re: 'John Carter' goes down as one of the biggest flops in history ($200M loss)

Not only that, but I'm guessing Battle Ship well outdid their budget vs what they'll earn. Not a good movie career start for Tim Riggins.

I enjoyed the movie with my kids, 10 and 14. I'm not sure how the movie was supposed to be marketed. Not great, but good.

quote:

---

because it forces studios to make better movies. Or at least, that's the reasoning.

---

But it never does. What it does is force studios to exert even MORE control over products thinking they can make a better movie.

This movie was plagued by the studio enough, from the name changes to the content. And it was still a good film (that says a lot for Stanton). But if highly creative and inspired movies fail, studios will make more Jack and Jills, NOT LESS.

quote:

---

I want movies that look like crap, ones where studios sink 250M+ into them just for the sake of doing it, to BOMB.

---

It looks like crap... why does it matter what it looks like, what about judging something on what it is? And they sank $250 million into it....but what did that pay for, how do we know where that money went? What if they're considering the millions put in years ago, before Riggins and Stanton, to try and make the film? Until you get a breakdown of how much the movie actually cost, you can't just judge it "because it cost $250 million to make."

quote:

---

Making great movies is less about how much money you throw at them, and more about having a great script, great director, and great acting

---

And nobody would deny that, but also, just because it costs a lot doesn't mean it doesn't have those things.

So are you saying you don't want any blockbusters? That we should cap the amount spent on a film?

quote:

---

The way movie studios report losses is such a racket. This movie could have very well made money but the studio could have come up with magic numbers to report a loss. Happens frequently.

---

I'm thinking the $250 million figure is way off, or at least "Edited for sake of giant numbers." This movie had been between studios, directors and actors for a long time if I'm not mistaken. They might have just threw that into the cost.

the first time i saw the John Carter trailer flipping thru the channels i thought it was a spoof, and waited for the show that made it to come on

quote:

---

the first time i saw the John Carter trailer flipping thru the channels i thought it was a spoof, and waited for the show that made it to come on

---

And that's a fair assessment.... Of the trailer.

Everyone should read this, where they specifically bring up the trailer: LINK

quote:

---

Disney needs to just completely reassess their marketing. They blamed the fact that "The Princess and the Frog" didn't do as well as they expected on the title, so they go on and give their other films stupidly simplistic names, like changing "Rapunzel" to "Tangled" and "The Bear and the Bow" to "Brave", neither of which really tell me anything about the film. Changing "John Carter of Mars" to "John Carter" was just an unbelievably stupid decision. If I had never heard of John Carter before, what am I really supposed to get out of that title? It could be drama, action, or whatever, but of Mars tells your potential audience something.

---

Exactly. They already mingle enough, and if these films fail, big companies like Disney will interact MORE with the process, not less. Hoping that these fail is not the right way to think if you want studios to make better films.

quote:

---

Plus "A Princess of Mars" wouldn't have been a bad title either.

---

Is a brilliant title. Changing that was a big big problem. Or maybe "John Carter and the Princess of Mars" I mean they needed to evoke the pulp feeling and "John Carter" does not do that in the least.

I know that I shouldn't, but i find this to be hilarious!

quote:

---

Mars Needs Moms"?! WTF is that? Hard to believe a $150 million movie flew completely under my radar.

---

It as an absolutely horrible CGI movie put out by Disney. It's about some jackass kid who hates his mom because she makes him eat brussel sprouts (or some disgusting vegetable) and wishes she would disappear. Well aliens land on Earth and abduct a bunch of moms, including the jackhole's, somehow he is able to sneak aboard the ship where he is later captured. The rest of the movie is about him escaping and saving his mom. It is atrocious. I watched it on Starz one night because I couldn't sleep and there was nothing else on.

quote:

---

it's still a movie with a grossly overinflated budget due to way too much CGI

---

Yes and No. The CGI is necessary and actually done very well. It's far more natural feeling than movies with twice the budget.

quote:

---

without an established director (of live action movies).

---

Who does a good job.

quote:

---

i don't know if another movie like this is really worth $250M budget

---

It obviously won't be , which is a sham.


I really chalk this one up to people not liking true adventure anymore. It's almost like as a culture, we can't.