Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

New JOHN CARTER Poster Looks Burroughs-y!

Nordling here.

I really like the look of the new poster.  It reminds me of those old paperbacks from the 1960s.  All that's missing is a monster for John Carter to wrestle.  Still not jazzed about the title though.  C'mon Disney, add the OF MARS.  You're going to do it anyway.

JOHN CARTER (OF MARS) opens next March.  Nordling, out.

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Nov. 28, 2011, 6:33 p.m. CST


    by Kevin


  • Nov. 28, 2011, 6:33 p.m. CST


    by TheUmpireStrokesBach

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 6:37 p.m. CST


    by MooseMalloy

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 6:38 p.m. CST

    Saving it for the sequel(?)

    by SanityKaos

    John Carter John Carter Of Mars John Carter Of Mars Kills John Carter Of Mars Kills Again

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 6:39 p.m. CST

    This guy isn't right for the part. Too bad this could have been better.

    by EyeForgiveMelGibson

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 6:40 p.m. CST

    John Carter of Moobs

    by teddy_duchamp

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 6:40 p.m. CST

    johnny carter and those wacky martians!

    by jimmy

    Poster is sort of cool. Seems to evoke the old book art. Nice effort,but this film is doomed. We all know it.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 6:41 p.m. CST

    It'll just be called 'John' by the time it hits theaters.

    by kwisatzhaderach

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 6:43 p.m. CST

    it will be simply called "$"

    by jimmy

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 6:51 p.m. CST

    Very very sad

    by PhxMonsterGuy

    I have been waiting for years for a John Carter film. The first trailer and this poster are epic fails. A $250 million plus budget and this is what we get? Like so many of you, I think this will be a box office disaster of enormous proportions. so sad too. I will hold out hope but my expectations are very very low. Goddammit.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 6:54 p.m. CST

    it looks Burroughs-y

    by D o o d

    except rubbish!

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 6:55 p.m. CST

    I'm waiting for JOHN CARPENTER OF MARS

    by I am not a number

    It will just be JC playing video games and smoking for 2 hours (on Mars). It will be epic.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 6:56 p.m. CST

    Yes, Nordling, and add A PRINCESS, too.

    by SnootyBoots

    The book is called A PRINCESS OF MARS and people have been reading it for damn near one hundred years. Many of those people have been young boys who weren't afraid of the word princess in the title unlike the money men at Disney who are afraid that some of todays young boys wont go to see a movie about an icky girl. Besides, who isn't going to know the movie is based on a novel called A Princess Of Mars by the time it comes out?

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 6:57 p.m. CST


    by Koyaanisqatsi

    I haven't even seen this movie but my opinion on it is FACT and matters more than yours does!! FACT!! Fucking dickbags

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 7:03 p.m. CST

    Who gives a fuck about the title?

    by Jay

    The guy who directed Wall-e, Finding Nemo, and co-wrote all of Pixars movies up to that point is making a 200 mill JCOM movie that is clearly staying true to the books. Yet all I hear is whining about the title? Do you guys just need something to bitch about?

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 7:07 p.m. CST

    Coming soon....JESUS CHRIST OF MARS!

    by Il Buono Il Brutto Il Cattivo

    Imagine the Son of Man transported to Barsoom to become the Martians' messiah, only to be betrayed by Judas Tars Tharkas.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 7:08 p.m. CST

    Studio dropped the Mars because...

    by Andrew Coleman

    I think they openly believe most people going to the movies are retards. Which they could be right. But some asshole in the midwest sees the title with "Mars" in it and they might go... "I ain't seeing no space movie". That's why they dropped it. Plus John Carter is really easy. They are lazy and have no confidence in their own product... There is no way this movie will be a hit. We all know it. They better just hope international audiences will be interested. Because here they should have just went all in on it. Instead they mess with the title and fuck around in the ad campaign... The movie is set to fail now.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 7:18 p.m. CST

    epic bomb


    nothing but superhero films will be produced for the next 20 years because of this shit

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 7:19 p.m. CST

    This poster does nothing to promote this movie. I sense a

    by jupiterjim

    huge toy line to promote this that will also crap out. who the hell OK'd this? Did anyone read these books?

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 7:20 p.m. CST

    snootyboots is quite right

    by D o o d

    even though there is a book in the series called John Carter of Mars, this particular story is from the book, The Princess of Mars. Maybe that's why they dropped the "of Mars" in the title as they're being less descriptive about which book in the series and more about the character John Carter.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 7:20 p.m. CST

    and please. Tell me Disney does not have the rights to Doc Savage

    by jupiterjim

    they will destroy it.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 7:27 p.m. CST

    it's partly because "branding" has become more popular


    Everything needs to be short, concise, and sound catchy in a corporate-fueled commercial jingle.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 7:30 p.m. CST

    really hate this poster


    Hate the font. It's like they want to drain all the awesome from the project.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 7:41 p.m. CST

    The movie looks pretty lame...the poster is even worse.

    by Doug Phillips


  • Nov. 28, 2011, 7:43 p.m. CST

    I know nothing of John Carter. Is it a synonym for Jesus Christ?

    by mistergreen

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 7:45 p.m. CST


    by WhatTheHellHappenedToMe

    Take your sound logic and reasoning elsewhere. Although I do support the Indiana Jonesing of the titles, just so I don't get confused and think this might be a Denzel Washington flick about a struggling single father who mentors an at-risk slam poet.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 7:46 p.m. CST

    Cool poster

    by AlibyebyeEssmob

    I think it looks sort of like a Penguin classics edition of John Carter of Mars.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 7:48 p.m. CST

    I'm not one to bag on headgeek, but

    by gboybama

    That was pretty predictable. The font, huh? LOLLLLL. Harry, I ask that you recuse yourself from opinions about this movie, before the rest of us split our sides laughing. Anyway, love your website.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 8 p.m. CST

    This movie will bomb

    by sunwukong86

    No one knows who this John Carter character is. Kinda like the rest of the world and Doctor Who

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 8:05 p.m. CST

    You know who's going to see this?

    by NeonFrisbee


  • Nov. 28, 2011, 8:08 p.m. CST



    "If they add the "of Mars," then they risk their movie franchise being inundated with other studios movies based on the Barsoom novels, all of which also end in "of Mars." Yeah, all of the other studios are just beating down the door for the chance to make one of those...

