Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

Mr. Beaks Beholds The Agony Of JOHN CARTER And The Ecstasy Of THE MUPPETS At D23!

"I have an army."
"We have a Hulk."

You want the "big takeaway" from Saturday morning's Walt Disney Studios presentation at D23, there it is. After two-and-a-half hours of teasing some of the biggest Disney fans on the planet with footage, concept art, or, absent either, fonts for nearly every single geek-friendly movie due out from the studio over the next several years, it's that exchange between Tom Hiddleston's Loki and Robert Downey Jr.'s Tony Stark brought the house down. It's what every attendee tweeted - once they retrieved their phones from security - on their way out of the Anaheim Convention Center arena. They'd seen footage from Joss Whedon's THE AVENGERS, and it looked and sounded exactly like an AVENGERS movie should. Rejoice! Then, once this was out of their system, they began tweeting about WRECK-IT RALPH and BRAVE and MONSTERS UNIVERSITY and two other off-in-the-distance Pixar movies. Or perhaps they led with THE MUPPETS. Or FRANKENWEENIE. Or OZ: THE GREAT AND POWERFUL.

And this is how, a month later, Disney won Comic Con.

Disney's decision to shun the massive San Diego convention in favor of a deluxe presentation on their own Anaheim turf was pretty much a smart play all around: rather than jockey with their competition for prime coverage, they used their recently-acquired ace-in-the-hole (Marvel Studios) to generate buzz for their extended slate - all on a weekend where they were the sole focus. But there might be a downside. Whereas it's great to have the fan community buzzing exclusively about your product, this means there's less noise to drown out what doesn't connect - or, in the case of one very ambitious (and expensive) project, falls stunningly flat.

The event also said a lot about Disney's m.o.: Marvel might've been the grand finale, but animation was front-and-center. The message was clear: "We're a full-service movie studio, but animation is the crown jewel, and we still do it better than anyone else."

And now, a moment-by-moment, selectively-detailed (based on my enthusiasm) breakdown of Disney's Saturday's presentation...





Disney Studios chairman Rich Ross takes the stage to welcome the gathered members of the "Disney family" (this is the studio they've chosen). Ross quickly turns the proceedings over to the most beloved person in the building, Pixar/Disney Animation capo John Lasseter.



PLANES (2013)


Lasseter kicks off his portion of the presentation with a sneak peek of the direct-to-DVD complement to the CARS franchise. The main character is a plucky crop duster named "Dusty" (Jon Cryer) who yearns to be fighter jet - which would be controversial if all of the humans hadn't already been killed off in this universe. Cryer is brought out on stage for a few seconds. He looks well.


WRECK-IT RALPH (November 2012)

Or ARCADE STORY. John C. Reilly voices the titular character, an 8-bit bad guy fated be clobbered a quarter at a time at the hands of Fix-It Felix, Jr (Jack McBrayer). Ralph isn't a bad guy at heart (he's just playing a role), but he's still shunned by the characters in the game (which, design-wise, looks like an amalgamation of DONKEY KONG, CRAZY CLIMBER and RAMPAGE). When the Arcade shuts down for the day, he attends a support group called Bad-Anon, where all the video game villains vent their misery in a therapy session moderated by one of the ghosts from Pac-Man. This is no life for Ralph, so he boldly breaks free of FIX-IT FELIX, JR. and attempts to find purpose in another of the arcade's games (including a HALO-inspired shoot-em-up and a kid-skewing title called SUGAR RUSH).
This is the brainchild of director Rich Moore, a veteran of THE SIMPSONS, FUTURAMA and THE CRITIC (name your favorite episode from one of these shows, and there's a good chance he directed it), and it's got the potential to be a visually-inventive traipse through video game history. Reilly's amiable voice work as Ralph seems spot-on, and the supporting vocal talent (McBrayer, Jane Lynch and Sarah Silverman) is impressive. Considering the endless number of games Ralph could visit, this feels like it has real franchise potential for Disney. The concept is fun, but it's Moore's involvement that's got me believing this could be one of next year's big surprises.






BRAVE (June 22, 2012)


This is Pixar's summer 2012 offering. It's an original story about a headstrong Scottish princess, Merida (Kelly Macdonald), whose bow-wielding quest for personal freedom inadvertently results in the casting of a dangerous curse only she can break. It's Pixar's first fairy tale and, more importantly, its first film with a female protagonist. I've no idea why that took so long, but the director/producer team of Mark Andrews and Katherine Sarafian seem to have a strong handle on the story they want to tell.
To goose the audience a bit, Andrews and Sarafian bring out Macdonald and Kevin McKidd (who voices a Scottish lord with a literally indecipherable accent), but they truly win them over with a scene in which Merida crashes her own courting ritual, embarrassing her would be suitors with a dazzling display of archery (concluding with Merida castrating splitting the arrow of the dope who luckily hit a bull's eye). Merida, with her fiery red hair and take-charge attitude, looks to be a fine addition to the Disney princess roster - and I'm all for Pixar staying away from needless franchise building. Speaking of which...




MONSTERS' UNIVERSITY [Or, if Pixar is dead set on eliding the apostrophe, MONSTER UNIVERSITY] (June 21, 2013)


Lasseter kicks off this preview by reiterating Pixar's sequel policy: "We do it because we've found a story as good as or better than the original." And what was the "as good or better" idea that set MONSTERS' UNIVERSITY in motion? "How did Sulley and Mike Wazowski become friends?"
To be honest, I never thought to ask that question - just as I never thought to ask how Laurel and Hardy first crossed paths. But Lasseter seems pretty excited about making Pixar's first college comedy, and when director Dan Scalon shows off the sketches of undergrad Sulley and Mike (the former thinner and shaggier, the latter sporting a retainer), the D23 faithful are delighted. It doesn't take much.
Scanlon also gives us a peek at the Ivy League-inspired campus setting of Monster University. Sulley and Mike will start as "enemies" at the university's prestigious "Scare School" (they both want to be the best scarer in their class). Since we know how this turns out, I guess the film will deal with Mike learning that scaring is not the end-all, be-all in life, and that behind every great scarer is an equally great scare assistant. Yawn. I hate being underwhelmed by the idea of MONSTERS' UNIVERSITY at this point, but nothing they showed us at D23 convinced me that this film needs to exist (which is in stark contrast to both TOY STORY sequels, which a) had compelling premises, and b) weren't prequels). If Pete Docter was back directing, I wouldn't question a thing.




From Bob Peterson (co-writer of UP and the voice of Roz, Mr. Ray and Dug) comes Pixar's inevitable dinosaur movie. We've suspected this one was in the works for a while now, but now it's confirmed. Premise: What if that life-exterminating meteor missed Earth, and the dinosaurs never died out. Dinosaurs and humans cohabiting? Simple, yes, but loaded with potential. It also sounds like a license to print money.




From the great Pete Docter (MONSTERS INC., and UP) comes an animated movie that takes place in the human brain. Feel free to make HERMAN'S HEAD jokes, but I prefer to think Docter is drawing his inspiration from Woody Allen's EVERY THING YOU ALWAYS WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT SEX *BUT WERE AFRAID TO ASK. Sounds like fun. If there's a voice role for Burt Reynolds, this is automatically my most anticipated film of summer 2014.




