John Carter (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews



Message


Empire Admin -> John Carter (3/3/2012 1:44:04 AM)

Post your comments on this article




J_BUltimatum -> John Carter of crap (3/3/2012 1:44:04 AM)

where to start? the ridiculously bad acting? the hundreds of plot holes? the bad script? the over use of stupid words to describe the different races? or the long running time (almost 3hrs) to get to a very predictable ending? yup this has everything that makes a bad film. still better than Avatar, but that doesn't take much!




Dave25 -> (3/3/2012 9:25:48 AM)

@J_BUltimatum I don't believe you have actually seen this film have you? 3 hour running time? Its just over 2 hours, go away you attention seeking liar.




croninja -> Star ratings don't work! (3/3/2012 2:03:14 PM)

You say that it's better than Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe and yet Empire awarded both films 3 stars! There has to be a better way of rating films. And Empire gave Attack of the Clones 5 stars! And Indiana Jones and the Nuclear Fridge 4 stars! Very hard to take any Empire reviews seriously after that. If this was directed by Spielberg, Empire would have automatically given it 4 or 5 stars.




croninja -> Star ratings don't work! (3/3/2012 2:29:59 PM)

You say that it's better than Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe and yet Empire awarded both films 3 stars! There has to be a better way of rating films. And Empire gave Attack of the Clones 5 stars! And Indiana Jones and the Nuclear Fridge 4 stars! Very hard to take any Empire reviews seriously after that. If this was directed by Spielberg, Empire would have automatically given it 4 or 5 stars.




croninja -> Star ratings don't work! (3/3/2012 2:44:03 PM)

You say that it's better than Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe and yet Empire awarded both films 3 stars! There has to be a better way of rating films. And Empire gave Attack of the Clones 5 stars! And Indiana Jones and the Nuclear Fridge 4 stars! Very hard to take any Empire reviews seriously after that. If this was directed by Spielberg, Empire would have automatically given it 4 or 5 stars.




Indio -> RE: John Carter (3/3/2012 5:34:14 PM)


Saw this on Thursday, I thought it was OK but no great shakes. Without going into spoilers (unless you're going to see this just to see James Purefoy, in which case look away now) , if you haven't seen any of the big name science fiction films of the last 50 years then you might find bits of this exciting but too much of it seems like stuff we've seen before (and OK, the source material was written 100 years ago and has been ripped off countless times since, but some scenes , i.e. in the arena with the white apes seemed to be directly in a style far too similar to stuff we've already seen i.e. Attack Of The Clones).

Apart from the special effects, I can imagine a lot of people getting bored by this before too long, the script is a bit dull (the fact that the only characters name I can still remember after seeing this is John Carter shows the level of character development and how much you care about them by the end of the film), we're not given any proper reasons as to the motivation of the main characters beyond a bit of exposition from Mark Strong half way through that doesn't really amount to anything, so it was hard to get too excited regarding what happens.

While I thought there was nothing particularly wrong with Kitsch's performance (he comes across as a kind of mix of James Franco and Sam Rockwell) he wasn't really given that much to do to prove himself acting wise. I'm also a bit perplexed as to why the likes of Ciaran Hinds, Samantha Morton, Dominic West and co. signed up for this, beyond a big pay cheque - none of them are given that much to do acting wise (James Purefoy's one 'big' scene basically amounts to what seems to be a deleted scene from Carry On Cleo with added swordplay)

Overall, if you like BIG science fiction films you'll probably want to check this out (it certainly looks like they spent a lot of money on the effects), but don't go expecting something that you're going to be thinking about too much an hour or so after seeing it.




rpem22 -> mr muscle gets a role in hollywood action pic... (4/3/2012 6:36:50 PM)

Why does the main guy look like a scrawny little runt...? Isn't he supposed to be a warrior? It looks ridiculous.

It's like the director tried to get him to bulk up with weights for the role but he instead just went on a no food diet.




antosh25 -> Tim riggins (4/3/2012 9:05:26 PM)

not surprised .




Cyberleader -> (5/3/2012 12:23:25 AM)

A quick question about the star rating? Not one of us have seen the film (its out soon but not this minute) so HOW can we review it? I think less action sounds good though...don't get me wrong, I'm an action junkie...I love me Helms Deep battles and Alien Queen vs Ripley stand offs...but think about it...would Jaws have been as exciting if a cgi Jaws had leapt out at the screen every two seconds? That's what too many directors seem to think...CGI does not always win the day. The best sci-fi big alien brute that pops straight to mind? The rancor from Star Wars. Not even slightly computer generated, very slow lumbering...but a VERY atmospheric scene.