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 8:14 p.m. CST

    BTW, here is the real reason:


    "John Carter’s had its titled changed. And there seems to be some kind of confusion as to why this should be, and I think the reason is brilliant. The reason is that he has to earn that title. Again, it’s a franchise or a number of books; a series of books that people may or may not know, but if you call him John Carter of Mars, at the very beginning, all the work’s been done and what Andrew [ Stanton ] wants to do is introduce people to this first film, and by the end of it, he becomes John Carter of Mars, but not at the beginning. In the beginning he’s John Carter, but by the end of the first film, he’s John Carter of Mars."

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 8:14 p.m. CST

    This flick has 35% Rotten Tomatoes, written all over it.

    by irritable_bowel_syndrome


  • Nov. 28, 2011, 8:14 p.m. CST

    So is it a contest now with movie posters...

    by don

    to see who can burn our retinas the fastest? Between this and MIB 3 my head is pounding. Hate it.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 8:18 p.m. CST

    The title sucks but that don't make a movie.

    by WordToDaWizard

    I hope it's good, but from what I've seen It's not true to the book. The Tharks look too Human. Burroughs describes them as Bug like, red protruding eyes, antennae for ears and big tusks they can use to disembowel enemies. The Red Men should be RED, and not Woo Woo Indian red and not tattooed red. But the color red. There needs to be major big fucking battles, Air Ships and Infantry. Bucket of blood everywhere. Then I would be happy.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 8:23 p.m. CST

    Is Harry still surprised that Hollywood won't let him in?

    by MooseMalloy

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 8:27 p.m. CST

    You're Right portlandtimberssuck

    by WordToDaWizard

    Disney is probably already working on a cartoon series for this already. That explains the Tharks looking so Human and Woola looking like a plush toy.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 8:29 p.m. CST

    John Carter from Albuquerque!

    by Zardoz

    Stupid Disney! Just because 1 movie with Mars in the title bombed we gotta change the title. Because "John Carter" is such an established name for a hero, like Bruce Wayne or Clark Kent, so everyone will undoubtedly know who he is, right? PUT THE FUCKING "FROM MARS" BACK IN THE MOTHER-FUCKING TITLE, DISNEY! FUCK!!!!

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 8:32 p.m. CST

    It's not "From" is "Of"

    by WordToDaWizard

    And the original title was "Under the Moons of Mars" when it was first printed in 1911.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 8:33 p.m. CST

    You blabbed, Quaid!

    by REDD

    You blabbed about Mars!

  • This movie, the posters and everything around it needed to look like a Frazetta painting come to life and so far I'm not getting that. Instead I'm getting a generic 70's Flash Gordon feel.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 8:38 p.m. CST

    The trailer looks awful.

    by Duck of Death

    I got the same bad feeling from watching it that I did from the trailer for the Conan film. Just really meh with very little spark. Definitely gonna wait for the reviews and fan response on this one.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 8:39 p.m. CST

    oh yeah


    this poster is fucking terrible. the first thing that caught my eye was the stupid font. wtf is that? I like their excuse for chopping off "of Mars." It's actually not a bad idea, except for the fact that it leaves you with a stupid title for your 300 million film.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 8:43 p.m. CST

    see what I mean about "branding"


    the poster is a failed attempt at commercial graphic design. Simple colors and design with huge bold, simplistic print. A giant wanna-be corporate brand.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 8:45 p.m. CST

    If "John Carter of Mars" is still trade marked

    by WordToDaWizard

    Couldn't they have gone with "John Carter on Mars" at least it would have made sense.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 8:46 p.m. CST

    Saw the trailer.

    by maxjohnson1971

    The poster is better.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 9:08 p.m. CST

    Well it's certainly eye-catching...


    I think that's the point. The days of the old sweeping Empire Strikes back style posters are long over. Most movie posters now are insanely simple. At least this one is something a little different...don't think I've seen anything quite like it. Very 60s-ish. I kinda dig the font and the color. My only problem is that the tharks should be more visible, he should have a sword in his hand, whoola & dejah and possibly an airship should also be somewhere in the background. But then again that might have made it look too much like the old Dune poster. However, I have say, enough with the fucking teaser shit- you already did a teaser poster. But yeah, it is certainly eye-catching and there's no doubt what the movie is called that's for sure.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 9:15 p.m. CST


    by WhatTheHellHappenedToMe

    That's how business gets done here, fag. Go rehearse.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 9:19 p.m. CST

    Hey portlandtimberssuck --

    by MooseMalloy

    -- the Portland Timbers do not suck.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 9:30 p.m. CST


    by WhatTheHellHappenedToMe

    They certainly do. Along with any other fake faggy european soccer bullshit.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 9:48 p.m. CST

    Just calling it 'John Carter' misses the point.

    by Tom

    'John Carter Of Mars' sounds like a guy who found some heroism and found himself. Whereas, 'John Carter' could be about a man who found a nice living from dentistry. It's a ho-hum title.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 9:52 p.m. CST

    CTM ... Harry

    by DrMorbius

    Dangling a carrot in front of him ... HAH More like a Double Layer Triple Fudge cake!

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 9:54 p.m. CST

    It's going to be fucking hilarious...

    by AssyMuffJizz

    when this film knocks all our socks off. From the director of Wall-e, Finding Nemo, and co-writer of all of Pixars movies (short of CARS 2)... Yeah, I'm SURE it's going to suck. Some of you guys sure get worked up over a simple teaser and some posters and a title. And, yeah -- that includes you too, Harry (though you clearly have an axe to grind about the project, pretty understandably).

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 9:58 p.m. CST


    by Happyfat73

    </p> </p> </p> </p> </p> </p> </p> </p> * Talkbacker logic – may not resemble actual logic.</p> </p> ** Not a fact.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 10:02 p.m. CST

    Nice work, bantuwind

    by D.Vader

    I salute you.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 10:03 p.m. CST

    by DrMorbius

    Is it too much to ask, that we get a proper film faithful to the novel? Rhetorical question. But really, is it?

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 10:06 p.m. CST

    These talkbacks remind me of the AVATAR talkbacks

    by D.Vader

    In which so many people were so quick to dismiss the movie as a future flop in the making that everyone would soon forget.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 10:09 p.m. CST

    You guys forget that most "MARS" movies fail at the box office

    by D.Vader

    And you *know* that has to be a factor in the decision to remove "MARS" from the title. Remember Mission to Mars? Or Red Planet? Or John Carpenter's Ghost of Mars? Yeah, most of the movie-going public doesn't either. And I doubt they want to.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 10:19 p.m. CST

    It's true that nobody knows who John Carter is

    by mr.underwater

    And it's Disney's job of makig us really interested in finding out. That said, I think they're doing a pretty lousy job... Nothing they've put out thus far has managed to spark anything. Trailers are making it look like Avatar lite, at best. They don't even have star to capitalize on. So. they could be sitting on the Citizen Kane of family action/adventure flcks, but if they can't get people excited (or at the very least, intrigued) enough to get to the theater, it's not going to matter. Hogo's supposedly "great," but they couldn't get people intrigued and it's box office speaks for itself. I thought John Carter was a pretty iffy property from the get-go, but had the potential to be cashed-in if handled properly. So far, it's been handled far from properly, and the bomb is in the air. Let's see if it lands...