JOHN CARTER (March 9, 2012)


This is my most anticipated presentation of the morning. I've always believed in the pulp cinema potential of Edgar Rice Burrough's Martian Tales. They're the template for many of our modern fantasy/sci-fi movies; Cameron recently plundered them for AVATAR, but emphasized stop-and-gawk world-building over the kind of non-stop roller-coaster thrills that should drive a proper Burroughs adaptation. When Andrew Stanton took on the project for Disney, I considered the crackerjack narrative economy of FINDING NEMO and WALL-E, and thought he'd be sensational - provided he could easily manage the transition from animation to live-action.
The presentation is off to a rough start as Disney's head of production Sean Daniels takes the stage to the TRON LEGACY score. Though that film did decent business, Disney shouldn't be aspiring to that standard - i.e. a beautifully designed film in search of a compelling narrative. They need to do better. Before delving into the studio's live-action slate, Bailey cites a quote from Walt Disney: "I do not make films primarily for children. I make them for the child in all of us, whether we be six or sixty." That's more like it. Now on to JOHN CARTER...
Andrew Stanton is a great filmmaker, and an avowed fan of Burrough's fiction, so I'm struggling to understand why, save for the Woola clip, this movie continues to evince such a strangely dour tone. This is, of course, the awful thing about out-of-context footage presentations: I'm being forced to grade Stanton's movie against my notion of how a John Carter movie should play. But this is the game Disney loves to play, and right now I'm a little heartbroken by what I'm seeing.
The first sequence Stanton shows finds John Carter stumbling upon a glass-encased nursery full of hatching Tharks. Soon, he's dodging rifle-fire - leaping high into the air thanks to Mars' lower gravity - from a team of Tharks led by Tars Tarkas (Willem Dafoe). This leads to an inter-species dialogue where both beings clumsily attempt to establish a basic form of communication (Tars amusingly believes John's name is "Virginia"). Tars wants to see Carter jump again. Carter, who's played as a bit of a rube by Taylor Kitsch, complies, then tries to escape. The scene concludes with someone being shot.
The second scene features an imprisoned Carter breaking free of his chains, only to be chased everywhere he leaps by the scampering, doglike Woola. This is fun, but, due to the nighttime setting and somewhat dim projection in the convention center arena, I can't quite make out Woola's features.
The third scene is between John and imprisoned Dejah Thoris (Lynn Collins), who pleads with Carter to fight for the people of Helium. She also offers him a way back home, which he seems to take just as her soon-to-be husband, Sab Than (Dominic West), busts through the door with a group of soldiers. Carter is gone. "I am alone," laments Thoris.
The final scene is John and Tars in the arena, where they're pitted against a four-armed white ape. This should be the fist-pumping finale to the presentation, but the staging and basic concept are terribly familiar. This is Luke versus the Rancor, or Anakin versus the stuff in ATTACK OF THE CLONES that I don't care to remember. Though it's adequately executed, that's not good enough for an event movie of this magnitude; this sequence has to be sensational. And, I'm sorry, but 3D is not going to give this sequence the extra oomph it needs. Short of a full-scale reshoot (which would be prohibitively expensive for this allegedly $300 million production), this scene looks DOA.
So does the film, sadly. From the drab color palette to the familiar looking set pieces, JOHN CARTER looks completely joyless. Though I'm a huge fan of the idea to shoot on location with performance-captured Tharks, the landscape appears desolate and earthbound when it should feel strange and otherworldly. And then there's the solemn tone, which is a long way from the rollicking spirit of Burrough's books. Plop two flavorless leads in the middle of this dull, dusty universe, and you've got one seriously torpid tentpole.
My one hope for JOHN CARTER is that Stanton and screenwriter Michael Chabon have somehow elevated Burroughs's narrative, imbuing it with a thematic complexity that wasn't present on the page. When your protagonist is a Confederate soldier transplanted to a bizarre new world, where he must befriend an alien species, the temptation to smuggle must be irresistible. So maybe there's a subtlety to the storytelling that we just can't pick up on until we, you know, see the finished movie. Some films just aren't made for footage presentations. Here's hoping JOHN CARTER is one of them.




FRANKENWEENIE (October 5, 2012)


What's not to like about a stop-motion animated film shot in black-and-white about a boy reanimating the corpse of his run-over dog? This is what I'm asking myself as I watch the work-in-progress preview for Tim Burton's FRANKENWEENIE, which looks great, but has the distinct disadvantage of being directed by a visionary who's been phoning it in for most of the last decade. Everything about this remake of Burton's 1984 short film should appeal to me, but I've been burned too many times by Burton to get my hopes up. This one's a big wait-and-see.






Jennifer Garner and Joel Edgerton play a childless couple who get drunk one night and write down personality traits for their ideal kid onto scraps of paper, which they then put in a box and bury in the backyard. The next morning, after a heavy rain, a mud-caked boy rises from the earth, hungry for brains. It's a FIELD OF DREAMS wish-fulfillment fantasy from Peter Hedges, who previously annoyed us with PIECES OF APRIL and DAN IN REAL LIFE.




Ever wonder how The Wizard found his way to Oz? Me neither. Great director (Sam Raimi), great cast (James Franco, Rachel Weisz, Michelle Williams and Mila Kunis), another pointless prequel. It appears that Raimi may be shooting the non-Oz sequences 1.37:1 and in black-and-white. Exciting.




THE MUPPETS (November 23, 2011)


Jason Segel, Kermit the Frog and a seriously perturbed Miss Piggy introduce two Piggy-less scenes from THE MUPPETS. Though the theatrical trailer left me a bit concerned that Jim Henson's creations had been dumbed down for a generation weaned on poop-eating Chipmunks (Fozzie doing fart jokes hurt my soul), these two scenes back me off the ledge: Segel, co-writer Nicholas Stoller and director James Bobin have nailed the brainy, zany tone of the show and the first movie.
The first scene has Segel, Amy Adams and die-hard Muppet fan Walter attempting to scale the Graceland-like front gate at Kermit's house - which Walter soon discovers is electrified. When Walter is revived, he's in Kermit's living room with Segel, Adams and the green one himself, who summons his robot butler to serve his guests their choice of Tab or New Coke. Evidently, Kermit is culturally frozen in 1985.
The next scene finds the reunited Muppets unchaining the front door of the long-shuttered Muppet Theater, which has fallen into extreme disrepair. A massive restoration is in order. Segel, Adams and Walter offer to pitch in, and they're off! Sort of. Actually, they all just stand around and watch Scooter push a broom. Walter reminds them that they used to work to music, which leads Dr. Teeth to produce an old boom box. Soon, Starship's "We Built This City" is blasting (guess they're all stuck in 1985), and a classic '80s clean-up montage is in full swing. While Kermit works the phones, looking for celebrity support for the Muppets' telethon (his outdated rolodex has him calling Molly Ringwald, Cindy Lauper and President Carter), the rest of the gang merrily restore the theater to its former glory. It's a funny, feel-good sequence, the highlight (for me) being Gonzo opening up a closet to find Beauregard, who's apparently been trapped there for nearly thirty years (he emerges and calmly asks where everyone has been).
THE MUPPETS are back, folks, and they're in fightin' 1970s form.




