Jump to content

The Film Thread


Recommended Posts

How have you seen that so early? Press screening or something? It's not even on general release yet in the States, nevermind the UK.

Not convinced by it myself, apart from as a bit of eye candy. I'll see it before I judge it, yet it just seems like a typical big blockbuster that goes for style over substance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just out if cloud atlas and it is a **** masterpiece
Did you go to the Premiere? It's been put back until March over here :|

Really interested in how they do the fabricant section which was the best part of the book for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • VT Supporter

Curiousity got the better of me... I bought John Carter. I paid towards making the biggest flop of all time slightly less of a flop.

I'll give it this - it's not as terrible as you might expect. And it's pretty. Looking at the film as a purely technical feat it's incredible, the CG is superb, and every shot is achingly good looking. Unfortunately the looks are tempered by everything looking a little... uninspired. Theres nothing about the art direction of the film that strikes you as remarkable, or particularly inspired or unique. The 2 human Martian races are both apparently walking around in hilarious amounts of fake tan (gallons each by the looks of things) and wear very very similar costumes, the only difference is 1 wears red and the other blue, and the first minute of the film tell you the reds are baddies. Oh and theres another mysterious race who are set up as being manipulators and for all intents and purposes magic but you can largely ignore them.

The plot is needlessly complicated. Thats not to say you're going to be confused watching it, but the plot has numerous bits and bobs you simply sit there and think 'why wasn't this cut at script editting?' The manipulative race have 1 necessity to the plot - they are in effect the device to get John to Mars. The film pisses about with a completely unnecessary plot line on Earth regarding John dying and (curiously, I've no idea if this plot point is in the books or not) leaving his estate and fortune to (real life writer of the John Carter adventures) Edgar Rice Burroughs, though the film make no attempt to suggest that Edgar goes on to write about John Carter as a chronicle of real events, or if the character is just a nod to people who know he was the author of the original books. This serves next to no purpose in the plot beyond to provide an overly elaborate final twist to the film to enable a sequel, something that could have been far easier and simpler done without the needless plotline. There are 2 or 3 really, really out of place and heavy handed flashbacks to a tragedy in John's life that feel like they've simply been hurled into the film for the sake of it, as there is absolutely no reference to this tragedy to my knowledge in the entire film besides these flashbacks. They didn't need to be there at all, and serve only to be incredibly jarring.

The pacing is also all over the shop. It manages to achieve what you'd believe to be impossible actually. It's 2 hour film, has a fair amount of action, and has a quite bad habit of characters coming to conclusions or making choices in the blink of an eye (a couple of examples - John is able to just pluck from thin air as far as I can tell, correctly, that an alien he encounters is an apparently illegitimate daughter of the chief of her tribe. In another moment, he refuses to fight for a tribe and it's chief immediately tells him if he doesn't fight for them his lady friend (who he met literally a minute before) is in danger. He barely has chance to say the word 'danger' before John says he'll fight. This kind of thing happens again and again, you never feel like things are considered by characters, they just know. This isn't helped by the film having absolutely no sense of the passage of time, it feels like John Carters crazy 48 hours), and yet it at times feels ponderous and leaden legged, and feels long.

There are silly little things too - John gets to Mars and discovers he has difficultly walking, soon finding out he leap massive distances and punch incredibly hard. The film offers no explanation for this until 10 minutes before the end, by which time you've either worked it out (they use Mars' lower gravity as an excuse to give Carter increased strength) or you simply accepted it and forgot about it. You get a few examples like that - the manipulative baddies are set up throughout the film as, well... manipulative baddies, but then they decide to actually tell you they are manipulative baddies 20 minutes before the end. That this isn't a revelation at all, nor in actuality that important to the plot at all (the film would only require a tiny change to allow these characters to be completely deleted and losing nothing from the rest of the film), is an example of just how dumb a lot of this film is.

You also get the feeling that a few of the actors knew they were in a bit of a mess of a film so decided to have a laugh. Every brief scene with James Purefoy doing anything you can almost see the smirk on his face as his mind is going 'Fuuuuuck this thing is going to be a horror show in the box office, lets have a laugh!'

It's also sad to say that it suffers for the original material having been such an inspiration for so many film makers. Vast swathes of the film feel like they've been lifted from things like Star Wars, particularly the prequel films, when the opposite is more accurate, and obviously such a comparison isn't a good one.

Even with all this, I walked away from the film having enjoyed moments (admittedly sometimes not as the film intends - A major set piece had me smirking as our hero is chained to his doom... but you notice he could easily walk up and pull the chain off it's tether and largely have problem solved. And the film suffers from the worst 'Sci fi /Fantasy naming' convention I can recall, some of the names are exactly what a 6 year old would conjure if you asked him to write a Star Wars knock off). It's not a good film, not by any means. But the thing that strikes me having seen John Carter is, had they not spent the absolutely obscene amounts of money they did on it, and had Disney marketed it better (they threw the thing under a bus before it'd even come out), we wouldn't even have given John Carter a second glance. It'd be considered a naff fairly forgettable tech demo. With better direction, and more work on the script, it might even have managed to be decent.

As it is, it's the biggest flop ever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How have you seen that so early? Press screening or something? It's not even on general release yet in the States, nevermind the UK.