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 10:26 p.m. CST

    Actually, the more I look at it...


    the cooler I think it looks. I dig it

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 10:27 p.m. CST

    Is this a movie about

    by bobbofatz

    Jimmys chubby beer guzzling brother?

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 10:28 p.m. CST

    If Only A Poster Had Fuck-All To Do With A Movie Being Good

    by Crow3711

    Because literally every other piece of info and media that has come out of this movie looks like a complete piece of shit and we all know it. This poster will not save this movie.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 10:30 p.m. CST

    Hey, Harry!

    by dukeroberts

    Where's your DVD column? You're due for three weeks worth of columns now, dude. And...I like the poster. It's the best looking thing that I have seen about the movie so far.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 10:30 p.m. CST

    You are a fucking retard CTM so yes you could run a studio FACT!!!

    by Xiphos_2

    Also your posts reek of infected vaginal discharge and since you are an infected hatched wound that isn't much of a surprise.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 10:42 p.m. CST

    It's a BANTAM book cover, circa 1975...

    by Marc Cerasini

    And by the time this movie is released, it'll be called John from Cincinatti.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 10:44 p.m. CST

    Nell Carter of Mars Bar

    by Undead03

    Looks like a bloated kids movie. Disney stockholders will be up in arms about the cost of this fiasco.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 10:50 p.m. CST

    LOST in development hell. FOUND in AVATAR.

    by justmyluck

    Sounds more à propos.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 10:58 p.m. CST


    by MaxTheSilent

    Needs more Frazetta.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 11:24 p.m. CST

    James Cameron of Mars

    by lv_426

    Will be the title of the 2019 IMAX 3D documentary where James Cameron and Bill Paxton go to Mars with a crew of astronauts on a joint mission made up of NASA and international space agencies.

  • Ghosts of Mars = rewarmed shitty 90's style John Carpenter Red Planet = utter shite Mission to Mars = not great, not horrible, but solid, the only good Mars film for a long time Mars Needs Mom = bullshit pandering Disney junk A film with Mars in the title or with Mars being a setting or subject matter will not fail solely because of the word Mars. It is just that no one has made a really good Mars film since Total Recall. Even then, Total Recall could have been set on any old world or moon and still have pretty much the same plot, although the alien terraforming devices wouldn't have made as much sense.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 11:37 p.m. CST

    I actually like this poster

    by Teddy Artery

    Not too excited about anything else I've seen, though.

  • And this film does look more and more like a huge mistake the more I see of it. Say what you will about Avatar ripping off a lot of ideas from A Princess of Mars by E.R. Burroughs, but it did get to theaters and thus into the public zeitgeist first. People are not going to flock to this. It sounds boring "John Carter". Those that do go see this, will probably feel like it's a poor man's Avatar set in the desert. Most people don't know or don't care that technically the E.R. Burroughs Barsoom novels were written and published nearly a century before Avatar. They will need a Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter level of awareness for this film to crawl out of that 300 million dollar hole. What a waste. They could have financed three 100 million dollar films for one John Carter. Or a single 150 million budget blockbuster and three 50 million dollar budgeted films that could have been original stories that took a risk or two. But nooooo!!!!!! We're too chickenshit to even stoop to letting people get a whiff of that nerdy 'sci-fi' vibe by putting the only logical title (John Carter of Mars or John Carter of Barsoom) on this overpriced turd.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 11:54 p.m. CST

    Heh they changed it


    John used to be flush with the right edge and all you could see was CARTE against the right edge. This one looks better. I think the design and colors look nice but there's things that could have been improved. whatever. Like for example it saying John Carter of Mars in a cool looking font. But hey it's a corporate brand, not a piece of art, it must be JOHN CARTER in big generic bold typeface. With red and yellow, just like McDonalds.

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 11:54 p.m. CST

    russellcrowesbeerbelly, JC of Mars should have been retro

    by lv_426

    I agree. What we have looks pretty generic. Even the cheese-rific Flash Gordon film from the early 1980's at least had some pizazz and embraced its pulp roots. Not that I want a Barsoom movie to be "that" cheesy, but I don't think such a generic big budget summer tentpole approach is a good fit either. I thought it was inspiring to initially hear that Kerry Conran of Sky Captain was going to make a film version of A Princess of Mars. Then I heard it was John Faveraugh and the notion if genericness really set in. I would have thought that a Pixar alum like Andrew Stantin would have done something a bit, bolder looking, but maybe the switch from animation to live action will take some time for him to find a more distinctive directorial voice?

  • Nov. 28, 2011, 11:56 p.m. CST

    one thing Avatar had going for it


    was known stars/actors. Say what you want about Sam Worthington but apparently the guy is a draw, how else can you explain Clash of the Titans not failing? Who is this John Carter dude? I've never seen him in my life. Horrible casting. Where's Brad Pitt? 300 million and no Brad Pitt?

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 12:02 a.m. CST

    I forgot to add

    by lv_426

    That I feel "retro" sci-fi/fantasy is going to take off and be a big deal in film and in publishing. Think shiny optimistic sleek future visions like those imagined after the post World War II boom times. Googie architecture, art deco, Twilight Zone nostalgia and twisty storytelling, gee-wiz gadgets and robots with simple designs that are the antithesis of the overly busy and layered look popularized by stuff like Michael Bay's Transformers tragedies. Or to make it simple, expect a young adult book series that is basically the watered down kid's version of something like Bioshock or Fallout. Something like that is bound to break free and make a few people who have no problems claiming all the credit and money for themselves, millions of dollars at the bookstores and multiplexes of the world.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 12:05 a.m. CST

    The Poster isn't that bad...

    by bob_uzumaki

    It's just that the alphabets look fucking awful and it's creatively uninspired. Even if this movie ends up being amazing (which I somewhat doubt it will), it's going to be as ignored as Hugo. And the title still sounds boring. "John Carter" sounds very, very boring. Can't they spend a few more bucks and add a little "Of Mars" or "Hero of Mars" subtitle at the bottom?