THE AVENGERS (May 4, 2012)


Kevin Feige receives a warm welcome from the D23 audience, and further earns their respect by name-dropping noted Imagineer Tony Baxter. Smooth.
Feige wastes no time giving the crowd what they want - if what they wanted was a tense confrontation between Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) and Loki (Tom Hiddleston). At this point in THE AVENGERS, Loki is being held in a cylindrical containment pod somewhere in S.H.I.E.L.D.'s Helicarrier (this cell is strong enough to hold the Hulk, so Loki's goin' nowhere). After demonstrating for Loki what will happen if he acts up (the pod will be ejected, subjecting Loki to a perilous - if not fatal for a god - 30,000-foot drop), Fury lashes into Loki for threatening Earth with war and killing "for fun". Fury is desperate. Loki responds by taunting Fury with the "real power" of the tesseract. Finished with this conversation, Fury walks away and mutters "Let me know if 'real power' wants a magazine or something." It's not a mindblowingly great scene, but it's well-written and directed. So far, so good.
We then get an action-filled montage crosscut with a Stark/Loki confrontation from later in the film. Stark, in his insouciant way, gives Loki a "head count", letting the god know that he's up against two master assassins, a demigod, a living legend "who lives up to the legend", etc. Then comes the above-quoted exchange. The audience erupts. Then Feige introduces most of The Avengers (Chris Evans is absent) and Loki. Now the audience is on their feet. Robert Downey Jr. takes the microphone and asks if they'd like to see the footage again. They do. And so with a "See you next year", the footage is replayed and the Walt Disney Studios D23 showcase comes to an end.


So much marketing...

Faithfully submitted,

Mr. Beaks

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Aug. 22, 2011, 5:28 p.m. CST

    Lots of cool stuff coming.

    by tomandshell

    But what did Harry think of Planet of the Apes?

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 5:31 p.m. CST

    So Willem Dafoe plays Tars Tarkas, who leads the Tharks

    by MaxCalifornia.

    Um...what the hell is this crap?

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 5:37 p.m. CST

    Fozzie does fart jokes?

    by BeeDub

    The hell?

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 5:39 p.m. CST

    Yep, that's "Tron: Legacy"

    by jawsfan

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 5:39 p.m. CST

    and soooooooo many others too (You listening, Michael Bay?)

    by jawsfan

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 5:46 p.m. CST

    I'm worried

    by the dolphins are in the jacuzzi

    that we may be witnessing the inevitable decline of Pixar. Obviously, it had to happen eventually, but, while Brave may be good, Planes looks like shit (Pixar's doing the whole "direct to video" route, now? Isn't that where Disney lost the plot 15 years ago?), Monsters University looks unnecessary, and when I heard about the Dinosaur movie, all I could think about was Ice Age 3. C'mon, Pixar, don't go out like this.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 5:47 p.m. CST

    Beaks, what did Dafoe look like as Tars?

    by Detective_Fingerling

    was he big and green with big tusks coming out of his mouth and did he have four arms? Or is he just Dafoe in a Dark Green(almost Black) leather jacket with slicked back hair?

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 5:48 p.m. CST

    Fingers crossed

    by the dolphins are in the jacuzzi

    for the Muppets and the Avengers, tho. Buzz has been good on the Muppet movie, and Joss appears to be heading in the right direction with the Avengers. Here's hoping.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 5:50 p.m. CST

    The John Carter preview

    by the dolphins are in the jacuzzi

    before Captain America looked about as good as the Clash of the Titans remake, so yeah, your news doesn't really surprise me, Beaks.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 5:54 p.m. CST

    Stellar, unbiased report from Beaks... as usual


    Raimi filming black and white sequences for OZ sounds cool as hell. Then again, I wouldn't expect much of the guy who thinks cheerleading and rape make for great cinema.

  • what's funny is that I just recently watched Top Gun for the first time and thought, "that;ll be funny if pixar did fighter jets," and now this jon cryer as dusty thing gets mentioned. I want JCM to succeed because of Taylor Kitsch and because I dug him on Friday Night Lights so chances are I will see it opening weekend. None of the above pixar summaries float my boat but then again I didn't think I would like Up as much as I did so hopefully Pixar cranks out some second decade of the 21st century classics in the next year or so.

  • Which, I believe, happened under Mr. Knowles watch. After decades of people trying to put A PRINCESS OF MARS on screen the ones who finally do are a lot of pussies afraid of the words "Princess" and "Mars." Does not bode well.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 5:57 p.m. CST

    Aww, so sowwy, dolphins.

    by Gerry Manderin

    Widdle cwy baby fanboys awe watching their widdle Pixaw decline. Oh, the (lack of) humanity! Sniffle. The fall of Pixar will be the worst thing to happen to fanboys since they realized that fangirls don't look like a 22-year-old Carrie Fisher in a bronze bikini. Don't be afraid to grow up, kids. You're never too old to do so. Take it from Uncle Subby.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 6 p.m. CST

    wonderful summary of D23

    by justmyluck

    Concise, orderly, no meanderings...well done, Beaks.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 6:02 p.m. CST

    re: JOHN CARTER. The teaser trailer said one thing to me:

    by justmyluck


  • entered the Direct to DVD market. Whatever non-theatrical film products will be in the future, most likely direct downloads, I'm a little saddened to see Pixar lessen their brand by embracing it.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 6:09 p.m. CST

    shouldn't it be "monster" university??

    by FleshMachine

    monster"s" university sounds really weird. i mean if it they were would be fish university, no? not fishes university.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 6:09 p.m. CST

    i remember an old tex avery toon with the same plane story.


    google it. wow i can't believe pixar just did something SO unoriginal.

  • that makes sense.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 6:10 p.m. CST

    pixar direct to DVD?? "Planes"...oh man....sad..really sad.

    by FleshMachine


  • Aug. 22, 2011, 6:12 p.m. CST

    Muppet fart jokes??? thats really sad. : (

    by FleshMachine

    bummer. muppets never needed to sink to that level.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 6:12 p.m. CST

    muppets better not be hip post modern self referential garbage

    by FleshMachine

    what a goddamn shame that would be

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 6:12 p.m. CST

    Dinosaurs and people coexist

    by jameskpolk

    Wasn't this already done in Dijotopia? Am I misremembering something?

