Disney has released a 720P HD clip of the John Carter Warhoon battle scene — a scene that fans of the movie swoon over, and which is absolutely hated by one of our more prolific commenters here.   I’m sure we’ll here from both sides.  My view?  It’s a beautiful lyrical piece that works emotionally, visually, and within the story.  Although something like this has been done by other directors — I’m not aware of anyone linking visuals (it’s not just the sword/shovel cuts, the visual parallelism is much more complete than that)……

Aside from whether you like it or not — the other aspect about this is interesting is that Disney releasing this is one of the few signs I’ve seen of the studio pushing any of the heart/romance aspects of the story. Falls into the category of “too little too late” …..

 
One of the members of the John Carter Facebook group found this article and posted it today.  I’m sharing it here as this is obviously a topic of interest to us.  It takes a while to get going, but it eventually gets into some interesting points.
Movie marketing is a tricky and incredibly difficult business.  Whenever you market a movie, you’re making a promise to the audience that the movie will be a certain way.  People like to see the same thing in a new way—we’re weird like that.  We like to be told what we’re getting into.  The less sure people are of what to expect, the less they’re willing to take a chance and drop $20 – $50 at the movies.  If you advertise a movie one way and it’s actually a completely different type of movie, you may have a large opening weekend, but your movie will quickly tank as word of mouth spreads that your movie is a stinker.
 All of this discussion of movie marketing leads me to the actual point for this article, which is to discuss the movie John Carter, an action-adventure sci-fi, space opera movie that did rather poorly (at least, in American markets) largely, I feel, due to its bizarre treatment in marketing the movie to the public.
John Carter was a mess of marketing issues.  The movie is sort of disadvantaged because science-fiction movies don’t have the best track record in cinematic history.  Sure, Alien, The Terminator, etc., but John Carter’s story is based on a golden-age science fiction novel series—which are often very cheesy, and would appeal to a very niche audience these days.  Like B-movies.
This movie was expensive, and they needed to make a lot of money to justify how much they spent.  So when marketing the movie, you try to appeal to the broadest audience out there, which is why, I assume, the advertisements look like a Michael Bay flick…because he’s incredibly popular right now for providing big, dumb action movies with lots of epic action scenes but very little in the way of depth or substance or characterization.  People love big dumb action movies—including me.  But marketing a movie as a big dumb action movie when it’s not is a huge mistake.
 For example, if people go into a movie expecting gigantic visual spectacles and wall-to-wall action…well they’re not going to get that from John Carter.  Don’t get me wrong, there’s action.  Lots of it.  It’s really cool, too.  But there aren’t a lot of scenes just for the sake of scenes. Most of the scenes in John Carter move the story forward and develop the plot.  In addition to plot, however, the movie takes time to develop its characters, creating three-dimensional people instead of cookie cutter “good-guy” and “bad-guy” stand-ins.
Now, I’m not saying John Carter is a perfect movie.  But it’s much better than it’s been getting credit for.
Another issue that people probably had with the movie, at least whether they’ll go see it or not, is the “what is it?” issue.  You often know where you stand with a movie based on the title and the advertisements.
 

Editor’s note:  JCF is pleased to welcome a new contributor, Eric Holland.  Eric has created in depth online databases at www.barsoom.wikia.com and johncarter.wikia.com, and has also contributed to recovering the old John Carter comics printed in “the funnies” anthologies.  In this article he traces the history of the depiction of Dejah Thoris as a “warrior-like” princess–doing so at a time when there is considerable debate about the depiction of Dejah Thoris as a “Warrior Princess” in Disney’s John Carter, with Lynn Collins as Dejah Thoris, directed by Andrew Stanton.

Dejah Thoris – The Warrior?

by Eric Holland

Here I have collected a timeline of the various depictions of Dejah Thoris as a warrior!

February 1912: A princess of mars first sees the light of day, while Dejah Thoris is not depicted as a warrior, she is depicted as a strong willed woman willing to stand up for what she believes. And it is important to note, that this book goes out of its way to explain that all martian women carry at least a dagger!

August 1940: The funnies Issue #46 contains a story adapting a princess of mars, Dejah Thoris defends herself during her wedding by pulling out a gun and shooting someone! (a gun not provided by anyone, but she brought herself. Keep in mind this series was drawn and likely written by John Coleman Burroughs, and thus was likely approved by Edgar Rice burroughs

September 1940: The funnies issue #47, Dejah Thoris pulls out a gun and saves John Carters life!

December 1975: DC comics Tarzan family issue #60 depicts the world of barsoom and its people in the most inaccurate way imaginable. This comic depicts Thorjah, the daughter of Mars Kujak as a woman fighting for the right to be a warrior. Although a poor adaption it is clear who these people are meant to be!