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 12:11 a.m. CST

    Best JOHN CARTER Web-Page...

    by Apocalypse_Pooh

  • No, he hates the font. This will get a bad review no matter what.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 1:11 a.m. CST

    I didn't realize

    by tusk1113

    They were making an ER movie, set in Noah Wyle's character's time in Africa...didn't they already cover that in the series? What? DIFFERENT John Carter? Maybe a more descriptive title would help with such confusion in the future. Also: remember when talkbacks weren't just a bunch of uncreative cursing? No? Maybe its because you're 12...

  • My impression is that JOHN CARTER will have a quick burial. Maybe it will be saved by story rather than CGI...I'm still rooting for Stanton.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 1:47 a.m. CST

    That guy had anti-charisma as Gambit in the Wolverine movie.

    by Bedknobs and Boomsticks

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 2:11 a.m. CST

    The font IS pretty weak.

    by Flip63Hole

    I've seen worse posters but this looks like it was thrown together in a hurry...

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 2:24 a.m. CST

    That guy looks like The Princess of Mars alright

    by chien_sale

    fucking WB actor pussy

  • I'll hold judgement on the actors - and I'll hope to the Gods that it's a great film but.... it looks baaaaaaaadddd

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 2:42 a.m. CST

    Call Sam Worthington what you want,but he IS badass.

    by KilliK


  • Nov. 29, 2011, 2:49 a.m. CST

    This movie will flop

    by hallmitchell

    John Carter! Who cares?

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 3:01 a.m. CST

    Why is the sky blue in the trailer?

    by Ryan

    That's really all I wanna know.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 3:04 a.m. CST

    JC = TL. FACT.

    by KilliK

    The movie wont be a disaster but it wont be the huge hit that Disney hopes for.Just like what happened with Tron Legacy.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 3:25 a.m. CST

    no, the postar is not all that great.

    by AsimovLives

    not terrible, but not memorable either.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 3:31 a.m. CST

    Really hate this poster

    by white_vader

    Creepythinman I mean. Fact!

  • Alas, cowards are in charge of moviemaking today.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 3:34 a.m. CST

    The poster should've been painted, not photoshopped

    by Cobb05

    I do think this movie is going to suck. I hope it doesn't, but I just don't have any faith in it at the moment. The poster really should've had that painting look, like the cover of an old book. This just looks like someone won a contest to design the poster and came up with something on photoshop.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 3:40 a.m. CST

    it's gonna be an epic mega-bomb


    heads will roll

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 3:40 a.m. CST

    no lightsabers, no Brad Pitt = fail


  • Nov. 29, 2011, 3:43 a.m. CST


    by Tim Reuschling

    if you would run a studio, you would probably make the following movies: FACT 1, FACT 2, FACT 3................. idiot

  • FACT:

  • JOHN CARTER: Driving Instructor of Earth Millions I tell ya. Millions.

  • Although the "diGriz" is too foreign sounding for Hollywood to not get worried. They'd have to just call the film James Bolivar. Darn it. Bolivar. Too South American drug dealer sounding. People might think it is about some Pablo Escobar like character. Better to just call it James Brown. That'll get 'em butts in the seats.

  • Die Hard would be ... John McClane. Predator would be ... Dutch. Robocop would be ... Officer Murphy (or Murphy's Law) Blade Runner would be ... Rick Deckard. Alien would be ... Ellen Ripley. Aliens would be ... Ellen Ripley's War. Alien 3 would be ... Ellen Ripley is Bald. Alien Resurrection would be ... Ripley Rises. The Terminator would be ... Sarah Connor. Terminator 2: Judgment Day would be ... John Connor. Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines would be ... John Connor 2: End of the World. Terminator Salvation would be ... John Connor's Salvation. The Matrix would be ... Thomas Anderson. The Lord of the Rings trilogy would be ... The Frodo's Journey Trilogy (consisting of: Frodo's Quest, Frodo's Shadow, and Frodo's Triumph). Gladiator would be ... Maximus. The Godfather would be ... Michael Corleone. The Godfather part II would be ... Vito Corleone. Goodfellas would be ... Henry, Tommy, and Jimmy You get the picture.

  • or this: or this not some really bad BORING photoshop

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 5:51 a.m. CST

    @cartmanez : you're absolutely right of course

    by marineboy

    I fucking hate Hollywood. All that talent out there - and they give us that piece of shit. Fuck Hollywood. Fuck Photoshop. Fuck the digital age.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 6:20 a.m. CST

    Yes, but is there as much gay sex as a Burroughs novel?

    by KoolerThanJesus

  • It'd be awesome if they cast that whalecow from PRECIOUS which was totally friggin' hilarious. I mean, that scene where she's running down the street eating the fried chicken she stole?? HAHAHAHA! It was like something out of a John Waters movie.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 6:29 a.m. CST

    Maybe it's not set on Mars?

    by GhostofCicero

    Maybe they dropped the Mars angle from the film. Pretty much everyone knows Mars is uninhabitable now so a movie like this set there is retarded. Maybe it's just going to be set on some planet elsewhere in the galaxy.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 6:53 a.m. CST

    JOHN CARTER: Geet Yur Asszz Ta Maarzz!!!!

    by lv_426

    Deezz peepole kneed AIYREEE!!!!!! ARHGHGHGGHHHH HAAH HAKASHSDFSAHG AGjiaghjaogjhakghjklahglka!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 7:06 a.m. CST

    Most interesting image of Tars Tarkas

    by reid

    If I was coming into this movie blind to the source material, the silhouette of Tars Tarkas behind JC would make the 11 year old geek in me very interested. I am trying not to be too cynical, because I love the books ,and I can't fix the movie from this talkback.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 7:32 a.m. CST

    Retro-Chic 60's look

    by Stewart Wolfe

    .....and equally as dull.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 7:51 a.m. CST

    Gary Carter of Montreal

    by Aquatarkusman

    Fighting alien invaders at Olympic Stadium with his trusty sidekick, Tim Raines.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 7:54 a.m. CST

    So disappointing...

    by T Pl

    Why couldn't they have called it Barsoom instead of John Carter? I loved this series as a kid. My late dad introduced me to the books when I was 8 years old. I was even named after one of the characters (not telling which one). I really want to believe in this movie, but am struggling to do so.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 7:58 a.m. CST

    Frazetta, Williamson, Wood??? (Wally Wood that is)

    by maskedmagician

    Do your homework DisneyWood. This film should have Frazetta, Williamson , Krenkel all over it. They all visually redefined the genre of sword and sorcery, and had an enormous influence on succeeding generations of artists including crappy filmmakers who tried to imitate the look and failed Although -Lucas' early team was successful with the first Star Wars trilogy but then dropped the ball --as we all know--much later....with the vitriol of Episode 1,2,3, 7, 8,9, 10,11, oh sorry... Where is the atmosphere of the EC's science fiction comics /Weird Science, Weird Fantasy, and Weird Science-Fantasy masterpieces.... 70 percent of the success of this film would potentially come from the design and atmosphere And judging by the trailers the design and atmosphere is vitriol--"Attack of the Clones" style vitriol --plastic looking --It reeks of artistic sclerosis, a hardening of the the artistic arteries --no sense of the "nature of beauty art, and taste, and with the creation and appreciation of beauty".....looks like a freaking video game..why does everything look like a freaking video game? Now i will watch the trailer 3 more times-- first on my iPod. Then my iPad , then my iPhone all while eating at Ihop....