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 6:14 p.m. CST

    John Carter will bomb

    by sunwukong86

    The trailer underwhelmed me and from the description the movie seems to be lifeless. Its a shame too, because it could have easily been done right with the right director one who isn't primarily an animation director

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 6:18 p.m. CST

    John Carter = poor cousin of Avatar. FACT.

    by KilliK

    i am talking about it as a movie.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 6:19 p.m. CST


    by Krinkle

    "Grow up?" Are you proposing that only children or adolescent-minded people can enjoy Pixar? That's ridiculous, sir. And are you also saying only idiots would hope Pixar doesn't decline? Really? It's idiotic to hope for something good? And nothing - NOTHING - in this article suggests a Pixar decline. The problem is that you WANT one - nobody likes anyone to be special anymore, nobody likes any filmmaker to knock em out of the park everytime... instead of seeing something amazing like that, we'd rather get our sad jollies watching someone strike out. Why? Why would we rather an artists be fallible than not? Where is you idealism, sir?

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 6:23 p.m. CST

    WRECK-IT RALPH that's the film i am waiting to see

    by KilliK

    maybe it will turn out the TRUE sequel to Tron and not that pile of shit Legacy sequel.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 6:25 p.m. CST

    Planes is NOT made by Pixar.

    by BWOzar

    That's all. Lasseter is involved, NOT Pixar...

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 6:29 p.m. CST

    PIXAR isn't doing Planes

    by glenn_the_frog

    Disney's low rent straight to dvd department is. Its coming out of the same idea, yes, but its not Pixar handling it.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 6:35 p.m. CST

    When I saw the John Carter trailer in theaters

    by BigDogg

    I thought that it was a Gyllenhall-less sequel to "Prince of Persia." The locations and costumes looked extremely similar to me and there wasn't a single second of the trailer that had me feeling the need, or even desire, to spend money on that film

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 6:35 p.m. CST

    If they just graded JOHN CARTERS RED on the mars segments

    by irc-Hollywood

    it would look like it actually cost 100 million dollars more, and it would actually look like it was set on MARS instead of filmed in some Mexican desert. Watch the trailer, and just imagine a Red filter on those mars segments and tell me you don't agree.... it's an insane decision to keep the grade a natural yellow/white tone, makes the movie look cheap.... and it just doesn't look like MARS! how we film fans know and love it! MARS SHOULD BE RED!

  • That's why it took Pixar so long to do it. It's a huge risk. I'll bet the movie has plenty of violent action to make up for it. But, still, girls play with dolls and boys play with action figures, and you better believe, it's all about selling toys (how else can you explain Cars 2?).

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 6:52 p.m. CST

    Fozzie doing fart jokes hurt my soul

    by omarthesnake

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 6:54 p.m. CST

    Fozzie doing fart jokes hurt my soul

    by omarthesnake

    c'mon folks, it's time for a new meme. Let's grab the " ____ hurt my soul" train and ride it for all it's worth! NBC's commercials for "Whitney" hurt my soul. the box office failure of that movie hurt my soul. George Lucas hurt my soul. That light turning red hurt my soul. that lame "soul train" pun above hurt my sole. join the fun!

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 6:59 p.m. CST

    Disney didn't entirely shun ComicCon

    by artdude102

    Disney there pimpin Phineas &b Ferb across the 2nd Dimension Movie and had a pretty substantial set up with an airstream made up as a giant platypus and food truck where they sold Exclusive ComicCon figures. It was right smack in the middle across from the Walking Dead and had massive crowds through out the convention. We sold out of the exclusive figures I designed and the free back packs brought them in like piranhas on a cow. The creators of the show were there for Q&A, autographs, and the voice actors as well.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 7:01 p.m. CST


    by MrDexter

    is smart - acts as a training ground/R&D for PIXAR animation newbies.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 7:04 p.m. CST

    LOL "hungry for brains"

    by CountryBoy

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 7:11 p.m. CST

    Straight to DVD Pixar based movies? Okay by me.

    by lochkray

    My kids loved Cars 2, but there's a movie that could have gone straight to DVD. It wasn't totally awful by any means, but subpar for Pixar - and that's some mighty high standards. Side show "franchise" DVDs of their properties suit me fine. Pixar has surprised me a number of times, considering the offbeat concepts they've turned into fantastic movies, so I won't count them out. And for those doing the bitchtard thing about talk-backers sounding off about Pixar (looking at you subtitles), why the hell would you read a Disney article to begin with? How does that make any sense? Reminds me of the teen on Family Guy who kept saying "that's gay" about everything and everybody, then at the end screams out "Okay, I'm gay! I admit it!" You are the internet posting equivalent of a closeted homosexual teen, who acts like a homophobe to hide their shame.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 7:21 p.m. CST

    Ever wonder how The Wizard found his way to Oz? Me neither.

    by WhatTheHellHappenedToMe

    While I LOL'd at this, the same could be said of the logline for Wicked. Just sayin'.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 7:33 p.m. CST

    Can we see the footage now?

    by davidwebb

  • Wasn't it? I'm not overly bothered by Fozzie going for a bad comedy staple like that.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 7:53 p.m. CST

    could have been so easy to keep JCs pulp Mars.

    by chronicallydepressedlemming

    opening scene, have a modern day MARS rover come across his tomb to give us a WTF moment. Then cut to scene of JC in his Civil War period, and have him wounded witnessing a meteorite crash nearby. Investigating it away from the battle, he discoveres MAGUFFIN, which when touched teleports him through space and TIME to a prehistoric Mars covered in lush jungles and swarming with alien beings. BOOM you're in the proper JC universe, and you got there in a modern sci-fi way. Why would that have been so hard?

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 8:12 p.m. CST

    This "Decline of Pixar" bullshit

    by SifoDyasJr

    Hilarious hearing people talk about the 'decline of Pixar'. How much has Cars 2 made at the box office so far? Oh, really? Half a billion worldwide? That's quite a decline there... It's okay that they make a movie here and there that appeals to the younger crowd more than the talkback d-bags.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 8:21 p.m. CST

    None of this stuff interests me

    by James_Camera_On

    "Planes?" What next Trains? Couldn't care less. JOHN CARTER and the Princess of the Planet that Must Not Be Named? Avatar-lite, if we're lucky. More likely it will be next year's Green Lantern. Prequel to Monsters Incorporated? What? No need, no want. Muppets? Their glory days are long past. This is just sad. Avengers? So if one "Super Hero" doesn't excite you anymore let's throw in a few dozen of them and see if that get's you going. Pass. Brave? Girl-Power BS. Again?! Jeez-Loueez, how often do we have to go down that road? We got the message, morons! On the plus side, it looks like a ripoff of Princess Mononoke -- with everything but the heart and the soul. OZ prequel!? You gotta be kidding. Who green-lit that? And why? Human and dinosaurs together (recall the Harry Harrison novels with the same theme?). 100 Million B.C. Could be interesting, could be great, but it won't be. Is fucking Allee Oop or whatever it was called still around? I have to stop. Can't go on. Must prepare last testament. 2012 will be a very bad year.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 8:25 p.m. CST

    Tron: Legacy

    by Slingshot

    Tron Legacy was a great film. I have no complaints at all with that movie. Whereas the new Superman movie looks like it will be a train wreck. From the casting to the crappy suit.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 8:28 p.m. CST

    The lead of "Brave" looks like a Cabbage Patch Kid

    by FeralAngel

    The eeny-weeny tiny teaser of "Brave" that I saw on the web the other day looked kinda cool though. And the idea of Pixar doing a fairy tale is intriguing. So while I'm not hyped for "Brave", I'm hopeful.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 8:41 p.m. CST

    Fozzy fart jokes...

    by Etienne72772

    A bit dramatic, aren't we? Let's not jump off a cliff here until you see the joke (which many have, actually, since it was in one of the trailers from about a year ago). Fozzy, who has ALWAYS had the worst taste in what makes a joke funny, tries out his "fart" shoes for Segel, Adams, Kermit, which are simply whoopie cushions tied to his feet. None of Segel, Adams or Kermit thinks these are funny, and make some kind of comment about how they have a long way to go to re-capture the magic. So you see, the joke is not that there are farts, it's that Fozzy thinks they're funny, which is completely in line with his character. Wow, did I just spend all this time writing that??? Too bad you just spent all that time reading it. But at least now you have been enlightened. Oh, and I suppose I should have put a "spoilers" tag in there...

