You've mentioned the budget a couple of times. I had read that the $250mil price tag included the $100mil marketing campaign.
Disney's $350,000,000 fart
- Thread starter Flicker Pictures
- Start date
You've mentioned the budget a couple of times. I had read that the $250mil price tag included the $100mil marketing campaign.
only going by what I've read on several sites and here:
http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=johncarterofmars.htm
maybe it only cost $150mil to make?
and on Variety
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118051232
http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=johncarterofmars.htm
maybe it only cost $150mil to make?
and on Variety
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118051232
Might be a generation gap thing here, but "geek" isn't really a negative term (or at least, it's self-depricatingly negative), and says absolutely nothing about one's physical appearance. In fact, a lot of the geeky types I know are really into martial arts (and bring the same sort of obsessive enthusiasm to that as they do to comic collecting or computer programming). Vin Diesel is the new-geek posterboy...he's in better shape than all of us, and regularly talks about playing Dungeons and Dragons!
By saying geek movie, I meant it appeals to people who like sci-fi, comic books, fantasy, etc. Geek culture. Not a bad thing, or saying that it has no appeal outside of it. Take Batman. Nolan's movies are VERY geeky in their respect for the comic books. But lots of people like them who wouldn't open a comic book. This happens to be a really busy year for that kind of film (last year was too, now that I think of it), with Avengers, Batman, Spiderman, all within the space of three months! And The Hobbit (Tolkien is VERY geeky...the man himself was; his narrative served as a vehicle for his invented languages and mythology).
Anyway, my point is this IS a geeky movie...but your point is it's not *just* a geeky movie, which is a fine point to make. After all, more people like Star Wars/Star Trek than the geek crowd!
<gets off soapbox made of comics and video games>
$250,000 is the actual production budget general consensus.
"What's It Cost? Initially planned at $200 million, the reshoots are said to have pushed it closer to $300 million, which allegedly means the film needs to clear $700 million worldwide to guarantee a sequel."
http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplayl...risk-being-the-blockbuster-casualties-of-2012
"While I don’t know that any film is worth a quarter of a billion dollars (and that’s not even counting P&A), JOHN CARTER is quite a good film."
http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/review-john-carter
"Disney's $250+ million 3D sci-fi epic, John Carter, did better than expected internationally,..."
http://movies.about.com/b/2012/03/12/box-office-report-the-lorax-beats-john-carter.htm
"Of course, that huge marketing push is part of the reason why a $250 million movie costs more like $400 million before one ticket is bought. But, if it works, it could pay off big."
http://www.slashfilm.com/john-carter-700-million-earn-sequel/
"What's It Cost? Initially planned at $200 million, the reshoots are said to have pushed it closer to $300 million, which allegedly means the film needs to clear $700 million worldwide to guarantee a sequel."
http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplayl...risk-being-the-blockbuster-casualties-of-2012
"While I don’t know that any film is worth a quarter of a billion dollars (and that’s not even counting P&A), JOHN CARTER is quite a good film."
http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/review-john-carter
"Disney's $250+ million 3D sci-fi epic, John Carter, did better than expected internationally,..."
http://movies.about.com/b/2012/03/12/box-office-report-the-lorax-beats-john-carter.htm
"Of course, that huge marketing push is part of the reason why a $250 million movie costs more like $400 million before one ticket is bought. But, if it works, it could pay off big."
http://www.slashfilm.com/john-carter-700-million-earn-sequel/
I stand corrected...
Either way, a quarter BILLION dollars is a LOT for a movie...
I just feel bad for Andrew Stanton. He's great filmmaker. If they would have pushed the fact that he directed this in the promotions (like they did for Brad Bird on MI:4,) it would have helped...
Either way, a quarter BILLION dollars is a LOT for a movie...
I just feel bad for Andrew Stanton. He's great filmmaker. If they would have pushed the fact that he directed this in the promotions (like they did for Brad Bird on MI:4,) it would have helped...
I'm going to get off this thread. I have had my say. I do not want to be redundant.
Do not take this the wrong way, Flicker Pictures. I want you as a friendly acquaintance. Someone I may be able to network with in the future, share ideas -- get along with and learn from. I am NOT a know-it-all.
