i am also vajazzled for this, though i refuse to specifically endorse "planetary romance" on the grounds that it sounds suspiciously like something that twirly moustache steampunk ppl would fancy.
― Fozzy Osbourne (contenderizer), Friday, 9 March 2012 18:39 (1 year ago) Permalink
buckaroo bonzai now and forever
Not this review?
http://m.guardian.co.uk/ms/p/gnm/op/s0NXmqAl4Z9LR-DQO91AOkg/view.m?id=15&gid=film/2012/mar/08/john-carter-review&cat=most-read
― ledge, Friday, 9 March 2012 18:43 (1 year ago) Permalink
block that metaphor:
I felt as if someone had dragged me into the kitchen of my local Greggs, and was baking my head into the centre of a colossal cube of white bread.
― Fozzy Osbourne (contenderizer), Friday, 9 March 2012 18:48 (1 year ago) Permalink
^ a feeling i think we all know well
wtf
― Peppermint Patty Hearst (VegemiteGrrl), Friday, 9 March 2012 18:56 (1 year ago) Permalink
reviewer took too many mushrooms in prep
― Fozzy Osbourne (contenderizer), Friday, 9 March 2012 18:57 (1 year ago) Permalink
reviewer baked his head in too many ovens
― EZ Snappin, Friday, 9 March 2012 18:58 (1 year ago) Permalink
when metaphors fail
― Peppermint Patty Hearst (VegemiteGrrl), Friday, 9 March 2012 19:03 (1 year ago) Permalink
Aw c'mon man! Leigh Brackett! C.L. Moore! JACK FUCKING VANCE! It's a genre with pedigree.
― Axolotl with an Atlatl (Jon Lewis), Friday, 9 March 2012 19:03 (1 year ago) Permalink
no ledge, this one that ned posted upthread: http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2012/mar/01/john-carter-week-geek?CMP=twt_fd
the "planetary romance" genre is basically like the originary text for steampunk!
― the late great, Friday, 9 March 2012 19:03 (1 year ago) Permalink
― the late great, Friday, 9 March 2012 19:04 (1 year ago) Permalink
grew up on this nonsense
― the late great, Friday, 9 March 2012 19:05 (1 year ago) Permalink
I guess what it comes down to is that my very favorite shit (Jack Vance, James P Blaylock) happens to be foundational for steampunk, yet I abhor steampunk.
― Axolotl with an Atlatl (Jon Lewis), Friday, 9 March 2012 19:08 (1 year ago) Permalink
So it was pretty ridiculous and entertaining! Yeah, go see it.
― Ned Raggett, Saturday, 10 March 2012 05:22 (1 year ago) Permalink
There's a huge feeling of "Wow, I can't believe they got away with spending that much money on this" but however formulaic it was always going to be, it wasn't dull. And yeah, Riggins or Kitsch or whatever you want to call him did pretty good and yes is mostly stripped down to not much throughout.
― Ned Raggett, Saturday, 10 March 2012 05:26 (1 year ago) Permalink
It's also the kind of film where I missed some dialogue here and there and thought "Ah, it won't matter." And it didn't, and I expected as much, so.
― Ned Raggett, Saturday, 10 March 2012 05:27 (1 year ago) Permalink
TIM RIGGINS OF MARS
yay
― Peppermint Patty Hearst (VegemiteGrrl), Saturday, 10 March 2012 05:29 (1 year ago) Permalink
Thanks for the report Ned! Glad to hear it was fun.
― EZ Snappin, Saturday, 10 March 2012 05:32 (1 year ago) Permalink
Fun is important. I feel better about seeing this
― Peppermint Patty Hearst (VegemiteGrrl), Saturday, 10 March 2012 05:33 (1 year ago) Permalink
There's one scene that is pure pulp one-dude-vs-the-alien-horde and gotta say that was pretty amazingly done. Frazetta come to life, that.
― Ned Raggett, Saturday, 10 March 2012 05:49 (1 year ago) Permalink
from Boxoffice:
John Carter is off to an underwhelming start. The sci-fi flick grabbed only $9.818 million on Friday. If family audiences decide to show up, then Carter could manage a better multiplier this weekend and possibly pass the $30 million mark. Either way, there's no way this debut will be seen as anything but a disappointment. Carter will have very little time to rebound considering that The Hunger Games hits on March 23. A 73% approval rating from around 15,600 Flixster users indicates that word-of-mouth is mixed.
http://www.boxoffice.com/statistics/bo_numbers/early_estimate/2012-03-10
― Literal Facepalms (Dr Morbius), Saturday, 10 March 2012 21:39 (1 year ago) Permalink
"Industry Hacks Poison Well Before Release, Then Bemoan Poor Box Office."
Even with a shitty marketing strategy, I mean, come on.
― the Hilary Clinton of Ghostface Killahs (Phil D.), Saturday, 10 March 2012 23:04 (1 year ago) Permalink
My local (NYC) megaplex is showing it in only one of its, like, 14 theatres and that's with just 3 showings per day. I think the "Heaven's Gate"-ish advanced fusillade has mortally wounded this one. FWIW, I'm gonna try and catch this on the big screen at one of those screenings tomorrow.
― Lawanda Pageboy (Capitaine Jay Vee), Saturday, 10 March 2012 23:30 (1 year ago) Permalink
this was surprisingly breezy for a 2+ hour flick! i enjoyed it for what it was. manages to be pretty light in tone without being campy. worth seeing if you like this sort of thing.