Not convinced by it myself, apart from as a bit of eye candy. I'll see it before I judge it, yet it just seems like a typical big blockbuster that goes for style over substance.

im covering toronto international film festival and we had a media screening of it yesterday. there's plenty of substance to it, and surprisingly it actually makes great use of its almost 3 hour run time

Just out if cloud atlas and it is a **** masterpiece
Did you go to the Premiere? It's been put back until March over here :|

Really interested in how they do the fabricant section which was the best part of the book for me.

the fabricant section was the best bit imo, slightly dodgy prosthetics aside. it couldve been a movie on its own

full review is here

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just been to see Dredd, a bit of context I am a hardcore fan who has been reading 2000AD for thirty years so I will be both easily impressed (because its Dredd) and easily offended (if they **** it up in anyway).

fantastic, loved it all, amazing 3D (and I hate 3D), super violent, full on action.

Pros-Wow they really get Dredd right, I was VERY sceptical after seeing stills and short trailers about the 'look' but after a few minutes it becomes total Dredd, Karl Urban is superb and the way it is shot gives it exactly the right feel, 3D very well used.

It is really made for the fans and I didnt see any pandering to a mainstream audience which I was dreading. Im sick of people ruining potentially good shit because most of the audience will eb too stupid to get it, **** them and do it properly.

Cons-I know they did not have as big a budget as they wanted so mega city 1 feels a bit low tech, but I think its set in early Mega city one history before it gets too built up. Also most of it is set inside a building which helps avoid the issue somewhat.

Loved it and will see it again at the cinema

9/10

Link to post
Share on other sites

the times for 2D are shit so i dont know if i'll get to see it at the cinema :(

sky have started playing a brilliantly edited trailer for their new channel - sky movies 007 HD - i cant wait, launches october 5th, not sure what they'll do in terms of programs, probably just all the films on HD plus a couple of skyfall specials, not sure if they'll make all the films instantly available or because the channel runs for a month if they'll do say 5 films a week on a loop and then change them over

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just been to see Dredd, a bit of context I am a hardcore fan who has been reading 2000AD for thirty years so I will be both easily impressed (because its Dredd) and easily offended (if they **** it up in anyway).

fantastic, loved it all, amazing 3D (and I hate 3D), super violent, full on action.

Pros-Wow they really get Dredd right, I was VERY sceptical after seeing stills and short trailers about the 'look' but after a few minutes it becomes total Dredd, Karl Urban is superb and the way it is shot gives it exactly the right feel, 3D very well used.

It is really made for the fans and I didnt see any pandering to a mainstream audience which I was dreading. Im sick of people ruining potentially good shit because most of the audience will eb too stupid to get it, **** them and do it properly.

Cons-I know they did not have as big a budget as they wanted so mega city 1 feels a bit low tech, but I think its set in early Mega city one history before it gets too built up. Also most of it is set inside a building which helps avoid the issue somewhat.

Loved it and will see it again at the cinema

9/10

I actually liked the way they did MegaCity One without blowing the whole budget on it, gave it kind of a realistic feel. Totally agree that Urban absolutely nails Dredd, just the right undercurrent of pissed off rage.

Also think they did a really good job with Anderson.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • VT Supporter

The headache is caused by your brain trying to reconcile what it believes it's seeing, and what it's actually seeing. It's not helped by the fact that the effect is never perfect.

Dredd's 3D has been getting some plaudits from people who don't like it - I think this might mostly be down to the slo-mo sequences, which because of their slow movement and apparently striking/interesting/beautiful subject matter (even the gore), grab you and allows the effect to work at it's best. 3D gets blown away when things are expected to move quickly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dredd's 3D has been getting some plaudits from people who don't like it - I think this might mostly be down to the slo-mo sequences, which because of their slow movement and apparently striking/interesting/beautiful subject matter (even the gore), grab you and allows the effect to work at it's best. 3D gets blown away when things are expected to move quickly.

Might have to give it another go then.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just back from Dredd and i loved. The brilliant action sequences which were accompanied by pumping, loud music made it all really exciting. The script and story were non existence but this really added to the feel of the movie and what i think many Dredd fans had been hoping for. Just a pair of Judges battling to stay alive in the ruthlessness of the city. On top of this the 3d and slow motion was stunning. The best 3d ive seen in films for a very very long time - the final scene in particular is brilliant. Plus because its an 18 there weren't any annoying, talking and cheering kids as there are in most comic book / action films these days. Loved it and would recommend it...however having said that my brother fell asleep in it for 10mins so obviously doesn't appeal to all!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Going back to John Carter.

Am I over exagerrating by suggesting one of it's biggest problems is the fact it was called "John Carter" when it appeared to be trying to be some big epic action filled blockbuster?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter

The name didn't help - I don't think anyone really knows for sure why they thought it was a good idea to drop the 'of Mars' part of the name, other than perhaps Hollywood has been burned by Mars so many times now they got the fear of using it in the title, or they felt the sci-fi aspect might put off people. The film actually ends with a caption 'John Carter of Mars', with a nice logo.

Disney didn't have a clue how to market the film in all honesty. They wanted/hoped it could be this generations Star Wars (interestingly the series that has pinched most of the original books' ideas and style), and then appeared to go '**** if we know, sod it'.

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of use Terms of Use, Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Â