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 8:47 p.m. CST

    Pixar's Brave -- why do princesses always have to be

    by Wookie_Weed

    either helpless maidens in distress who need a prince, or domineering, bossy, "headstrong", fiesty, fiery "I'll do what I want when I want" stereotypes? Real women are a lot of things in between -- but nope, we get the same old extremes. I find the "headstrong" princesses just as offensive as the helpless ones, to be honest. It's like feminism has one volume level, 11. Get real, sistas!!!

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 8:54 p.m. CST

    jon cryer on mars

    by maxjohnson1971

    looks awful in the previews

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 8:55 p.m. CST

    Crossing my fingers

    by maxjohnson1971

    for The Muppets. Anyone that doesn't like the muppets can eat a dick! Muppets rule!!!

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 8:56 p.m. CST

    Avengers dialogue

    by Calico Pete

    Amazing that every single blogger quotes the same designed-to-be-quoted-by-the-geek-faithful lines from The Avengers presentation, and thinks the lines are cool. Remember when every geek blog quoted the senator/Stark and Fury/Stark conversations from Iron Man 2 as if they were well written coolness? Once the pre-release excitement died down and that movie came out, everyone realized those lines sounded forced and unnatural. To me, that's what The Avengers' Stark/Fury/Loki exchange sounds like. C'mon everyone, get a grip and remove Disney's marketing hand from your Muppet asses.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 9:07 p.m. CST

    I have to agree about John Carter...

    by zinc_chameleon

    I think it will be a 'Green Lantern' or 'Conan' sized fiasco. Why would Andrew want to make John Carter's adventures bittersweet and sad? Nothing could be further from ERB spirit of wonder; John Carter's enthusiasm for the new world he found himself in was contagious; perhaps Stanton wanted to make 'The Time Machine' which is bittersweet, sad, and ultimately nihilistic. ERB on the other hand is about we humans rising above adversity and experiencing true wonder.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 9:10 p.m. CST

    Wasn't Harry attached to John Carter once? Disclosure?

    by Odkin

    With such negativity about JC, I think it would be professional practice to say whether Harry was involved and especially if his involvement was terminated. Either one of those situations would be severely compromise the integrity of any review of John Carter on this site

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 9:14 p.m. CST


    by berserkrl

    "lush jungles"? That ain't the Mars of the John Carter books. It's a dying desert planet.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 9:14 p.m. CST


    by maxjohnson1971

    I have to agree. Despite being treated like shit the past 15 years or so, I can't get over the classic Muppets. Some of the best family entertainment ever, much less plain old entertainment. Henson gave them such heart and put that subversive humor in them at the same time. I want that to come back. The Muppets were at one time the most upbeat and, at the same time, darkest, comedians in the world. Please let this film be a HUGE hit so we can have more!!

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 9:15 p.m. CST


    by berserkrl

    "It's like feminism has one volume level, 11"? If you think feisty animated princesses are feminism turned up to 11 -- oh man, where do I start?

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 9:32 p.m. CST

    He annoyed YOU with Dan in Real Life. I liked it.

    by DadTimesTwo

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 9:45 p.m. CST

    @slingshot Tron Legacy a great film?

    by sunwukong86

    Im sorry but i disagree, it nearly put me to sleep

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 9:47 p.m. CST


    by maxjohnson1971

    I don't know about the misogynist aspect of Henson, and honestly, I don't care to. It might ruin some of the love I have for that man. I've stated a few times on here that Henson was the only "celebrity" I cried for when he died. I'm 39 and at that age, the Muppets were as integral a part of growing up as Star Wars and Indiana Jones. I have cringed, literally, at the way the property (I hate using that word!!) has been handled in the past few years and am crossing my fingers that a new generation gets to see the Muppets I remember! Long live the Swedish Chef!

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 10:11 p.m. CST

    John Carter I disagree with EVERYONE!! WOW!!

    by WASPFAN

    Dream of mine to get to this to a major motion picture. I have read over 30 reviews of d23 and most of them (like 90+%) were so overwhelmed by the footage that they are guessing 750 mil - 1 billion in box office... You guys crack me up with Prince of Persia shit and Avatar crap -- look JCM was written in 1912!!!! It is one of the most stolen stories in the history of scifi -- One thing beaks got right is - I bet the STORY is key - and if the STORY works - the set pieces don't matter as much - and as for the arena scene I have heard it screams perfect -- I had a friend at d23 - and he said avengers and john carter had all the buzz... So I guess we can agree to disagree -- but I think so far it looks amazing - given the fact that they even got someone playing Edgar Rice Burroughs... I just re-read the first three books after first reading them in 1970's -- Man - all you 14 year olds go read the books before you post your insight --

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 10:16 p.m. CST

    And MARS is not really -- RED -- Check Pathfinder Pictures

    by WASPFAN

    It looks close to trailer - maybe a tint of red - due to oxide -- but it looks a lot like the arizona desert --

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 10:51 p.m. CST

    @ berserkrl

    by chronicallydepressedlemming

    I had Flash Gordon in my head for some reason.

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 11:05 p.m. CST

    =and if the STORY works - the set pieces don't matter as much=

    by KilliK

    Wrong. in those event genre films what has priority is the visualization,the effects,the set pieces, everything that stimulates the human vision in generak. Then comes the story. That doesnt mean ofc that the story is less important than the visuals.not at all. But in a film of a 200m or 300m budget,you dont simply tell a have to show stuffs,very interesting and very impressive stuff to an audience who gets bored with his everyday,ordinary life. Othewise if you only want to tell a story,then you dont need such humongous budgets.A budget of 50m at most is sufficient enough for every capable director to tell his stories. The tricky part,when it comes to those blockbuster events,is that the visualization shouldnt become from priority to purpose.Its job is to impress the audience,but it has also the job to serve the story of the movie. A talented director with a vision,expert in both the storytelling and the vfx aspects of a film can always accomplish the perfect balance of storyline and effects in order to create a memorable movie.That's all that it is needed. That's why great genre movies have come from directors who put the same care on both the effects and the story of the film.Cameron,Jackson,Spielberg,Kubrick,Raimi,Ridley,etc So the only question as John Carter is regarded is this: Can the director make a movie which not only says an interesting story,but also shows interesting stuff? If yes then the movie will be a classic.If not then the movie will be mediocre which is even worse than being a bad movie. Will John Carter be Transformers (bad),Tron Legacy(mediocre) or Terminator(good)?

