Everything sucks.

0%? Has Armond White come along to ruin it yet?

DamnYankees: John Carter was ok. It's the apotheosis of a bland and mediocre epic action film with extremely good production values (the all time greatest such film, of course, being Avatar, and JC doesn't even come close to that movie).

It looks like Avatar On Mars. Is that a fair assessment?

Eddie Murphy had a movie out?

Somehow we remember how bad Eddie is when he stars, but forget when he's a supporting actor.

Tower Heist and Shrek, fairly good, Eddie didn't screw them up too much.

/Have to get back to watching the Criterion Kurosawa collection.

John Carter made 100 million worldwide so it will be fine. It won't be the blockbuster that somebody at Disney must have thought it would be, but they'll get their money back. Fans of the movie shouldn't get their hopes up for a sequel though.

If you needed to know how bad Eddie Murphy's movie is, it was made in 2008 and shelved until now.

farkeruk: 0%? Has Armond White come along to ruin it yet?

Maybe there are some lines even he won't cross.


Maybe.

GAT_00: DamnYankees: John Carter was ok. It's the apotheosis of a bland and mediocre epic action film with extremely good production values (the all time greatest such film, of course, being Avatar, and JC doesn't even come close to that movie).

It looks like Avatar On Mars. Is that a fair assessment?

The irony of course being that, in reality, Avatar is John Carter with cat people.

farkeruk: 0%? Has Armond White come along to ruin it yet?

Armond's reviews aren't a part of RT anymore the last I knew. He left his job and started a new one that wasn't part of RT's ratings.

arcsecond: GAT_00: DamnYankees: John Carter was ok. It's the apotheosis of a bland and mediocre epic action film with extremely good production values (the all time greatest such film, of course, being Avatar, and JC doesn't even come close to that movie).

It looks like Avatar On Mars. Is that a fair assessment?

The irony of course being that, in reality, Avatar is John Carter with cat people.

I've honestly never read Burroughs' books so I can't comment on how Avatar relates to John Carter.

DamnYankees: I mean, on a plot level, maybe

That's what I meant.

9beers: John Carter made 100 million worldwide so it will be fine. It won't be the blockbuster that somebody at Disney must have thought it would be, but they'll get their money back. Fans of the movie shouldn't get their hopes up for a sequel though.

If you needed to know how bad Eddie Murphy's movie is, it was made in 2008 and shelved until now.

Thank god. I was worried a multi billion dollar conglomerate was going to lose money. Whew, okay now I can get back to praying for comcast.

"John Carter" is such a big flop it could lead to Israel bombing Iran just to detract attention from it

Mugato: 9beers: John Carter made 100 million worldwide so it will be fine

On a $250mill budget? And it has to make a lot more than that to cover marketing. I don't care, I'm not an investor.

People should shut up about Hollywood making shiatty movies when the foreign market eats up movies even we won't see.

Are you implying John Carter is a shiatty movie?

I have yet to see a negative review and the worst word of mouth is "it's ok" with the rest positive.

Mugato: On a $250mill budget?

Come on man, it's been out for a week. It will be bringing in huge numbers overseas for the next couple months.

serpent_sky: Eddie Murphy is weird in that he doesn't seem to age as all. He looks exactly like he did when I was a kid. I have no idea how old he is, but he seems to be eternally in his early 30s.

Edward Reagan Murphy was born on April 3, 1961, so he's just shy of 51...About the same IQ you'd need to enjoy his new movie.

Mugato: I know, it just better have legs is all.

Alice in Wonderland pulled in almost 700 million overseas. I'm thinking that John Carter can at least hit 600 million and might surprise everyone and get as high as 800 million in total box office. I'd be interested to know how much Disney actually needs to make to break even.

HarlequinGuy: so he's just shy of 51...About the same IQ you'd need to enjoy his new movie.

Wow...are you sure? That's higher than I expected.

GAT_00: DamnYankees: John Carter was ok. It's the apotheosis of a bland and mediocre epic action film with extremely good production values (the all time greatest such film, of course, being Avatar, and JC doesn't even come close to that movie).

