Go Back   DreamTeamDownloads1, FTP Help, Movies, Bollywood, Applications, etc. & Mature Sex Forum, Rapidshare, Filefactory, Freakshare, Rapidgator, Turbobit, & More MULTI Filehosts > General > Entertainment/Art/TV/Movies/Gossip on Stars & News

Entertainment/Art/TV/Movies/Gossip on Stars & News Read all about New Movies/Consoles/Games/PCs Coming out and Art & All The General Entertainment News & Gossip Here

IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT
Hallo to All Members. As you can see we regularly Upgrade our Servers, (Sorry for any Downtime during this). We also have added more Forums to help you with many things and for you to enjoy. We now need you to help us to keep this site up and running. This site works at a loss every month and we appeal to you to donate what you can. If you would like to help us, then please just send a message to any Member of Staff for info on how to do this,,,, & Thank You for Being Members of this site.
Post New ThreadReply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 21-03-12, 15:20   #1
 
FreaknDavid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: In The Hills of Tennessee
Posts: 6,631
Thanks: 7,340
Thanked 7,260 Times in 4,750 Posts
FreaknDavid has a reputation beyond reputeFreaknDavid has a reputation beyond reputeFreaknDavid has a reputation beyond reputeFreaknDavid has a reputation beyond reputeFreaknDavid has a reputation beyond reputeFreaknDavid has a reputation beyond reputeFreaknDavid has a reputation beyond reputeFreaknDavid has a reputation beyond reputeFreaknDavid has a reputation beyond reputeFreaknDavid has a reputation beyond reputeFreaknDavid has a reputation beyond repute

Awards Showcase
Gold Medal Gold Medal Gold Medal Gold Medal 
Total Awards: 5

Popcorn Movie Review: John Carter



Howard Waldrop and Lawrence Person review John Carter:

Both: Split decision: Howard, after some reflection, just doesnít like it. Lawrence thinks itís a good action/adventure film, but not a great one.

Howard Waldrop: John Carter is Edgar Rice Burroughs for people whoíve seen Avatar and Lawrence of Arabia.

Lawrence Person: It strikes me as a good-faith effort to capture the feel of A Princess of Mars, updated just enough to make it (almost) acceptable to modern audiences. It falls short in ways that are very typical of special effects movies of this era.

One reason Howard and I have differing opinions may be the different ages we first came to the source material. Howard read the Burroughs novels as an early teenager, the perfect age for them to work their visceral magic on a boyís imagination, whereas I read A Princess of Mars in my thirties, when I was already thinking of the novel as an artifact of its time, something I could see the primal appeal of without actually sharing it. That distance let me enjoy the movie for what it is: a steampunk action adventure spectacle update of a book that was already a period piece.

HW: The main problem of filming John Carter 100 years after the source material was written (Under the Moons of Mars/A Princess of Mars) is all the movies that have been made in the intervening century. John Carter, an embittered, unreconstructed ex-Confederate cavalryman, ends up on Mars, and stuff happens.

In the frame story, John Carterís nephew, a young man named Edgar Rice Burroughs, is brought to Carterís estate after his uncleís mysterious death, and is given Carterís journal to read. (In 1881, the setting, the real Burroughs was 6 years old.) The only part of the movie that really works, and gets some of the flavor of Burroughs across, is the last 10 minutes, back in the envelope story (and of course, setting us up for the sequel); there is some hint of what it must be like to venture between worlds.

LP: Some of the movie tracks the book. John Carter goes to Mars and gets captured by the tall, four-armed, green-skinned, tusked Tharks, who discover that Carter is amazingly strong on their world. Meanwhile, the human cities of Helium (good guys) and Zodanga (bad guys) are at war, and John Carter ends up saving the life of Helium princess Dejah Thoris. All of that is (more or less) from the book. Thorisí impending wedding to the chief bad guy isnít (at least in the first book), and neither is the instrumentality by which Carter gets there (more about which anon).