― enjoy your fleetfoxesocracy sheeple (latebloomer), Sunday, 11 March 2012 05:41 (1 year ago) Permalink
i think I am a person who likes this sort of thing. Buoyed by positive ilxor reviews itt
― Peppermint Patty Hearst (VegemiteGrrl), Sunday, 11 March 2012 05:57 (1 year ago) Permalink
Underwhelming performance?! After the great pains they took to keep the public from confusing it with Mars Needs Moms!? Surely people were all like, "John Carter? I don't know who he is but he sure sounds interesting! I have to spend $15 to find out more!"
― Alan Hale's Corn Casserole Recipe (Family Circle, June 1976) (Deric W. Haircare), Sunday, 11 March 2012 06:19 (1 year ago) Permalink
Mark Kermode went on an unholy rant about this, not that that means absolutely anything at all qualitywise, but it made me more aware of just how much the knives were out due to its production cost. I think I'm going to see it this week just to spite that, but my local multiplex is only showing it twice a day in 2D and I can't be fucked with anymore retro-fitted 3D nonsense, unless any of you ILXors think it worth the extra dosh.
― stay in school if you want to kiw (Gukbe), Sunday, 11 March 2012 06:21 (1 year ago) Permalink
Nah, 2D will be fine.
― Ned Raggett, Sunday, 11 March 2012 06:24 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah there's no reason to see this in 3D.
― enjoy your fleetfoxesocracy sheeple (latebloomer), Sunday, 11 March 2012 06:27 (1 year ago) Permalink
http://www.tor.com/stories/2012/03/the-film-makers-of-mars
ha this is awesome read it
― enjoy your fleetfoxesocracy sheeple (latebloomer), Sunday, 11 March 2012 07:10 (1 year ago) Permalink
Great story!
― valleys of your mind (mh), Sunday, 11 March 2012 14:49 (1 year ago) Permalink
wow. stop what you're doing and read that article.
― the late great, Sunday, 11 March 2012 17:51 (1 year ago) Permalink
ILXors voting with their dollars to fight the burying of $250 M films
― Literal Facepalms (Dr Morbius), Sunday, 11 March 2012 17:55 (1 year ago) Permalink
Nice.
― Spleen of Hearts (kingfish), Sunday, 11 March 2012 17:57 (1 year ago) Permalink
That article is A+++
― that mustardless plate (Bill A), Sunday, 11 March 2012 18:01 (1 year ago) Permalink
thanks for linking that ryman piece, latebloomer. great great great
― Fozzy Osbourne (contenderizer), Sunday, 11 March 2012 18:50 (1 year ago) Permalink
Mark Kermode went on an unholy rant about this, not that that means absolutely anything at all qualitywise, but it made me more aware of just how much the knives were out due to its production cost.
How did I ever not find Kermode completely awful? He's just insufferable now.
― Pheeel, Sunday, 11 March 2012 21:06 (1 year ago) Permalink
That short story !!!! so good! SO good. Thanks for linking, lb
― Peppermint Patty Hearst (VegemiteGrrl), Sunday, 11 March 2012 21:08 (1 year ago) Permalink
alt-history science fiction we can get behind
― valleys of your mind (mh), Sunday, 11 March 2012 23:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
Carter looks to have made about 30 million. Finke is probably gonna get out her autopsy gear, and I'm gonna puke.
― stay in school if you want to kiw (Gukbe), Sunday, 11 March 2012 23:55 (1 year ago) Permalink
Saw a short NYTimes headline: "'Ishtar' Lands on Mars."
― Josh in Chicago, Monday, 12 March 2012 12:50 (1 year ago) Permalink
I'm going to see this this weekend, assuming they don't pull it hard with a vengeance, but the biggest red flag was not all the bad promotion or the bad advance word, but ironically something that's been trotted out in the film's favor: the fact that the source material has been minded dozens of prominent times over the decades. We've see this before.
Admittedly, that doesn't explain why every other POS people have seen before gets seen these days, from sequels to franchise kickstarts. And even on the higher end of things, I have no idea why people in America would take a shot at "Tintin" (however modest) but not this.
― Josh in Chicago, Monday, 12 March 2012 12:55 (1 year ago) Permalink
Ladies and gentlemen, future fall guy Rich Ross, former TV exec and chariman of Disney:
― Josh in Chicago, Monday, 12 March 2012 13:01 (1 year ago) Permalink
It would have been funnier if it was Rick Ross.
― Respectfully, Tyrese Gibson (Nicole), Monday, 12 March 2012 13:18 (1 year ago) Permalink
+ =
― the Hilary Clinton of Ghostface Killahs (Phil D.), Monday, 12 March 2012 13:26 (1 year ago) Permalink
I seem to remember reading that all blockbuster films – at least from the last 20 years – have at least recouped their costs over time.
― Chewshabadoo, Monday, 12 March 2012 13:27 (1 year ago) Permalink
what, even Cutthroat Island?
― Number None, Monday, 12 March 2012 13:29 (1 year ago) Permalink
-xpost -
However, just looking it up now that seems to be balls. Mars Needs Moms (which I'd not even heard of) seems likely to struggle.
― Chewshabadoo, Monday, 12 March 2012 13:34 (1 year ago) Permalink
I still have never seen Cutthroat Island, and I probably should because I have an irrational love for The Long Kiss Goodnight. xp
― Respectfully, Tyrese Gibson (Nicole), Monday, 12 March 2012 13:35 (1 year ago) Permalink