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 8:07 a.m. CST

    Noah Wyle grew his hair out for this one, eh?

    by darthderp

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 8:16 a.m. CST

    This film will do fine..

    by lprothro

    assuming the reviews are positive and the "Pixar" and "director of Finding Nemo" selling points work. I seem to remember reading the same dire predictions on here about Avatar a few years ago. A property doesn't have to be well known to attract viewers. It needs good word of mouth and the right amount of visual spectacle. Agree with everyone on the poster itself though--pretty damned dull.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 8:29 a.m. CST

    Should have been Michael Whelan

    by menacingphantom

    (Or at least in his style) He did the amazing 80s versions of all 15 book covers for JCOM. Google him for more awesomeness. He actually read the books so he could be accurate to ERB's descriptions.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 8:30 a.m. CST

    I am losing faith

    by menacingphantom

    I am a huge Stanton fan, as how could anyone on this site not be, but so many of the decisions that are coming from the production seem to be almost all bad. I even like most of the trailer, but I fear that's because it shows so little of the actual movie. I don't like the casting, the poster, the stills that have been released. Really worried about this one.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 8:43 a.m. CST


    by sapno_krei


  • Nov. 29, 2011, 8:47 a.m. CST


    by D.Vader

    It doesn't matter whether or not MARS being in the title is the reason for failure or not. The point is, those movies with MARS in the title WERE failures and that's what the public will associate a MARS movie with. That's the important sticking point. Get me? Total Recall may have been a great movie, and a smashing success, but it was also much older than the Mars movies I mentioned above. And it doesn't reference the red planet in its title.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 8:50 a.m. CST

    LV_426, as for your "movie titles of today"...

    by D.Vader

    I know you're making a joke, but those ideas aren't close to the MARS issue at all. If you could find examples where there were 3 previous movies with "Matrix" in the title or "Terminator", and all 3 of those failed, then maybe they would be changed to "Thomas Anderson" and "Sarah Connor". I get what you're saying, but I think its a little extreme and not at all comparable to the Mars issue.

  • ... "John Carter... of MARS."

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 8:53 a.m. CST

    The poster does one cool thing

    by Ye Not Guilty

    Every time I blink, I see an after-image of the words "JOHN CARTER" floating on the screen. Try it and see for yourself. Too bad about the blah font, though.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 9:05 a.m. CST

    @dvader You are clearly right, but who will say the line?

    by menacingphantom

    Dejah, Her Dad, Tars Tarkas, Albino King Kong or John Carter...of Mars?

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 9:22 a.m. CST

    Moderator: kindly ban creepythinman

    by Gabe Athouse

    How many times does he post deliberately obnoxious all-caps nonsense before this happens?

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 9:42 a.m. CST

    Harry bashing a movie that he was unable to get made himself?!

    by Ironhelix

    That's just crazy-talk. From what I have seen of this so far, it looks just fine. No better or worse than anything else that's coming soon. Harry can't even write a coherent paragraph, and he was supposedly trying to get a movie made? The bitterness makes me laugh.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 9:43 a.m. CST

    I like how it's all RED..................

    by Astronut

    ... and yet the actual film depicts a world devoid of red sand or red skies or any martian red anything (from what they have shown us)!

  • Reportedly. If that's the case, then come ON, people. I mean, WHAAA-?!?!!???

  • ... and ask mom to buy them some "JOHN CARTER" ACTION FIGURES!!! HAHAHAHAHAHA They should have put the word MARS in there. NO QUESTION ABOUT IT.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 10:17 a.m. CST

    bobo_vision - you nailed the '60s paperback description exactly.

    by openthepodbaydoorshal

    Its an okay to the MiB poster its a friggin work of art.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 10:27 a.m. CST

    I realized why Disney is scared of the "of mars" part.

    by knowthyself

    It's like an American going to Russian and than being "John Carter of Russia." I guess they don't like the idea of him switching his citizenship from Earth to Mars? That's my best guess as to why they are avoiding the "of mars" part like the plague.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 10:27 a.m. CST

    Why is it red?

    by Jaster Mareel

    They didn't bother to make Mars red for the movie so why make it red for the poster?

  • You know what I mean; filmmakers take the core elements of a story, add their own seasoning and tack on a different title to give it a hint of pseudo-originality. Best example I can think of is the book Mrs. Frisby & the Rats of NIMH, re-worked to The Secret of NIMH. Or, for another example, the book Nothing Lasts Forever...made over into Die Hard. Just my take on the subject....

  • Because in ERB's Barsoom novels, the author makes it quite clear that everyone...and that means *everyone* STARK NAKED except for the chest harness. And this is not "naked but for a loin cloth". STARK. FRAGGIN'. NAKED. And no, I'm not making this up. Even when JC visits his "nephew" on Earth in The Chessmen of Mars, he shows up naked. Call me what ya want, but I didn't write the original novels starting back in 1911. Personally, I always thought it would be difficult running into battle with ya junk swingin' to and fro....

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 11:34 a.m. CST

    How many people will assume it's an ER spin-off?!

    by Cadillac Jones

    Noah Wyle, wherefore art thou?

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 11:42 a.m. CST

    Jennifer Connelly circa 1990-1991 *WAS* Dejah Thoris ...

    by Cadillac Jones

    Can't argue with facts, man!

  • It doesn't remind me of Frazetta...more like some of James Bama's work and other artists from the 60's /70's. Now everyone, please continue you on with your hate.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 12:28 p.m. CST

    Dogpile on John Carter!!

    by malificus

    It's much better the property remain in development limbo than someone take a crack at it, right? What a fools errand it is trying to realize on screen books that a thousand geekboys have read and have expectations of! What a hack to not nail every single aspect to everyone's satisfaction. Why doesn't he have ridiculously-beefy man-tits and steroid engourged muscles? Worked for Conan, right? The font on the poster is just deplorable, that's my measure of a good film is the poster font, what a missed opportunity. This movie is a pile of dick-turd that I wipe my ass on, FACT! No wait, I LOVE the John Carter books, so I'm gonna keep my fingers crossed and hope for the best, because that's what a real John Carter fan would do. Everyone else bitching their blue streaks are either disgruntled losers with bad development deals or the same lame assholes that lurk here every day just to bitch and spout and barf venom. Who cares what these dicks think anyway, it's like playing a FPS on x-box live around here, immature, punk-ass bitches running their mouths.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 12:47 p.m. CST

    Maybe they'll fix the "red" in post..

    by openthepodbaydoorshal

    ... This poster needed some good old fashioned Struzan...