HW: As the story of the filmís genesis came to me: it could have been much worse. First, it was to be a live-action Tom Cruise vehicle, in the early 90s. Then Disney wanted to make it one of those big splashy animated musicals, along the Beauty and the Beast/ Hunchback of Notre Dame lines, the then-current fashion. A long succession of writers tried their hands at each metamorphosis, until the current guys went Back To The Book and turned in a script they could use (with an assist from Michael Chabon). You can see the Tom Cruise template; the star here (Taylor Kitsch) is a smaller, thinner actor than most people imagine John Carter to be.

LP: Kitsch is OK, and all the acting here is at least good or better. I too would have expected a Carter that was a bit beefier, older and more grizzled, but Kitsch plays the part as written. Dominic West, most famous for his role as the dogged, self-destructive Det. McNulty in The Wire, is fine in the underwritten villainís role. Lynn Collins is hot but a little static as Dejah Thoris, Princess of Science. All of the CGI actors seem to get better lines than the humans.

HW: The other working template is David Lynchís Dune. (See what I said about intervening movies?) The politics of Mars (Burroughs got most of them out of a bottle of Scotch) are more easily explained if thereís some kind of secret priestly order (the Thurns) a cross between the Illuminati and the Bene Gesserit, who can and do travel between Mars (Barsoom) and Earth (Jasoom). They do so by means of a medallion (which puts the travel on a semi-scientific voodoo basis), rather than the mystical, wish-fulfillment voodoo basis of the original novel, in the scenes of Carter in the Arizona cave (with, in the book, the body of a dead Apache).

LP: The original way ďlook up at Mars and blink youíre thereĒ method from the book isnít even as scientifically plausible as Dorothy clicking her heels together. I can understand the need to insert a vaguely plausible mechanism for getting him to Mars. The problem is that the method they come up with ends up taking up too much weight, making the Thurns Universal Plot Devices and necessitating moving scenes from the book around willy-nilly, usually to no good effect. Thurns are also simultaneously too mysterious and not mysterious enough (ďlet me tell you just enough so you know weíre the bad guys and move the plot forwardĒ). It all hangs together a lot more plausibly than Thor or Cowboys & Aliens (which is probably damning it with faint praise).

HW: Thereís stuff wrong with the physics in the movie. Much is made of Carterís Earth-muscle ability to jump (there are some semi-funny scenes of Carter learning how not to injure himself every step when heís first on Mars). Marsí gravity is about .37g, our Moonís around .16góand you didnít see the lunar astronauts making 200-meter-long, 59-meter-high leaps there, at half Mars gravity.

LP: Howardís right, but the leaping stuff is almost straight from the book, which is filled to the brim with adolescent male wish fulfillment. (Though the scene where Carter jumps a damn quarter-mile isnít, and is lazy and unnecessary.) On the other hand, I donít remember him breaking thick iron chains with such abandon in the bookÖ

HW: And the moons of Mars look like two smaller Earth moons hanging in the sky, and thereís talk of ďMoonriseĒ like on Earth. (Deimos and Phobos look like potatoes, and one of them zips around the planet 6 times a dayótheyíre probably in the same part of the sky for about 3 minutes every 24.57 hours.)

You could take all that if all those other movies hadnít gotten in the way. There are bad Red Martians in a walking city; nicer Red Martians in Helium, run along the lines of Rome. Dejah Thoris, besides being a Princess, is the chief scientist, looking for the Ninth Ray (a secret controlled by the Thurns). There are the Tharks, green 15-foot-tall 4-armed Martians (like Apaches, or the Arabs in Lawrence). Thereís Woola, the equivalent of a giant batrachian puppy-dog, sort of like if Danny DeVito had been crossed with a diplovertebron. There are banths, the camel-equivalents the Tharks ride. The Thark raid on the walking city is staged just like the Arab raid on Jaffa in Lawrence.

LP: Another reason I probably enjoyed the movie better than Howard is that the Tharks and the dog worked pretty well for me. I also liked the fact that the role of Sola, the female Thark that becomes something of a mother/protector to Carter (at great cost to herself) tracks her role in the book. Indeed almost all the scenes with the Tharks are better than the scenes strictly between humans.