Dr Lenera -> RE: (5/3/2012 9:28:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cyberleader

A quick question about the star rating? Not one of us have seen the film (its out soon but not this minute) so HOW can we review it? I think less action sounds good though...don't get me wrong, I'm an action junkie...I love me Helms Deep battles and Alien Queen vs Ripley stand offs...but think about it...would Jaws have been as exciting if a cgi Jaws had leapt out at the screen every two seconds? That's what too many directors seem to think...CGI does not always win the day. The best sci-fi big alien brute that pops straight to mind? The rancor from Star Wars. Not even slightly computer generated, very slow lumbering...but a VERY atmospheric scene.


Well there have been previews, one of which I was at.




impqueen -> RE: RE: (6/3/2012 10:06:25 AM)

Thanks for the review Dr Lenera.

This John Carter is pretty much what I expected, it’s a great shame it has taken so long for it to come to the big screen and I feel it will suffer because the source has been butchered and appropriated by numerous films in the last 40 years but that’s life and as much as it might annoy me that people are all over the film saying it looks like this and this and blah it was never going to escape that criticism.

I too would love for someone to adapt Tarzan as he was created but I’ doubt it will ever happen.




ememtium -> It's a good film (6/3/2012 12:24:27 PM)

I got to see an advanced screening on Saturday morning (4th March 2012) in Reading thanks to a Sky Movies competition. I can't believe Empire gave the film the same 3 star review as Star Wars Attack of the Clones (which by the trailers looks to be the films nearest counterpart) - okay so it suffers slightly from every other sci-fi film of late stealing its source material (like the reviewer said) but John Carter is all the same a lot of fun and I for one would recommend it.




J_BUltimatum -> (6/3/2012 11:09:29 PM)

@Dave25 yup Movie plus trailers made the whole painful experience of Taylor "I can't act" Kitsch and listening to him being called John Carter of Earth every second line unbearable. Plus working in a cinema has it's plus points (getting to see films before the general public) and it's bad points (having to watch crap like this). Plus Avatar is one of the worst films ever made and is deserved of no stars (@gordonsalive)




BramClabby -> “John Carter” the Movie: Grit and Beauty in a Classic Tale (8/3/2012 1:43:21 AM)

John Carter, on the surface, looks like Avatar set in Prince of Persia. Having just seen a screening, it goes in a very different direction.

Remember that movie a few years ago, where one man who didn’t fit in on his world went to another civilization, where they look like they’re from ancient history but have magic super-science that looks like religion? And then he has to find his confidence, win their respect and lead them into battle to save them from annihilation against a warring superpower? Don’t forget the skimpy hot but smart, sharp-witted and silk-voiced princess and her rich but emotionally-unavailable evil suitor.

It sounds like a lot of movies. Star Wars 4-through-6. Stargate. Atlantis. Yet somehow, this Disney-written sci-fi does all of that and makes this kingdom on Mars feel heavily down to Earth...

edit: no directing traffic off site.




jonson -> RE: “John Carter” the Movie: Grit and Beauty in a Classic Tale (9/3/2012 3:55:02 PM)

Just heard Mark Kermode's review on Radio 5. Ouch! [:D]
Sounds like a $250 million disaster




jonson -> RE: “John Carter” the Movie: Grit and Beauty in a Classic Tale (9/3/2012 3:55:43 PM)

Hmm, double post ahoy.




OPEN YOUR EYES -> RE: “John Carter” the Movie: Grit and Beauty in a Classic Tale (9/3/2012 4:05:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jonson

Just heard Mark Kermode's review on Radio 5. Ouch!!
A $250 million disaster by the sound of it


First time Im going to say this but Mark Kermode really is in a snobbery/bigoted mood today.
You'd think John Carter himself came down and shoved a sphere right up Mark Kermodes backside.





Spaldron -> RE: “John Carter” the Movie: Grit and Beauty in a Classic Tale (9/3/2012 4:41:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: OPEN YOUR EYES

First time Im going to say this but Mark Kermode really is in a snobbery/bigoted mood today.



Please explain what was so bigoted about his review? Was he racist to the Martians? [sm=happy07.gif]




OPEN YOUR EYES -> RE: “John Carter” the Movie: Grit and Beauty in a Classic Tale (9/3/2012 4:49:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Spaldron


quote:

ORIGINAL: OPEN YOUR EYES

First time Im going to say this but Mark Kermode really is in a snobbery/bigoted mood today.