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 1:09 p.m. CST

    That poster should not turn me on

    by Dave

    But it does. Don't judge me.

  • WTF are you guys THINKING!?!?

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 1:20 p.m. CST

    I liked it when it was called AVATAR.FACT.

    by KilliK

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 1:31 p.m. CST

    A pretty good summation of was being said about Avatar


  • Nov. 29, 2011, 1:35 p.m. CST

    ...and cadilac?

    by malificus

    Jennifer Connelly circa '91 would be perfect scrubbing toilets in hazmat gear.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 1:38 p.m. CST

    Btw how can people say they want more 'red' & 'Fazetta'-style...


    and then criticize it for looking 'too much' like Attack of the Clones and Return of the Jedi? You do realize that if you went red and frazetta that it would look even MORE like those films...

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 1:40 p.m. CST

    I like the poster, but...

    by JustinSane

    ...they really need to move that title up a bit. The huge blank space at the top is REALLY distracting. Also, Stanton's explanation that Carter has to EARN the title "of Mars" would be pretty awesome if the movie began with a title card that read "JOHN CARTER" and ended with one that said "JOHN CARTER OF MARS".

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 1:40 p.m. CST

    Oh, and...

    by JustinSane

    ...this poster gives me hope that they will indeed "red" up Mars in post.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 1:53 p.m. CST

    But because you see blue sky...


    and a guy with long black hair & a sword you think- 'Prince of Persia' or about people are the very definition

  • And he earned it in which novel: what else? Warlord of Mars (the 3rd book, after A Princess of Mars and Gods of Mars)

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 2:14 p.m. CST

    Actually I heard that DID try for a Frazzetta-style...


    yellowish tint and some reds & shit and it made everything look gross and totally fucked up Daniel Mindel's beautiful cinematography

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 2:14 p.m. CST

    When will they replace the boy in the poster with JOHN CARTER?

    by pavel hora

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 2:32 p.m. CST

    There's also the possibility


    That it might not end up being Mars after all...just another world called Barsoom. I've heard a about there being some kind of twist in regards to it actually being Mars.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 2:51 p.m. CST

    One more thing


    It's totally plausible, given Carter's time period/frame of reference- that his character would naturally assume he was on Mars- just as we would assume otherwise. At the very least I'm guessing that if it IS Mars- it will be Mars of the distant past- thousands, if not millions of years ago.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 3:13 p.m. CST

    Give me a break

    by Chris Palm

    Jeez, here's a wild concept-why don't you see the movie first THEN pass judgement instead of trying impress everyone how snooty you are. Pathetic.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 3:57 p.m. CST

    wonkabar - I've always thought that myself

    by Damned if I can login

    I often wondered if Barsoom is from a different time era.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 4:18 p.m. CST

    My theory about the movie and time


    It sounds like the Therns are 'world-builders'. It wouldn't surprise me at all if it's implied that they are also responsible for earth as well- and had a hand in our religion/government (illuminati-type shit) and that this all ties in with Carter's supossed immortality. That he is actually OF mars of the distant past and just doesn't remember. I definitely get the feeling that they've expanded greatly on some of the things that were kept mysterious in the books

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 4:52 p.m. CST


    by phantomcreeps

    I grew up in Portland and yes they suck! We should have some major sports franchises in that city. All we get is Basketball, Damn near ruined my childhood. Who do I root for? Went for the Steelers and Pirates :)

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 4:54 p.m. CST

    Time theory continued...


    …look at the teaser when Carter is gazing at the moons- he has a ‘I’ve been here before/there’s something familiar about this place’ expression. It wouldn’t surprise me if that ends up being the line right there. It also would be interesting if in the movie somewhere we actually see Carter in the present day, looking at scientific discoveries of how mars is devoid of life- how it appears it once had life and running water, but vanished long ago…thus giving him the drive and passion to get back and change what happened

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 4:55 p.m. CST

    and that poster is beyond boring

    by phantomcreeps

    No effort at all. I would not hang THAT in my house.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 5:27 p.m. CST

    The sequel title: "WELCOME BACK, CARTER"

    by JDanielP

    I figure SOMEBODY already said it..but I had to say it, anyway.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 5:54 p.m. CST

    John Carter... needs more.

    by Tom

    This whole film is a problem for me. Love the source material but have always had issue with the fact that I had an antique dealer uncle called John Carter. He was not 'of' Mars. Therefore, to avoid confusion, the only title I will accept is John Carter - Not the Antique Dealer. I don't suppose that this will be listened to and close family members will just assume that this is a big budget film about a furniture dealer from rural Worcestershire.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 6:47 p.m. CST

    Re : bobo_vision

    by Real Deal

    I really hate some of the stupid responses about the nature of this movie and Burroughs novels starting with the first response. As a reader of all things SF since I was in 3rd grade ( I'm 58 now ) I like the fact that it resembles an old paperback! What a stupid thing to say! It makes me want to see the movie more because they seem to have a feel for the novels. Geez!

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 6:55 p.m. CST

    Wouldn't It Be Funny If This Was A Really Big Movie?

    by Real Deal

    I've heard these same talkback references about something none of us know very much about and guess what? It turns out to be good. I'm willing to give it a chance because all I've seen is one teaser trailer and a few photos. Given that the movie is still in production alot could change by the finished product. Hell! A lot could be present now but we haven't seen it.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 6:59 p.m. CST

    Re : wonkabar

    by Real Deal

    Good point! Maybe that's why they didn't add " Of Mars " to the title. Also that would satisfy all these little kids who say " Well we know Mars isn't like that ". As if that mattered with this material.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 7:11 p.m. CST

    Fuck them for making the poster so red!

    by catlettuce4

    When we know already Mars is not red at all in the actual film.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 7:32 p.m. CST

    real deal

    by Bobo_Vision

    First, you're old. Now that we've got that out of the way, as a cover for a 60's novel it's passable. I like my 60's novel covers with a bit of cheese. But when paying for a movie ticket...and if I'm deciding based purely on a poster....this poster is bland. It's also gawdy. As a small paperback cover it would be alright, but as a large poster, it's a bit of an eyesore with all that red to look at. <p> I'm not sure that you know this, but paperback novels and films are two different mediums. So my saying I would read it if I bought it at a secondhand store before a long train ride but would not watch it if it were a film (which it turns out it is) makes perfect sense. <p> I like the poster for the 1977 film Alien...but if that same image were on a carton of eggs, it would deter me from buying those eggs. Different mediums, different products...they require different aesthetics. I'm not sure that you'll understand these things at your age...but hey, I gave it a shot.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 7:52 p.m. CST

    Fanboys in 2008/9: "Avatar looks like Ferngully in Space!"

    by Hesiod2k7

    Need I say more? Let's wait until the fucking movie comes out before we trash it, please.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 7:57 p.m. CST

    Mars is not in the title -- because Barsoom won't be Mars

    by Hesiod2k7

    Or something.

