,DVD’s, and most of all the Merchandising.
When all is said and done, Disney might just make a few bucks on this movie.
A reported 250 million dollar budget, plus another 100 million dollars for marketing cannot buy you a hit. The ‘hate’ for this movie has more to do with the hate of a studio system that spends grotesque amounts of money on a few movies, instead of spreading the wealth around to more smaller budget projects and more development. The fact that Stanton made two wildly successful animated features certainly earned him the opportunity to make a live action feature, but the unfettered and lavish spending had more to do with Stanton’s relationship with John Lasseter than Stanton’s proven ability to handle such a big undertaking.
Lasseter, since taking over Disney (don’t kid yourself that he isn’t Rich Ross’s equal or better as far as the studio is concerned), has not delivered any worthwhile hits. I’m guessing that some of this ‘hate’ for John Carter is directed at Lasseter and is not undeserved. Don’t be surprised if Rich Ross (who did not green light the film), isn’t secretly happy about its failure. Will take the Lasseter led Pixar clique down a peg or two and with it, elevate Rich Ross just a little..
I think John would be quite comfortable comparing what he’s brought to the Disney brand compared to Rich Ross. Of course, High School Musical and Hannah Montana are evergreens.
Three things I see with this:
1. SoCal Disneyites vs. Bay Area (Pixar) Disneyites battling for supremacy. A Stanton/Lasseter/Pixar fail means a shift in the balance of power. It’s a battle Pixar will probably eventually lose given the gravitational pull of the Los Angeles mother ship and the pundit community here. Also, the Cook-Ross transition has fueled the political fires. Ever wonder why the Pixarians are so protective?
2. Pundits who think Stanton is an ego gone wild with a budget to match. But with nothing more than the $250M number and nobody at Disney willing to break that down – leaving the cynical to assume its evidence of gross excess or desperate retooling, it’s a number repeated over and over, folded into every review (especially the negative ones). Evoking Ishtar and Heaven’s Gate, it’s the kind of poison that can kill a film. But for audiences, unless they’re asked to pay a higher ticket price for that $250M, why should it even matter?
3. The Disney brand/scripty logo still turns off the geeks. Many in the blogosphere incorrectly attributed Carter’s problems with Disney meddling, whereas the pundits attributed Carter’s problems to Pixar resistance to Disney oversight. Who’s right? And how hard would it have been for Disney to build up a PR drum beat to promote Edgar Rice Burroughs’ centenary to help bolster the Carter effort? They did nothing on that score, leaving most would-be viewers wondering not only who John Carter was, but who Edgar Rice Burroughs was.
John Carter is a solid, fun scifi-adventure film. Seen it twice, once with friends and once with kids. No, I liked Raiders/Star Wars better, but It’s good enough to deserve better treatment than it has, and it appears the foreign markets, less blanketed with the negative press, are responding well.
Best-case scenario this is a cautionary tale for studios and filmmakers that helps them better manage whisper campaigns and pundit brush fires. Worst case, this is another nail in the coffin of studio’s taking a risk, leaving us with sequels, toys and formulaic blockbusters.
You should have put that “seen it twice already” part at the beginning of your wall of text so everyone would know to not to waste their time reading your shit.
Actually, the film is decent…Not great, but better than a lot of the popcorn tentpole type of films out these days. The marketing sucked, as the general public has no idea what this film is about…I somewhat believe the conspiracy theories, as I can’t believe how badly this film has been handled. Also, the budget got way, way out of control…This film could have been made with a 150 mil budget…With the huge budget, it would have to pull at the very least an 75 mil plus domestic opening in hopes of being a success…IF it manages to do 40 million plus domestic and another 30 mil overseas for its opening weekend, it may at least make the budget back eventually.
Schadenfreude is really the DNA of this industry…
People say they are depressed because of the (former) BO slump, and yet every time a particular movie opens they root for it to fail.