Beating a dead thoat

I was at Target again last week and I saw the Asylum John Carter DVD marked $5, next to other crap, and even big budget theatrical movies marked down to $5, $7 even $9.99. No copies of Disney's John Carter to be seen. And it occurred to me, that this might actually be the first time, Asylum's product will pass for the mainstream counterpart because of all the unprecedented criticism. People sitting around watching it, thinking, "Wow, this really was as crappy as the critics said it was." As they look at the Olive Garden sets, used gladiator costumes and six rubber masks, they will never get the deeper meaning. There is a deeper joke in there somewhere, that not many will ever know. Asylum finally made a film that will be able to pass as it's Hollywood counterpart, even if only for the critics perception of that Hollywood version movie and not the movie itself.

I haven't seen either version, but is the Disney one really as awful as people say?

JamesCarter wrote:

I haven't seen either version, but is the Disney one really as awful as people say?

No.

I liked it. I thought it was lot of fun. As a ERB fan I could say iit had its flaws, but it certainly wasn't the worst movie ever made. It certainly wasn't "walk out of theatre" bad.

Easily better than Green Lantern, Ghost Rider2, Cowboys & Aliens...

Whaaaaaaaat....I loved Cowboys and Aliens.

JamesCarter wrote:

Whaaaaaaaat....I loved Cowboys and Aliens.

Exactly!

I loved C&A, but it wasn't arguably any better or worse than JC. Within a margin of error being that one of those is supposedly the worst film ever made

When we saw it finally, there was actually a couple walking out at the end asking "what was all the fuss, that wasn't bad"

JamesCarter wrote:

Whaaaaaaaat....I loved Cowboys and Aliens.

I think C&A was a victim of event fatigue. It's being released really late in a summer packed with a ton of genre stuff, we ended up not seeing it in the theater, we just forgot, and there was so much else to do

Ahh, I see. *adds John Carter to the list*

JamesCarter wrote:

Ahh, I see. *adds John Carter to the list*

It's great fun!

Have you read the books? You don't need to have read them, to enjoy it. But there are some interesting and arguably significant differences made.

The closest I've got to John Carter was seeing the ads for comics in Previews. The entire story is mostly a mystery to me, beyond a basic synopsis.

I saw it when it was in theaters. And loved it.

I didn't mind the changes but I read them quite a long time ago. I could say I did miss some things, on a purely fan level, the friendship with Kantos Kan, and the Green Martian lifestyle and the deal with the combats, in general the time frame seemed shortened. Carter seemed to spend less time with the Martians before Dejah Thoris was introduced. But it was probably time and money issues.

Cowboys and Aliens was good too. I'm sorry we won't see sequels to either movie.

I disagree, sure you can watch it and it's a fun fim but some if what was removed made the story richer more enjoyable.

SPOILERS:
Much of what made the Tharks respect John Carter, and much of the fun for the readers as well, were the experiences navigating Thark life and politics. Not to mention explaining Woola's loyalty.

I agree removing the frienship with Kantos Kan saved time. But adding a reluctance to the JC character instead of him being a "fighting man" by nature. It seemed a poor trade for what we get. A dead wife and an I dont want to get involved attitude? I would have preferred the early scenes with Carter becoming a Thark citizen by killing his way through several high ranking warriors and gaining their wealth and position, as well as the respect of the Tharks.

And the whole animal training storyline, where JC teaches the Tharks how to better train their thoats, took away more of respect he earned. And his attitude towards Woola, saving Woola after Woola jumps in a saves JC from the white ape, and then refusing to kill the wounded animal after it saved his life, these are character moments sorely missing. The film holds up but like i said its just that much less rich and dimensional.

I liked the movie well enough, but I agree that the stuff lost from the books is missed.

I can understand why they made Dejah Thoris less of a sex kitten, more of a warrior. That makes sense for a more modern story. But I'm not sure that the replacement love story arc was all that compelling. Ah well, the movie had cool stuff to look at. I loved that walking city, for instance.