John Carter bombs at the box office. $200 million loss for Disney

[Bluce Ree]

To heisenburg:

Please before you post, perhaps check your history. Like read more than what is told to you via movies.

"It seemed that this movie was the vision of a much older person, say in their 80's. Civil War banter, spitting of tobacco and shooting of "Indians" by the Confederate soldiers struck me in a very negative way." --- heisenbug

"Confederate" soldiers did not exist in the segment of the movie you address. They lost that war. It was done. Guess who wears blue? Humm...

Also, it's too bad that you can't understand why a man who lost everything to him.. oh sorry..... a soul mate, wife and child can mean more than a car or house, or job.... Family.... I wish that you would really know what the word "family" actually meant.

So. To reply to my comment, you should try to actually understand what happened in this country over 150 years ago or you should chose to not comment on it. Also, people didn't talk the same way as they do now. People then actually understood the meaning of language and didn't require the use of slang to get their point across. Read some letters from a 100 years ago and see if you know all the words. Good luck.

I am posting only to get people to actually read on the subject they are typing about since it is too obvious that so many are ignorant of the past. I am glad folks are posting since it brings discussion, but please do research and spell check is good too.

Let me get this straight, you woke me up from my nap to piss and moan in favor or this butt chunk of a movie??? Listen kid, if I wanted to wake up to the cyber equivalent of a whiny, deflating balloon I'd look up an old post by a member here named Stonelesscutter (limited time only -- act fast!). As it is John Carter sucks a bag of excised dog sphincters -- you know it -- I know it -- we all know it, so let's just cut the crap. Now make yourself useful and go get me a pack of smokes!

View attachment 7298

I tried to warn ya, cymon, buddy. And this is when he gets up on the right side of the bed.

 

[Joelist]

Illiterati has a very valid point - the studio rewrote a LOT of the backstory which plays into why the movie was so bad. For example, by basically amputating Carter's "otherworldly" backstory all the motivations of his character go out the window too, which makes his actions lose any sense of rationality. It would be like making a movie version of "Dune" and removing the entire backstory of Paul Atriedes - it makes his actions nonsensical.

 

[SciphonicStranger]

I hope OM1 managed to avoid the dog sphincters when he was writing his review.

 

[Illiterati]

Illiterati has a very valid point - the studio rewrote a LOT of the backstory which plays into why the movie was so bad. For example, by basically amputating Carter's "otherworldly" backstory all the motivations of his character go out the window too, which makes his actions lose any sense of rationality. It would be like making a movie version of "Dune" and removing the entire backstory of Paul Atriedes - it makes his actions nonsensical.

The bit with the crypt was just bizarre.

I would have liked to have seen the actual story from the book about what really WAS down the river -- and what normally happens in the exceedingly rare event that anyone ever came back from that trip downriver.

 

[lady_maneth]

It's been over 20 years since I read the books so I can't really remember any details. Perhaps just as well. Still, I thought the fact that the movie bombed was unfortunate, because I would have liked to see more of this story, and I really liked the mix of CGI and live action, completely seamless.