  • Nov. 29, 2011, 11:16 p.m. CST

    The Retro Men of Mars

    by apewithchain

    The poster has a nostalgic look, like an old Analog cover. I'm wondering if they're going for the usual Pixar crowd: kids and parents. That would explain why they're avoiding anything overtly Frazetta-y. No wonder Woola will steal the movie--he's aimed at the target audience, no doubt. Perhaps the removal of Mars from the title is to desaturate the usual swords-and-sorcery expectations. BTW, trademarks probably have nothing to do with the title changes: all the major names in the book are already trademarked, so no one can make a rival film with the same names, regardless of the title. Of course, one can always borrow everything but the names, like George Lucas did.

  • And it will be the finest ninety-six hours you ever spent in a movie theatre.

  • Nov. 30, 2011, 12:51 a.m. CST

    When do we get THE FOREVER WAR?

    by Cheeses_of_Nazareth

  • Back in the early 2000's, based on Kim Stanley Robinson's MARS novels.

  • Nov. 30, 2011, 3:59 a.m. CST

    cheeses_of_nazareth, "When do we get THE FOREVER WAR?"

    by lv_426

    Never ever.

  • Nov. 30, 2011, 4:23 a.m. CST


    by phantomcreeps

    Could you make some stories and movies? I'm dead serious. Save us.

  • Nov. 30, 2011, 6:16 a.m. CST

    Avatar _was_ Ferngully in Space

    by menacingphantom

    Also Dances With Wolves in Spaaaaace.

  • Nov. 30, 2011, 6:19 a.m. CST

    Forever War

    by menacingphantom

    Some great things in that book. Of course also things like <<In the future there is terrible overpopulation so everyone is forced to be gay! See how that works?!?>>

  • Nov. 30, 2011, 7:27 a.m. CST

    You guys are unbelievable

    by Peter David

    ERB fans have wanted to see a "John Carter" film for decades. And now we're on the cusp of it coming to fruition, and the poster sucks, the actor sucks, the COLOR SCHEME sucks. "The sky of Mars is supposed to be blue." Oh my GOD. IT'S A MYTHICAL VERSION OF MARS! Who GIVES a damn if the sky is blue or red?

  • Nov. 30, 2011, 7:31 a.m. CST

    As I was saying before it posted before I was ready

    by Peter David

    Mars doesn't really HAVE an atmosphere. Or a canal. Or creatures on it. So it's called "John Carter" instead of "John Carter of Mars." You guys are obsessed with the "Of Mars" part and are totally ignoring, hey, JOHN CARTER. And yes, I fully admit to having a dog in this particular hunt, since I wrote a four-issue prequel series for Marvel Comics. But even if I weren't involved at all, I'd still be an ERB fan of five decades standing and I'd be looking forward to this. Not to mention, hey, Dejah Thoris action figures. PAD

  • Nov. 30, 2011, 7:48 a.m. CST

    well said and holy shit it's Peter David

    by Katet19

    Well said, I really dig your work. Big fan of your Dark Tower Adaptations and X-Factor. I'm looking forward to this and have high hopes for Kitsch's performance based on his work on FNL (despite a slightly ho hum teaser).

  • Nov. 30, 2011, 7:48 a.m. CST

    nevermind the title, that guy looks like a boytoy

    by chien_sale

    in the style of Brandon Routh/Chris Hemsworth/guy that did Conan. should have cast an actual MAN to do this role

  • Nov. 30, 2011, 8:20 a.m. CST

    New Trailer on Good Morning America

    by auralenz

    I would never watch that except Taylor was on this morning. For all the haters-- Ha Ha! The movie looks amazing, like I told you it would. See you on the red carpet at Grauman's Chinese in March! Lynn Collins-please have my baby!

  • Nov. 30, 2011, 8:59 a.m. CST

    As bad as BATTLESHIP looks.......

    by Father

    .....its advertising gives you a very specific idea of what to expect from it. The average member of the public could look at its trailer and tell you that the film is about the navy fighting a big robot alien ship and that the films main character is a hotshot young navy officer, who has beef with his fiancees father, who just happens to be his commanding officer . Its human heroes vs evil alien robots- all very easy stuff to digest for even the simplest movie goer (and there are a lot of simple movie goers out there). John carter on the other hand isnt as clear in its advertising and for a major tentpole movie that reportedly cost $300 million to put together ...thats not a good sign , commercially speaking. The films posters and trailers are pretty vague - sure, if you've read the novels you'll get what its about , but if your one of the millions and millions of movie goers who havent read the books, its highly likely that you'll just see this as some movie about a guy who rides horses and runs around shirtless the desert .... or .... something...... If producers want a $300 million movie to make money, its gotta be as easy to figure out as possible . John carter, with its visually anachronistic mix of aliens, horses, the 1800s , desert landscapes and vaugue hints of the actual plot will be hard for a lot of people to figure out and that why i think its going to fail financially.

  • Nov. 30, 2011, 9:55 a.m. CST


    by DrMorbius

    So, if Disneys depiction had everyone wearing mukluks and parkas, and it was a planet blanketed in snow and ice, we should be happy? Because, well, it's still JOHN CARTER!

  • Nov. 30, 2011, 11:07 a.m. CST

    Well the new trailer definitely isn't somber


  • Nov. 30, 2011, 11:31 a.m. CST

    Sounds like a Clooney or Hanks movie...maybe Cruise

    by Darth Macchio

    You know..just a guy's name? Always hated that. Seems as pretentious as being anything other than a musician and still expecting people to call you by a single, non-given, name. Like "Topol" or "McG", or "Cher", or "Garfield", "Marmaduke", etc. Besides, I know a dude named 'John Carter' and he's not remotely like the 'of Mars' John Cater and I'd rather not be confused like that.