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 11:10 p.m. CST

    =Let me know if 'real power' wants a magazine or something.=

    by KilliK

    you must be fucking kidding me,right? this is part of the dialog that we are going to hear in the upcoming Avengers movie? are you fucking serious???????

  • Aug. 22, 2011, 11:16 p.m. CST

    What's wrong with Pieces of April, exactly?

    by mrgray

    I picked that DVD up on the cheap when I first got a DVD player and was pleasantly surprised by how GOOD it is. Not sure what makes it annoying...

  • Pixar, fairy tale, Scotland, princess - all great. But everything actually described about it sounds hackneyed, trite, tired, and recycled, and ripping off the old Robin Hood moment - hey, it's one of the best things about an old story, and now it's ours, and most people won't even know where it came from! - just took all the air out of my interest in the film. Pixar knows, in the same sort of calculated short-memory way that so many purveyors of pop entertainment these days know, that most people don't know or don't care about the great stories or artistic creations of the past. So they cynically shovel it out, people eat it up, and repeat. Not something I respect.

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 12:30 a.m. CST


    by berserkrl

    We have good reason to doubt that the movie will get the "story" right:

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 1:45 a.m. CST

    Corporate Cartoon Factory Bullshit

    by batfunk

    Disney battery farm their artists and churn out soulless product to the masses. Jack Kirby would be turning in his grave.

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 1:45 a.m. CST

    The Psychology of Fanboy "Journalism"

    by THX1968

    Beaks doesn't annoy me nearly as much as that cunt face, Quint, but they are both guilty of the exact same bullshit. I get surly towards these fuckers when I've been drinking, and should just go to bed, but I make the mistake of checking out AICN. And then there's another story about John Carter. And then I get mad at these dinks. What story does Beaks spend the most time on? John Carter. What does Beaks level a most critical eye upon, even after providing the fair reader with the caveat that "This is, of course, the awful thing about out-of-context footage presentations: I'm being forced to grade Stanton's movie against my notion of how a John Carter movie should play." No one is forcing you to do anything dickhead. You admit at the opening of your high school essay that this is the one presentation that you are most looking forward to, and then you systematically dissect it - OUT OF CONTEXT, as you so wisely admitted previously. Yes, Beaks, you strive to absolve yourself of your opinions that you are "forced" to provide the fair reader with - very melodramatic of you. The positive that I find in Beaks' drama and Quint's idiocy is that there is truly a genuine interest in John Carter, and I love that because the movie is going to be special. The problem with the fanboy goons that get to attend these events (Beaks and Quint, etc.) is that these events are primarily for the exhibitors. Ebert may have been to a few of these things, but he would never, ever critique a bunch of clips out of sequence. Beaks and Quint would, and did, and will continue to do so. Because they aren't critics or journalists. They are fanboys, and that is it. God bless him, even Harry, who has an undeniable attachment to John Carter, had about as much of a chance of producing John Carter as Osama Bin Laden. Meaning zero chance. It all comes down to credibility, and AICN has just about zero credibility. They have a bit of power, but not much. I digress. The clips shown at D23 can't be summed up with a bowtie and easily digested. There isn't a simple "Buzzy" way to package it. It all looks awesome to me. Mind blowingly awesome. Part of it is simply the talent behind it and knowing what they are capable of. We all know what they are capable of, but more than a few fanboy losers think they know better and are thus incapable of finding any kind of true untainted wonder in it. Beaks and Quint and Harry made Finding Nemo and Wall-E. WAIT A FUCKING MINUTE - THOSE DINKS DIDN'T DIRECT FINDING FUCKING NEMO OF WALL-FUCKING-E! Beaks and Quint and Harry wrote and/or produced Toy Story 1,2,and 3; A Bug's Life, Monsters Inc., Ratatouille, and Up. WAIT A FUCKING MINUTE - THOSE DINKS DIDN'T WRITE AND/OR PRODUCE TOY STORY 1,2,OR 3; A BUG'S FUCKING LIFE, MONSTERS FUCKING INC., RATATOUILLE, AND FUCKING UP!!! No, Beaks, Quint, and Harry have not done a single goddamn thing worth mention. Not a goddamn thing. They are fanboys with a web page and they get some press. They spout their fanboy rhetoric and stir the mass of 14 year olds, but it will not matter. Check this: "A young farmboy is working on a robot as an old man prattles on about a galactic war. He hands the young man a hilt of some sort and tells him that it is an ancient, mystic weapon. The boy activates the hilt and a shaft of white hot light bursts forth." Does that sound exotic and fantastic? How about this: "The burly digger and the lanky archaeologist strive to remove the heavy stone from the altar and do so with great effort. They stand before their glowing prize in awe before they can be moved to action." Did that thrill ya? OK - how's about this, assholes? Would you rather see Jon Fucking Favreau direct John Carter?!?! Iron Man 2 was absolutely terrible and Cowboys and Aliens was just fucking boring. Favreau has eased into the game way too early. Ratner is a better director. I shit you not. Ratner is a better fucking director. Ask anyone who ponies up the cash for these things. Ratner comes out ahead. I find it hilarious that he's vilified by the fanboys. Give me Stanton for just about anything anyday, and stop giving me the fucking chin about how much the movie is gonna cost. Whatever. Level that shit against any fucking movie. What did Green Lantern cost? What a pile of shit that was - ruined by producers. Yeah, fanboys with an outlet. What are ya gonna do? Look for a great trailer later on this year for John Carter. That's another goddamn thing!!! They barely finished shooting and there's tons of effects shit to get through yet! Amazing. Speaking of "amazing", why don't you guys just keep selling Webb's Spider-Man. That is so totally your speed.

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 1:59 a.m. CST

    It doesn't matter what Mars really looks like


    This is a fantasy film, and should be treated as such. The Mars scenes should undoubtedly be treated with some sort of red filter. That's a no-brainer. I'm shocked that it was given a 300 million budget. Is James Cameron directing? Is Lucas? Are there lightsabers? It's a spectacular gamble, and as of right now it looks like it could end up being one of the biggest flops in history.

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 2:41 a.m. CST

    John Carter? Gonna watch 7th Voyage instead

    by ebolamonkey

    John Carter is running around on Mars with super-hero strength on the back of a lizard-lion fighting against and with 4-armed green martians for the love of a red-skinned honey - and no one noticed it was supposed to be fun? FML I'm going to be dead before this gets remade right.

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 2:46 a.m. CST


    by CuervoJones

    You don´t disagree with me.