HW: Thereís a scene of Carter and the Thurn walking through the city on Dejah Thorisí wedding day (to the chief bad guy, playing it like Tiberius in I, Claudius). The Thurn keeps shape-changing, to guys Carter knows, to older women, back to the Thurn. The template is the Ian Holm /Peter Weller stroll through Tangiers, with the telepathy, in Naked Lunch. It was done better there.

Letís talk about the effects. The green Martians are swell, much indebted to Avatar; thereís individuation of character, they look alive. The giant 4-armed apes (in the arena scenes) are big, mindless and fairly scary. The Martian fliers look like crosses between Roman triremes and giant dragonflies, and they blow up Real Good.

LP: I enjoyed the look of the fliers, which could have flown off a Roger Dean album cover. Indeed, the whole steampunk look of the human city scenes generally works (though once again, the Vast Interior Architectural Spaces here look as lifeless and unlikely as they do in Thor and Revenge of the Sith).

HW: Whatís wrong with this movie? A lot, and most of it I canít put my finger on. It may just have the wrong feel, something hard to control. I never thought of the Barsoom books as action/adventure spectacles (although that was in there). As I said, the closing minutes get closer to the feel of Burroughs, and that was a happy by-product of wrapping things up.

LP: Though I clearly liked it better than Howard, heís right; there is something missing here, and I canít quite put my finger on it either. Part of it is pacing problems in the human interaction scenes, especially those in the sappy romance (which was sappy in the original book as well). 132 minutes is at least 12 minutes too long. But I still found the action scenes gripping, especially the ones of the Tharks, and I was never bored. Also, the 3D worked for me in a way it didnít for Alice in Wonderland or Thor. (Howard saw it in 2D since, thanks to recent eye surgery, that whole third D is wasted on him.)
This is a good popcorn movie, but nothing youíll remember much about a year from now.

HW: Perhaps itís that the movie is on a lower diction level than the original novel. (Is such a thing possible? Yes, in these dumbed-down times). Itís those pesky intervening 100 years of film junk that have messed up some of the wonder and mystery of the Mars books.

LP: None of the dialog made me cringe, which is a lot more than I can say about Cowboys & Aliens. Or the remake of The Wicker Man. Or 9. Or Skyline. I will now stop before this becomes a rant on Movies These Days.

HW: Maybe this should have been filmed in the 1930s and 40s (at the same time as the Tarzan novels) with crappy special effects, etc. Maybe the book would have come across as more intact, and, well, pure. Sometimes you have to take your junk culture whole. This isnít even that; itís inflated, overdone, junk culture, another symptom of the times. This must retroactively be biting E. R. Burroughs on the butt.

LP: My enjoyment of the film may be closely linked to my lack of emotional attachment to the source material. The original was already so old and scientifically impossible by the time I read it that the changes made here donít bother me on a philosophical level. Just about all of them are individually defensible, though they add up to make the movie feel more like, well, just about every special effects-laden SciFi spectacular of the last ten years. But if someone had taken similar liberties with, say, The Lord of the Rings films, I would probably be incensed. [Imagine there's a long, detailed paragraph here explaining the differing frames of expectations for high fantasy and period science fiction. Got it? Good. Let's move on.] But since I regard A Princess of Mars as essentially an antiquated, noisy action/adventure spectacle thatís pretty much unfilmable as originally written, the changes donít irk me the way they probably will a Burroughs devotee.

HW: Somewhere in all this is a good, different movie with the same plot, sort of like Burroughs wrote it originally.

Iím sure itíll make a bazillion dollars, so thereíll be more Just Like It.
__________________
Rock Out With DreamTeamDownloads1-The Best Place To Be For Downloads.

You Can Help the site If You Donate, Please Click Here: DONATE

Thank You For Your Support & Membership To DTD1.


FreaknDavid is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote
Post New ThreadReply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.5.2
Designed by: vBSkinworks