  • Nov. 30, 2011, 12:08 p.m. CST

    wonkabar - the Therns are fully explained in Gods of Mars

    by Damned if I can login

    For the most part, a very wicked race of Barsoom, guiding the religion of the other races with what was basically a pack of LIES. Untold millions of the many races of Barsoom journeyed down the mystic river towards what they thought was heaven, only to find brutal death, or at best abject slavery. They were also cannabalistic. I don't recall reading that they were world-builders, but they were certainly involved in the development of the Barsoom religion(s). They were dealt with....harshly.

  • Nov. 30, 2011, 12:10 p.m. CST

    PAD, about those Dejah Thoris action figures....

    by Damned if I can login

    I would only want one if it were molded in the manner depicted by the author.....mainly, NAKED!!!! Heh heh heh....

  • Nov. 30, 2011, 1:52 p.m. CST


    by Peter David

    Katet--Thanks for the kind words. And yeah, I would have pegged you for a Dark tower fan for the obvious reason. DrMorbius--Wow. Nicely done. You took two completely different points, combined them, then went for a reductio ad absurdum to try and paint me into a corner. I'd be totally stuck for a comeback if I were, y'know, a moron. Point the first: I said that obsessing about whether the title had "of Mars" in it was missing the far more salient fact that it's JOHN CARTER. That's what's important. Not June Carter. Not Jimmy Carter. John Carter. We're finally getting a John Carter feature film. Point the second: It's silly to complain about the sky being red instead of blue because the entire ERB version of Mars is mythical anyway. And your comeback is to suggest all manner of topographical changes that would make the fictional Mars more of the wasteland that it is in actuality and say, "Would THAT be John Carter? Huh? Huh? Would it, huh?" Well, no. Because the ERB Mars was nothing like that, and seizing upon the color of the sky is such a desperate act to find something, ANYTHING to complain about, that the irony is unavoidable: Namely, what color is the sky in the worlds of fans who must ALWAYS complain, the answer being black and gloomy and filled with storm clouds. Here's a whacky concept: the only worthwhile opinion is an informed opinion, and my opinion is informed by having actually read the script, an achievement that this long-time ERB fan says, with confidence, IS John Carter. So how about some of you unbunch your panties and wait until you, too, can have an opinion that is informed by something other than relentless negativity. PAD

  • Nov. 30, 2011, 2:02 p.m. CST

    The horrors of movies with names only

    by Peter David

    Yes, absolutely, calling the movie "John Carter" will be enough to guarantee that it's a lousy movie that will tank at the box office. Herewith a partial list of "name only" films that were terrible and failed: Ben-Hur Arthur Barry Lyndon Bonnie & Clyde Cat Ballou Cleopatara Doctor Zhivago Erin Brockovich Jerry Maguire Sergeant York If only they'd carried better titles such as "Ben-Hur of Judea" or "Arthur of New York," they might have succeeded. PAD

  • Nov. 30, 2011, 2:57 p.m. CST

    peter david

    by AsimovLives

    Mar5s does have an atmosphere. While it's abouit 100 thinner then Earth's it's enough to make airbreak fearcible, which is what helps the probes land on mars. the fact mars has an atmosphere is why it has the sandstorms it has, which can envelop the whole planet and last for six months or even years. those sandstorms in fact were observed by one of the earliest probes sent to mars,a nd almost fucked up the mission, because they couldn't se a bloody thing about the planet, just this huge orange coloured cloud. but yeah, there are no "canalis" on mars.

  • Nov. 30, 2011, 3:26 p.m. CST


    by DrMorbius

    Best be careful up on your high horse there bucko ...

  • Nov. 30, 2011, 4:39 p.m. CST


    by Peter David

    Asimov--fine, I should have said breathable atmosphere. Satisfactory? Morbius--better to be the guy on the high horse than the guy walking behind the high horse. PAD

  • Dec. 1, 2011, 1:09 a.m. CST

    Jennifer Connelly Circa 1991 - 1994...

    by Cadillac Jones And... And... The woman would've been perfect!

  • Dec. 1, 2011, 3:11 a.m. CST

    I prefer Connelly circa Mulholland's Falls

    by chien_sale


  • It was artificially generated by machinery. At the end of A Princess of Mars (think that's it) the machinery ceased to function and the population began to die. JC remembered the secret method of opening the atmosphere citadel and was racing to reactivate the atmospheric generators.

  • It was the highest grossing film of 1963, earning US $26 million ($57.7 million total), yet made a loss due to its cost of $44 million, the only film ever to be the highest grossing film of the year yet to run at a loss. The film is infamous for nearly bankrupting 20th Century Fox. Originally budgeted at $2 million, the budget eventually totaled up to $44 million — the equivalent of $320 million in 2010 dollars, making the movie the third-most costly ever produced worldwide and the second most expensive in the United States. It eventually made money, but not at first.

  • Dec. 5, 2011, 9 p.m. CST



    Stanton was in London last month to show 20 minutes of John Carter footage to press there, and he took the time to explain his title mutilation. He started with why he eliminated the original title of Burroughs' first Martian novel, A Princess of Mars: "Here's the real truth of it. I'd already changed it from A Princess Of Mars to John Carter Of Mars. I don't like to get fixated on it, but I changed Princess Of Mars ... because not a single boy would go." So then we're left with a flick called John Carter of Mars, which is still a satisfyingly sci-fi title, right? It's got the word Mars in it, at least. But then Stanton made another call: "And then the other truth is, no girl would go to see John Carter Of Mars. So I said, 'I don't won't to do anything out of fear, I hate doing things out of fear, but I can't ignore that truth.'" Yes, these sound like cynical, marketing-based reasons for changing the flick's name around. It sounds like something a Disney branding executive would do, not the guy who directed Wall-E and Finding Nemo. But Stanton's not done, and before you get ready to go after him with torches and pitchforks, rest assured he has a real, story-based reason for the change: "All the time we were making this big character story which just so happens to be in this big, spectacular new environment. But it's not about the spectacle, it's about the investment. I thought, I've really worked hard to make all of this an origin story. It's about a guy becoming John Carter. So I'm not misrepresenting what this movie is, it's John Carter. "Mars is going to stick on any other film in the series. But by then, it won't have a stigma to it." And just like that, we've got a real answer for the title change and the hope of a sequel before we've even seen the flick. We'll have to wait until John Carter is released in March to see if Stanton's "origin story" explanation really plays out on screen, but in the meantime we'll give him a little credit. The guy made Wall-E, a flick that stars arguably the most adorable robot ever. That has to count for something.