July 1978: Marvels John Carter: Warlord of Mars, Issue #14 is released. It is important to know that this series is one of the most beloved and well-remembered things associated with Burroughs barsoom. In this issue Dejah Thoris fights skeletons with a sword

September 1978: Dejah Thoris fights an assassin woman in Issue #16 teenage boys are enthralled by this fight, John Carter is thought to be dead and Dejah Thoris goes off to avenge this death! (He isn’t dead btw)

Early (unknown) 1979: Warlord of Mars Annual #3 is published by marvel, lots of Dejah Thoris butt kicking to be found!

April 1979: issue #23 of marvels series, Dejah Thoris disguised as a member of the guild of assassins beats up john carter, and later in another fight a bunch of other warrior women!

May 1979: issue #24, dejah thoris fights tars tarkas and a bunch of other guys

August 1979: Issue #26 Dejah Thoris shoots a lot of guys, throws sword at one guy, stabs some more

April 1996: Dejah Thoris points a gun at tarzans head in Tarzans/John Carter warlords of mars 2

May 1996:Dejah Thoris still pointing gun at tarzans head in the next issue

June 1996:Dejah Thoris beats up the master assassin of zodanga, as depicted by the awesome cover art

2009: Asylums “A Princess of Mars” she stabs a bug, all fans of the books who have watched this movie enter a catatonic state for three weeks

March 2011: Dynamite Comics begins an ongoing series with Dejah Thoris as the protagonist, showing her with warrior characteristics almost every issue

October 2011: The movie prequel comic is released, Dejah Thoris is depicted as a warrior and a scientist, but her warrior aspects are not over the top and she only manages to kill a few calots throughout the entire series!

March 9 2012: Fans are outraged at the Disney film portraying Dejah Thoris as having warrior characteristics (how dare she defend herself at her wedding), because she has literally never been portrayed as a warrior before!

 

 

Eva Lin on the John Carter Facebook group came up with this very interesting interview of Andrew Stanton and Taylor Kitsch from “Kinopoesk”, a Russian site. It’s an interview they did as part of the promotion during their visit to Moscow — and in it Stanton makes some interesting comments about Burroughs fans and his casting of Taylor Kitsch.

Here is the link to the translated version of the Russian page:
Kinopoesk Stanton Kitsch Interview

Here is a transcript of the relevant portions of what Stanton says in the interview:

About his feelings about the film
Every film is precious….I’ve been very blessed that any film I’ve worked on is something that I’ve chosen, and I want to work on, it’s like your own child, you care so much.

Continue reading »

 

As a lot of people are aware of Kerry Conran’s pitch video and test footage for his Paramount John Carter — one of the many that never got made. Because I read the script for that one, someone over at the IMDB message board asked me to explain the differences between that one and the Stanton version–which of course we haven’t seen, but have some insights into at this point.  

Continue reading »

 

Those who have been following the seemingly endless journey of John Carter to the screen will recall that back in 2004 Kerry Conran (director of Sky Pilot and the World of Tomorrow) was attached to direct the film for Paramount when that studio had the rights. It contains a lot of interesting art I haven’t seen before, and gives clues as to where Conran was headed with the project (before he was replaced by Rodriguez, who was replaced by Favreau, who was eventually replaced by Disney and Stanton).

Continue reading »

 

This is a review which caught my attention because of it’s reference to Steve Jobs comment about dividing the world into those that “get it” and those that are “bozos” — with the reviewer reaching the conclusion that John Carter is a “perfect bozo-meter”.  There are some other good thoughts in here as well.  Thanks to Debbie Banway for flagging this one for JCF:

REVIEW: JOHN CARTER

by Dave Jutsum from Dave Jutsum’s Blog

Synopsis: JCM is the pinnacle of campy cool sci-fi wonderment. If you missed it and you are at all the kind of person who likes classic tales for boys or science fiction, you should go out of your way to see it. You won’t be disappointed.

