I agree with Frank. This movie does have heart and it's how the SW prequels should have been shot. It does have an old-school epic feel.
I have only read the first book in the series, but I found the film to be very much in the spirit of the book. The sets and costumes where great as were the CGI on the Tharks. It was refreshing to see old-timey pulp heroes and villains rocking the bare chest, colorful cape/shoulder pad look. I'm so sick of the 'organic', gazillion-moving-part robot look that's in every movie now (including half the trailers I saw...Avengers, Battleship...they seem to be fighting the transformers...yawn).
The wife really enjoyed it as well, and she's not a big fan of these type of genre films. They did a good job with the pacing, characters, and included several laughs without getting all slapsticky. The Kantos Kan rescue was worth the price of admission alone.
Glad I didn't take the 5 year old to see it though. Tharks shooting their own hatchlings, dead wives and children, etc would have been a bit much. Also, there were a few bits that the film could have fleshed out more...such as the 9th ray. He'd be a bit lost.
John Carter's fight with the Warhoon is the closest to a live action Frazetta painting that's been put to film. Fantastic.
I'd rate this up there with the best genre films based on books of the past 10 years. Lord of the Rings, Spider-Man 2, John Carter.
Went to see it this evening. Things I would say about it.
1) The Princess is by far the BEST thing about this movie. Her shocking blue eyes have been amped up by special effects no doubt but she is a beautiful women and did a fine job playing the part. I will IMDB her to find out what else if anything she has been in.
You want to watch the first couple of episodes of Tru Blood. Especially ep 4 or so :)
Finally got to see it last night, and I enjoyed it. No, it is not one of the truly great Hollywood genre films like The Dark Knight or Star Wars, but it is enjoyable and fun, and nowhere near the train wreck some have made it out to be. The movie I would say it is most similar to in quality is 1999's The Mummy, which is fun but falls down a bit under detailed analysis. While the Mummy is probably a tighter script and has more humor, the action is better in John Carter. I will get a copy for home viewing and watch it every few years like I do with The Mummy.
Wow Barney. I expected you to be a bit more open minded when it comes to movies. To judge John Carter without seeing it well that smacks of "Pulsipher-ism" (just made that up).
Besides, you dis Carter and then list 21 Jump Street the movie as something you'd prefer. What? 21 Jump Street was iffy at best 20 years ago on Fox. Remaking this is about as great an idea as the Yogi Bear movie.
Hunger Games looks great? Yah perhaps if I was 15 and didn't know that the movie was originally titled "The Running Man".
Lorax better than John Carter? Lets see..on this hand Ultra Hot Martian Princess...and on this hand grumpy teddy bear with Wilfred Brimley mustache selling a leftest world view...gimme the Princess.
More than a man. More than a machine. More than a fusion of the two.