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 3:48 a.m. CST

    JCM the look

    by Moshi

    Why spend so much money to create a Mars that looks just like Earth? Then put in an alien that looks like a cartoon character? Extreem naturalism, with extreem stylylization. They don't belong together. Make a choice and stick to it. The choice here is an alien world, that's believable. This doesn't do it. I can't help thinking that, love him or loathe him, Mr G Lucas would have done a bettter job of JCM. star wars has the look of a fantasy alien world, how hard can it be to do this, especially with such a huge budget? they must have all the artistic talent neccessary. Having said that, all I'm going on is short clips and second hand info, but the first trailer is so very important, Red Tails did the job admirably, JCM hasn't.

  • Remember, he's the guy who said the immortal words "the evolving sensebilities of Michael Bay". I wouldn't take anything said by Mr Beaks on trust alone, if you know what i mean.

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 6:03 a.m. CST

    Spoilerish rant

    by Jon

    I didn't let the so-so trailer get me down. I think the art direction (not red crayon red men, Earth-like desert Mars) seems to take its cue from the books. But shit I hope these character descriptions are wrong! Matai Shang doesn't even appear until the second book, and he certainly doesn't shape shift! We don't see the Therns until John Carter "dies" on Mars, returns to Earth and goes back to Mars ten years later in the second book. Are they going to cram this all in to one, four hour movie? It seems like the people who are making the movie and love the books are prepared to shit all over them. Not that you should really be surprised when this happens in a book adaptation...

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 8:23 a.m. CST

    JCM logo

    by skellngtn

    I'll be there opening weekend for JC as I'm a long-time fan of the material, irregardless of whether or not it looks like I'd hoped (Frazetta-like, in my case. OK, the airships with their featherlike sails aren't what I imagined, or the chunky swords, or Dejah Thoris...) but as someone said above you know there's a better trailer in the wings once they finish working on the film. Did they change the name of the movie so late in the game they opted to keep it's original title in the logo?

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 9:55 a.m. CST

    I happen to like Pieces of April, fuck you very much.

    by Knuckleduster

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 10:44 a.m. CST

    The OK Go Muppet video is ass

    by FeralAngel

    Just saw it. Trying to see if anything new the "new" Muppets are associated with could possibly be watchable. Answer: no. At one point the vid shows Kermit with his big mouth open and he's wagging his head which signifies that he's laughing at his own joke and/or saying "Aren't we clever?" What a sad turnoff.

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 10:59 a.m. CST


    by shodan6672

    Why even bother responding. Subtleties_off is a fat little cunt of a troll, ignore it. As for the upcoming Pixar films, "Planes" gave me legitimate douche chills and Monsters University is completely unnecessary. Yet we still wait for what would be an organic continuation in an Incredibles sequel? Ugh.

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 11:16 a.m. CST

    Check out this awesome illustrated version of "A Princess of Mars"

    by Damned if I can login

    Extremely faithful adaptation, even down to the lack of clothing. A quote from the artist: "The characters are highly underclad, yet oblivious to it; it's their normal way, and they don't see much naughty or titillating about it. The men are men and the women are women and blood is red and scary. I set out to be honest with the nudity and violence, and the devil take Pollyanna, she needs to grow up anyway." He admits he's more of a sculptor than an illustrator, but the work is unreal nonetheless. Just Google this: erbzine 1301 You'll get a link to the site. Enjoy! I know I did....

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 12:25 p.m. CST

    Who is to blame for the sorry state of cinema?

    by Billy_D_Williams

    Barry Diller and Michael Eisner, thats who. They came out of television, and they understood how to sell films on TV. If it could be pitched in a sentence, it could be sold in a sentence. High concept movies like Beverly Hills Cop lent themselves to being sold on television because the story was so easy to explain. Even though television buys back were expensive, it was the quickest, easiest way to reach a wide audience. From 1976 to 1980, there was a staggering 600 percent increase in studios' TV advertising spending. In other words, the sizzle started to become more important than the steak. Diller's Paramount regime was also the beginning of the movie by committee syndrome that pervades Hollywood today. Diller and his lieutenants (Eisner, Don Simpson and Jefferey Katzenberg) began setting the agenda at the script stage. Previously it was left to the director and the screenwriter (you know, the actual talent) to work out what the movie would say and how it would be said, and then run it by the studio for input. But at Paramount the executives would get involved with the first draft of the script, typing up voluminous notes (Simpson was notorious for this) for the filmmakers. Next they would hold story meetings so the executives and the filmmakers could float their ideas. , many of which were undoubtedly in conflict with one another. It was then left up to the filmmakers to cut and paste it all together. Soon the joke going around Hollywood was that "Paramount is the place that gives you a greenlight and then dares you to make the movie" The execs who engineered this system at Paramount spread it like cancer (or herpes) across Hollywood over the course of the 80s and 90s until it became the accepted way to develop, make and market a film.

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 12:31 p.m. CST

    Gotta concur with waspfan...


    and a lot of what thx1968 had to say. There's something a bit fishy when 98% of the reaction to this footage is positive and literally the ONLY negative shit I've seen is from here and Badass Digest. Remember, this is basically the same footage that was shown at CineEurope and the editbay visit that Quint reported on a few weeks back along with an Empire screening a few days before D23. In every case the footage got raves. Seriously, watch the video recently with Quint and the guys from Collider and /film. Both of the other guys are clearly excited about what they saw & Quint's all sour grapes spouting the EXACT same shit as Beaks here and Devin Faraci over at Badass...which goes something like "I'm such a huge fan of the material and I'm really hoping for it to succeed BUT" they go on to hint that it will fail. "I hate to judge it by a few minutes of out of context footage BUT" and they proceed to do just that. "Why is it so serious/real/not more pulpy/not more like Frazetta/the way I would like it?" Maybe the Austinites and their ilk are still upset that this wasn't made by Rodriguez over in Texas? I can only speculate about what motives are afoot, but I've read a lot about this footage and had some friends at D23 and's all positive. If you check out i09, Collider, /film, Empire etc...just about every other site covering the scenes shown at the editbay visit/Empire screening/D23...they are all genuinely enthusiastic except for these three suspiciously similar "reviews". How can their reactions be so alike while at the same time so remarkably different from pretty much everyone else? What's really lame is how Faraci (and to a lesser extent, Beaks) try to convince readers to that theirs was consensus opinion. More sad are the people that post after. How does one judge a film still six months away... based on the opinion of someone on the internet... who saw only a few minutes of out of context footage... and who seems to have more of a grudge than they let on??? Hey sorry, I just call it like I see it.

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 1:16 p.m. CST


    by AsimovLives

    What you described above, which is the high concept style of studio filmmkaing, as a movie geek, fills me with rage and fury. Those cocksuckers above are what allowed the pave the road for the flood of hack fucks like Michael Bay to contaminate cinema with their hackdoom shit. Sometime si think real cinema in Holywood died in the early 1980s. Sometimes proper filmmakers try to ressurect cinema, but always at great difficulties and hardships.

  • Mr Beaks, a cautionary tale for thinking before writing something for a wide readership.

  • Mr Beaks, a cautionary tale for thinking before writing something for a wide readership.

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 2:10 p.m. CST

    That description of JOHN CARTER...

    by DoctorWho?