Continue reading »

 

As I’m working on “Hollywood vs Mars”, I’ve been building a file of all the more substantial Andrew Stanton interviews as part of preparation for what I hope will be an opportunity to interview him once I’ve squeezed everything I can from the existing interviews. Following are the interviews I’ve been working with. If anyone is aware of other comprehensive ones, or even short ones if they contain quotes that haven’t been widely circulated elsewhere, please share.

http://collider.com/andrew-stanton-john-carter-reshoots-interview/146699/
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/53561
http://www.adventuresbydaddy.com/2011/12/29/academy-award-winning-director-andrew-stanton-discusses-making-of-john-carter/
http://www.ugo.com/movies/john-carter-andrew-stanton-interview
http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/movies/a-huge-slightly-baffling-risk-20120306-1ui0i.html
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=87266
http://www.firstshowing.net/2012/interview-john-carter-director-andrew-stanton-on-making-movies/
http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Interview-Andrew-Stanton-How-John-Carter-Changed-Him-Filmmaker-29931.html
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/john_carter_of_mars/news/?a=55362
http://www.digitalspy.com/movies/interviews/a369705/andrew-stanton-interview-john-carter-was-physically-challenging.html
http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/interview-john-carter-director-andrew-stanton-222
http://news.moviefone.com/2012/03/07/andrew-stanton-john-carter_n_1327070.html
http://www.geeksaresexy.net/2012/03/06/from-here-to-barsoom-an-interview-with-andrew-stanton-director-of-john-carter/
http://collider.com/andrew-stanton-john-carter-reshoots-interview/146699/
http://web.orange.co.uk/article/film/john-carter-andrew-stanton-interview-142382

 

Since March 9, somewhere between 30 and 50 million people have seen the movie John Carter, and as a result, during the month of March, A Princess of Mars was number one on the Project Gutenberg download list — meaning many people are discovering the books as a result of the movie. These are some teens who read A Princess of Mars as part of a JCF reading project undertaken with Long Beach Teacher Rebecca Baeder Garland. What did they think of the book? Give a listen. Their interviews start around 1:45.

I have to say — it was a real treat to see teens get excited about ERB.

 

Jess Nevins writing for i09 has a thoughtful article entitled “Why Does Edgar Rice Burroughs Still Matter” which is worth reading in its entirety.   Nevins traces the role of the pulp magazines in American and international culture during Burroughs’ heyday, and connects this to the present day.  Very good stuff and highly recommended.  Here is an excerpt, followed by a link to the full article.  Enjoy!!

Why Does Edgar Rice Burroughs Still Matter?

by Jess Nivens

Edgar Rice Burroughs published his first story, “Under the Moons of Mars,” a hundred years ago this month. And even forty years ago, nobody would have predicted that Burroughs’ creations, like Tarzan and John Carter of Mars, would still be shaping the entertainment landscape. Why does Burroughs continue to cast such a long shadow over pop culture?

The Pulps And Their Aesthetic

The pulp era began with the appearance of the first pulp magazine, Argosy, in 1896, and ended around 1951, when mass-market paperbacks and digest-sized magazines replaced the pulps. As with most historical eras, the borders are amorphous rather than distinct. The dime novel, the dominant form of popular literature in the second half of the 19th century, began its decline in 1894, but it was not until 1919 that more pulps than dime novels were published, and not until 1935 that the last dime novel ceased publication. And the last pulp, Ranch Romances, ceased publishing in 1971, long after the digest form and the paperback had come to rule popular literature. Nonetheless, the pulp era is best marked as lasting from 1896 to 1951.

During those years a distinctive aesthetic developed within the pulps. The pulps were a medium, never a genre; every form of fiction appeared within pulp magazines, from railway fiction to sports to adventure fiction. But each of these genres displayed the same aesthetic: an emphasis on sensation, melodrama, adventure and romance and a de-emphasis on the mimetic and realistic; simple emotions strongly expressed; the regular use of the exotic — racial, sexual, socioeconomic, and geographic — and the exploitation of the same; the use of dialogue and narration as means for delivering information rather than displaying authorial style or advancing character development; a privileging of series characters, many of whose situations never changed; and happy endings and good triumphing over evil.

……..

What Set Burroughs Apart

What set Burroughs apart from those previous authors was the scale of his success and the resulting influence he had on those genres. In the thirty years after Burroughs’ debut the great majority of the writers who wrote Planetary Romance and Lost Race-and-feral-children stories did so under the influence of Burroughs, if not in blatant imitation of him. Burroughs didn’t invent ray guns, or aliens using human feudal structures, chivalry, and martial codes, or humans being raised by impossibly intelligent and communicative animals, or any of the other tropes and motifs (now cliches) from both type of stories which are so familiar to us now.

But Burroughs so popularized the genres in which they appeared that his handling of those tropes and motifs, and those genres, became not just the standard approach but the archetypal approach to them. If the characters in Kurt Busiek’s Astro City literally live and work in the shadow of Mt. Kirby — a reference to comic book artist Jack Kirby and his enormous influence on modern superhero comics — then those writing Planetary Romances and Lost Race-and-feral-children stories, even today, figuratively do so in the shadow of Mt. Burroughs.