It looks like Avatar On Mars. Is that a fair assessment?

Nope. It has a decent plot. (Granted, I went to see the real movie and didn't pay for the 3D gimmick.) It's a bit overlong and overstuffed, but I enjoyed it a lot.

Eddie Murphy needs to stop making family films and half-baked takes on Jim Carrey movies and MAKE YET ANOTHER 48 HOURS ALREADY

Nick Nolte's not gettin' any younger, ya know.

JosephFinn: Nope. It has a decent plot.

I think it would have been a better movie had they spent some more time with the on earth part of the plot.

9beers: JosephFinn: Nope. It has a decent plot.

I think it would have been a better movie had they spent some more time with the on earth part of the plot.

The Ned section or the Western section? The Ned intro did seem...slightly rushed.

TheManofPA: Hey, A Thousand Words made TRIPLE the box office opening weekend of Pluto Nash. TRIPLE!

That's like saying that my dentist made triple the money by removing a molar instead of a bicuspid.

Pain is inherent in both scenarios... although I am morbidly curious to see how bad A Thousand Words is.

Saw exactly ONE ad for Eddie Murphy's movie and

A) had completely forgotten about it until the article

and

B) have NO idea what it's about it.

I loved John Carter. But I admit to being a big fan of the Burroughs original.

It is HORRIBLY marketed, though. As I stated in another thread, I asked a friend if he wanted to go, and he said, "no, I don't like gladiator movies." When I told him the plot, he was excited, went, and really enjoyed it, too.

douchebag/hater: Saw exactly ONE ad for Eddie Murphy's movie and

A) had completely forgotten about it until the article

and

B) have NO idea what it's about it.


From Wikipedia:

"Jack McCall (Eddie Murphy), a fast-talking Hollywood literary agent, fibs to New Age guru Dr. Sinja (Cliff Curtis). In response, Dr. Sinja curses McCall with a magical Bodhi tree in his backyard. The tree has 1,000 leaves and every word McCall says causes a leaf to drop; the curse dooms McCall to perish when the last leaf falls. McCall has to find a way to communicate with others or he is dead."

I can't imagine *why* this has been on the shelf for four years.

*gestures upwards*

What Mugato said.

JosephFinn: The Ned section or the Western section?

The Ned part. I think it would have been cool had they explored the search taking place on earth.

DamnYankees: Am I the only one who is infuriated they dare the main character of this piece of crap Jack McCall? Or maybe that's actually fitting...

I reserve judgment until I can determine if the film features Eddie Murphy squaring off with Wild Bill Hickok.

serpent_sky: Eddie Murphy is weird in that he doesn't seem to age as all. He looks exactly like he did when I was a kid. I have no idea how old he is, but he seems to be eternally in his early 30s.
=================================================================

I agree. He does. It's pretty amazing.

Only thing I got out of the stupid trailers for the movie was that 'Goddamn, Eddie Murphy still has a nice physique!'. And... still looks like he's about 35.

Mugato: 9beers: I'd be interested to know how much Disney actually needs to make to break even

That's a complex question since studios like to cook the books to make it look like a film wasn't profitable for various reasons. The rule of thumb used to be 1.5x the budget but for a budget that size they probably didn't spend that much on marketing. I usually have doubts about reported budgets too. Jack and Jill for example supposedly cost $80mill and it had the production value of an 85 minute SNL sketch. So who knows.

Plus, with certain movies, you also have to take into account the toys, video games, dress up stuff, and basically all of the other assorted crap that gets sold along side.

Mars needs Moms.

GAT_00: DamnYankees: John Carter was ok. It's the apotheosis of a bland and mediocre epic action film with extremely good production values (the all time greatest such film, of course, being Avatar, and JC doesn't even come close to that movie).

It looks like Avatar On Mars. Is that a fair assessment?

As I left the theater I put it in line with movies like Krull and Flash Gordon. The dialog (which was a little stiff at times) felt like it was made in the 80s. The story bounced around a lot in the beginning so it was slow to get started. Once it got rolling though I enjoyed the film quite a bit.

CapnPlaty: Flash Gordon

Ahhhh...savior of the universe?