    ...puts this film (one I was hoping the best for) off of my radar. Sure, the footage is not in context etc... but even if Beaks is 50% accurate in the vibe he was getting then this film is DOA. <p> Another iconic property used simply for the 'name/brand recognition' attached to it. In the end, a forgettable, generic offering. Game over John Carter.

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 2:14 p.m. CST

    ...''Let me know if 'real power' wants a magazine or something''

    by DoctorWho?

    I think that's a good line... Subtle mockery from Fury. Nice. <p> And delivered by Samuel 'fucking' L. Jackson?? I'm down.

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 3:07 p.m. CST

    me ogree with mr beaks 2


    he so smart and me no like john carter b cuz of wat he say. mars no red enuf and john carter look 2 much like prince of persha. me c mikal bay moovy insted

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 3:23 p.m. CST

    I was very excited abgout the Avengers movie..

    by malificus

    ..until I saw the painful Cap movie. Sam Jackson is no longer having fun doing Nick Fury, that much is obvious. Cap's new costume is horrendously-cheap and gaudy looking, Reb Brown's looks better (except the shield which is spot on). My ass is still blistered by the suck that was Iron Man 2 and if Downey Jr. brings one more hack-ass buddy of his into these movies to aggrandize his ego he'll ruin it all for sure. The little bit of Avengers footage I've seen, admittedly little, looks dingey and lame. I sense the Avengers is going to be the entire franchise they worked so hard to build swirling down the shitter.

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 3:28 p.m. CST

    Shorter Beaks on JOHN CARTER:


    Not enough rape.

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 3:52 p.m. CST

    LOL choppah

    by DoctorWho?

    Old school.

  • False prophet!

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 6:46 p.m. CST


    by Keith

    "How much has Cars 2 made at the box office so far? " That's a RUBBISH argument. 1. All their movies so far have been commercially AND critically successful. 2. If you have a great reputation, you can coast on it for a while commercially, but that won't last forever.

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 9:59 p.m. CST

    John Carter will fail due to pretty boy casting

    by chien_sale

    it's that simple. Same thing happened with Momoa and Conan and Tatum Channing and GI Joes. Stop casting these fucking cunty hunks! Hire real badass men! John Carter should have been Josh Holloway, Conan= Javier Bardem, Duke= Max Martini

  • Aug. 23, 2011, 11:02 p.m. CST

    it's obvious movies today are churned out on a corporate, industrial conveyor belt


    Even the best movies today are missing a soul.

  • These conventions are sold as "fan" events and Comic-Con is certainly true to the vibe. D23 spent too much time trying to sell me cruiseline vacations and over charging me for merchanise. If you have an extra $150 to see 3 or 4 good panels over three days (not guaranteed to get in to any of them), then head to Anaheim next year. I'll stick with San Diego in 2012.

  • Aug. 24, 2011, 5:11 a.m. CST

    wonka and thx

    by Quint

    Wonka - It's true, I was very much the minority opinion on the footage presentation out in Emeryville. But I was also the only one at all familiar with the books. I am seeing pattern as people begin to see footage: Those that are familiar with the books seem to be unhappy with the tone and feel of the world and those that aren't seem to like it more. I'm cautious about decrying the movie as a failure because every single time Stanton has talked about it (I went to the set, talked to him there, have seen him speak publicly twice about it and had a few micro-conversations with him about Barsoom at different festivals/events over the last few years) he impresses me as someone that not only knows his shit when it comes to Burroughs, but is passionate about this series. Here comes the "but". But, I'm not being convinced with what I've seen. Believe me, I'd love to see the finished film and say they haven't completely miscast their two leads or that the Tharks don't look out of place, too cartoony in a world that they're striving to make as gritty and realistic as possible. I want a great John Carter series to be made, I want Stanton to be the one to make them. I want my initial misgivings to be proven wrong. We'll see if I get what I want next March, I guess. THX - I don't know what the hell I've ever done to you personally, but from the level of venom you just unleashed it must have been something major. I'm sorry? I'm not a journalist. I'm also not just a fanboy, but something weirdly in-between. You can argue I'm more fanboy than journalist, and you might be right, but I don't see why that means I'm not allowed to have an opinion. You're also wrong, this event wasn't for "exhibitors" it was for fans. Does that mean this fanboy is allowed to have an opinion on it? You're thinking of ShoWest (now CinemaCon, which is appearing to be moving more towards a Comic-Con-like fan basis than an exhibitor one).

  • Aug. 24, 2011, 8:57 a.m. CST

    ...awesome illustrated version of "A Princess of Mars

    by Taillefer

    That's one of the worst things I've ever seen. Looks like it was drawn by a 15-year-old with no art training—or talent. Wow, is that bad. It hurt my eyes! The only thing awesome about it is that the "artist" would have the balls to show it to anybody, much less post it on the interwebs for all the world to see... Okay, it is kind of awesome that the guy actually took time to draw that many peni--, erm, pictures. Clearly it was a labor of love and a huge commitment, but, dear God, I hope I can erase those images from my mind. I didn't even get past the cave scene, but that was enough. T.

  • Aug. 24, 2011, 11:14 a.m. CST

    Have you read the original novels? Obviously not.

    by Damned if I can login

    Don't blame the guy attempting to illustrate the novel as it was written, you can lay that "blame" (if it could be called that) directly upon the head of the author, Edgar Rice Burroughs. In the Barsoom novels, everyone is naked. EVERYONE. And ERB's not talking about "naked but for a loin cloth" such as in Pellucidar. He makes it perfectly clear that naked means completely without clothes, other than the chest harness and weapons. So call it every name in the book if ya want, but as to this moment that version is the ONLY faithful adaptation of the original novel that exists. Also, the artist makes it clear that he's not an illustrator, he's a sculptor. But it's a straight fact that he's the only person thus far with the stones to attempt the story as it was originally written.

  • Jornalists collect and report facts and events. If you want to present an opinion, write editorials. So, as you said, you are more of a fanboy then a jornalist. I would even say, you are a fanboy who writes for a fanzine, and in this case, AICN is the fanzine. You are not a reporter. sorry, but that's how it is. You actually have to be licensed to be called a reporter, a jornalist. And to be one you have to actually take a course. The days when one could be a jornalist just because you worked at a jornmal for years and got promoted from the mail up, or just because you founded a little town's papel, or it's today's version a website/blog page, are long gone. This is not a criticism.

  • Aug. 24, 2011, 4:25 p.m. CST

    he credited it, i mean to say.

    by AsimovLives

  • Aug. 24, 2011, 10:56 p.m. CST

    I've been waiting for a Barsoom movie since I was 13.

    by SailorBarsoom

    I'm now 45. I'll be 46 before this hits the screens. If I want to gush about Tharks or worry myself about tattoos, I can do that. And believe me, I do. Every time anything new comes out about this movie, I read things that give me hope (hatching Tharks!) and things that make me nervous (Dejah Thoris gives John Carter some magic there's-no-place-like-Earth gadget?). I'll see in March whether or not they've done a good job, but until then, I have to go on what I've got to go on, and it isn't much.