Please explain what was so bigoted about his review? Was he racist to the Martians? [sm=happy07.gif]


Damn straight.[:D]
Kermode just annoyed me today.[&o]




Wild about Wilder -> RE: “John Carter” the Movie: Grit and Beauty in a Classic Tale (9/3/2012 4:54:59 PM)

Don't worry The Daily Star's Alan Frank probably gave it 10/10 I mean he if gave Green Lantern that & This Means War he'll probably give anything it.
I know Kermode was harsh BUT! you gotta admit still as funny as hell! [;)]




OPEN YOUR EYES -> RE: “John Carter” the Movie: Grit and Beauty in a Classic Tale (9/3/2012 4:59:22 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Wild about Wilder

Don't worry The Daily Star's Alan Frank probably gave it 10/10 I mean he if gave Green Lantern that & This Means War he'll probably give anything it.
I know Kermode was harsh BUT! you gotta admit still as funny as hell! [;)]


If its a crap film its a crap film,I have no problems with that regard.
Kermode is an inteligent writer and critic but today he just came across as an OTT amatuer,with a chip on his shoulder.
I didnt find him funny,I found him tiring.




Wild about Wilder -> RE: “John Carter” the Movie: Grit and Beauty in a Classic Tale (9/3/2012 5:12:32 PM)

But you didn't hear Mayo disagree with him?




OPEN YOUR EYES -> RE: “John Carter” the Movie: Grit and Beauty in a Classic Tale (9/3/2012 5:17:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Wild about Wilder

But you didn't hear Mayo disagree with him?


For Mayo its different.
He unfortunetly needs to play the guy who sits on the fence.Though I think last week Mayo openly admitted his deslike for a certain film (cant remember the film),so mabye he is changing.[:)]




Wild about Wilder -> RE: “John Carter” the Movie: Grit and Beauty in a Classic Tale (10/3/2012 9:52:50 AM)

Well when he says well I liked it more than you I think he pretty much gives the game away.
(Only 8/10 from Alan Frank Oh dear!)




Swedle -> Silly- but fun (10/3/2012 10:19:56 AM)

I would have enjoyed this sort of leave-your-brain-at-home-and-just-enjoy-the-aliens-beating-each-other-up movie if it hadn't been for the awful bloke sitting next to me explaining in a carrying whisper that 'it's just a rip off of star wars, really' to anyone who might be interested. By the end i wanted to punch him in the face, but aside from that, it's just a rather silly but ultimately really enjoyable film.




OPEN YOUR EYES -> RE: John Carter of crap (10/3/2012 11:17:19 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Swedle

quote:

ORIGINAL: J_BUltimatum

where to start? the ridiculously bad acting? the hundreds of plot holes? the bad script? the over use of stupid words to describe the different races? or the long running time (almost 3hrs) to get to a very predictable ending? yup this has everything that makes a bad film. still better than Avatar, but that doesn't take much!


I think the reason t's better than avatar is because it's over slightly quicker, it doesn't prolong the suffering as much...
to be honest i didn't think it was that bad, apart from the 'actng'



The acting is 50/50 with me with regards to overpopulated CGI films ie Avatar,John Carter etc.
Nearly 99% of the film the actors are dealing with Character,Objects that arnt really there.Also because these film are so overworked with CGI and with the films general budget heading those costs,then the actors they would likely bring in would be of the cheaper variety,which generally means they arnt the best around.

These films are mainly focused on appearance and appearance only,the acting is somewhat filler due to the basic lines and plot.
I'd love to see a runtime of how much real acting is in these films and how its comparable to the CGI action/acting runtime.




Rgirvan44 -> RE: Star ratings don't work! (10/3/2012 12:15:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Pigeon Army


quote:

ORIGINAL: croninja

You say that it's better than Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe and yet Empire awarded both films 3 stars! There has to be a better way of rating films. And Empire gave Attack of the Clones 5 stars! And Indiana Jones and the Nuclear Fridge 4 stars! Very hard to take any Empire reviews seriously after that. If this was directed by Spielberg, Empire would have automatically given it 4 or 5 stars.


Oh my god we've reached the singularity


It's full of stars....




UTB -> RE: Star ratings don't work! (10/3/2012 2:31:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: croninja

You say that it's better than Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe and yet Empire awarded both films 3 stars!


Instead of comparing the star ratings, how about comparing what the rating stands for, which would be Empire considers both of these films to be 'good' films.

Is that incorrect?

Don't answer that, because LW&W is shit. But you get the idea.




Frank Comiskey -> FLASHMAN (10/3/2012 4:58:48 PM)

Just seen AVATARZAN; as above, epic art direction and progressive CGI, but oddly cliched and derivative, considering that this is the grandad of all sci-fi heroes; perhaps would have been better with a more charismatic lead when it was previously planned in the late 80's with Mr Cruise or Mr Hanks.




Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.109375