The Forgotten Sci-Fi Gem: ‘John Carter’ Deserved Better

by

Reflecting on the situation, it seemed like a cinematic triumph was imminent. The esteemed director Andrew Stanton, a two-time Oscar laureate known for masterpieces such as “Finding Nemo” and “WALL-E,” was poised to make his live-action debut, following closely on the heels of Brad Bird’s remarkable success in the same realm. With a timeless science-fiction classic under his guidance, a tale that arguably laid the foundation for blockbusters like “Avatar” and “Star Wars,” all the elements seemed perfectly aligned.

However, fate had other plans. In 2012, “John Carter,” as it was titled, was met with a wave of mixed opinions and underwhelming box office performance. The film ended up costing Disney a staggering $198 million.

Despite being known as one of the biggest box office flops in history and having a less than effective marketing strategy, is the film John Carter truly deserving of its negative reputation? We believe it is not — though it has its flaws, it surprisingly maintains its appeal as an enjoyable sci-fi adventure filled with charm, action, and humor.

‘John Carter’ Was Always Going to Be a Hard Sell

To put it simply, John Carter was never going to be an easy movie for mainstream audiences to embrace. Being adapted from the initial book of Edgar Rice Burroughs’ popular Barsoom series, A Princess of Mars, the film had been attempting to make its way into Hollywood for several decades. In the 1980s, Disney acquired the rights to the novel in search of a possible rival to Star Wars, but the project failed as the necessary technology wasn’t advanced enough at that time.

In the early 2000s, Paramount acquired the book rights in an auction. Initially, both Robert Rodriguez and Jon Favreau were slated to direct at different stages. However, these rights reverted back to Disney in 2006 due to Paramount focusing on J.J. Abrams’ Star Trek remake. Andrew Stanton, a passionate fan of the Barsoom books, took over as director. Despite initial difficulties for Stanton transitioning to live-action, which necessitated additional filming, the production process itself wasn’t as chaotic as one might expect given the eventual box office performance.

As a dedicated movie enthusiast, I’ve got to admit that the marketing strategy for “John Carter” was quite an enigma. Frankly, it was a tough challenge to make this film shine amidst the vast sci-fi landscape. However, the trailers seemed to be making every perplexing choice imaginable, choosing not to highlight the director’s impressive background with Pixar or the profound impact of “A Princess of Mars” on the genre.

Because the Barsoom novels significantly shaped today’s major sci-fi series, John Carter’s elements ironically seemed to echo previous works. Despite being incredibly loyal adaptations, this gave rise to a movie that appeared to have no appeal for audiences. After a year filled with negative feedback, it faltered at the box office in March 2012, ultimately resulting in the resignation of Rich Ross, who was the head of Walt Disney Studios at the time, and the termination of plans for sequels.

‘John Carter’ Deserved Better

It’s unfortunate that John Carter doesn’t get the recognition it deserves due to its tarnished reputation. Despite having its share of flaws, it surpasses expectations. Initially, the narrative moves slowly, but gains momentum once John Carter arrives on Mars. The frequent flashbacks, while providing crucial character details, can occasionally disrupt the flow and would have been more effective in enhancing the early scenes. However, throughout the film, Stanton’s love for the Barsoom novels shines through, lending it a feel of being a passion project.

It’s beneficial that John Carter doesn’t get too caught up in itself, as it aims to provide a lively, action-packed adventure akin to Star Wars or Indiana Jones. Indeed, it successfully achieves this goal. Though the characters may not be the most intricate, they manage the story well enough.

Moreover, the production design and visual effects are stunning, and the action scenes, being Stanton’s first foray into live-action filmmaking, are particularly noteworthy in their execution.

Additionally, more than a decade has passed, and John Carter appears to be a relic from an earlier period for Disney. While the Marvel Cinematic Universe (up until Avengers: Endgame) has undeniably been entertaining, it’s hard to argue that most of its films haven’t been safe choices, targeting the broadest audience while only occasionally venturing outside the box. John Carter seems most similar to the first Pirates of the Caribbean, another old-fashioned adventure (initially considered a significant risk) that aimed to provide audiences with exhilarating thrills and went all out with its over-the-top, unapologetic style and grandeur.

In a 10-year review of the movie John Carter, The Hollywood Reporter observed that its failure marked a turning point for Disney, when they started focusing on safe bets instead of unique stories. This shift also signaled the end of an era where star power mattered more, and ushered in an age of capitalizing on well-known characters and themes like Jedi and superheroes over individual actors’ fame. Despite its flaws, John Carter was a charming, heartfelt adventure that unfortunately lacks contemporary representation in Hollywood. It’s unfortunate we didn’t get to see where the planned sequels would take us.

Read More

2025-02-10 03:37