I do have one last comment to end with -- I would advise those who can -- see the movie on the big screen. You will be glad you did. While I intend to buy the BluRay 3D pack the day it becomes available -- I plan to take friends and family to see this film several times before it leaves the theater. Something about that huge screen... with the awesome visuals and extraordinary acting...
Why?
Everyone has a right to their opinion. No matter how off fact and blind or deaf they might be. I would never slam or put down anyone's art, film or comments unless I personally have seen or heard their work or experienced the basis for another's comments.
Just as it would be unfair for the movie John Carter -- it would also be unfair for movies made by Flicker Films or anyone else (myself included).
Wisdom is something gained with time.
I am not the same person I was ten years ago or twenty or thirty, etc. My opinions evolve, (hopefully for the better), so I watch and read and listen to those from the past in order to offer a present opinion. Examples in film -- surface all the time. Music. Fine art, etc. Just like us as individuals, our culture is evolving. Opinions should be based upon current reality with perspective (when I say something was 'crap' -- I say it because I've read it or seen it or etc.). Etc. Sorry for the rant. Really sorry. I am neither rich or famous. I believe in being fair. Try very hard to be open-minded.
I would never, ever start a thread with "Disney's $350,000,000 fart". Especially, when I have NOT seen that 'fart'.
I repeat, that in my eyes and ears and reasoning, those artists behind John Carter, did a great job. I give it an A. Solid A.
IT IS ALL ABOUT STORY -- making it entertaining and real for the audience, I read that the L.A. Times reported that those paid viewers of John Carter, leaving the theaters (that were) polled gave the film a B+.
I concur with those that have paid and seen the movie.
Do not take this the wrong way, Flicker Pictures. I want you as a friendly acquaintance. Someone I may be able to network with in the future, share ideas -- get along with and learn from. I am NOT a know-it-all.
I do have one last comment to end with -- I would advise those who can -- see the movie on the big screen. You will be glad you did. While I intend to buy the BluRay 3D pack the day it becomes available -- I plan to take friends and family to see this film several times before it leaves the theater. Something about that huge screen... with the awesome visuals and extraordinary acting...
Why?
Everyone has a right to their opinion. No matter how off fact and blind or deaf they might be. I would never slam or put down anyone's art, film or comments unless I personally have seen or heard their work or experienced the basis for another's comments.
Just as it would be unfair for the movie John Carter -- it would also be unfair for movies made by Flicker Films or anyone else (myself included).
Wisdom is something gained with time.
I am not the same person I was ten years ago or twenty or thirty, etc. My opinions evolve, (hopefully for the better), so I watch and read and listen to those from the past in order to offer a present opinion. Examples in film -- surface all the time. Music. Fine art, etc. Just like us as individuals, our culture is evolving. Opinions should be based upon current reality with perspective (when I say something was 'crap' -- I say it because I've read it or seen it or etc.). Etc. Sorry for the rant. Really sorry. I am neither rich or famous. I believe in being fair. Try very hard to be open-minded.
I would never, ever start a thread with "Disney's $350,000,000 fart". Especially, when I have NOT seen that 'fart'.
I repeat, that in my eyes and ears and reasoning, those artists behind John Carter, did a great job. I give it an A. Solid A.
IT IS ALL ABOUT STORY -- making it entertaining and real for the audience, I read that the L.A. Times reported that those paid viewers of John Carter, leaving the theaters (that were) polled gave the film a B+.
I concur with those that have paid and seen the movie.
I thought the term "fart" was meant to comment more on the lack of box office receipts than the content of the movie. That's how I took it anyway...
Either way, I don't see it as anything to take personally or get upset about. We're all entitled to our opinions...
Either way, I don't see it as anything to take personally or get upset about. We're all entitled to our opinions...
All good, Don. No biggie. Yes, everyone is entitled to their opinion. Fully agree. When I posted the thread with the NY Times review I wasn't singling out you or anyone else or attacking anyone for seeing it, was I? Perhaps I should have added a ? after fart?
Either way, I'm really glad that you and many others are enjoying this film and give it high marks. That is great to hear.
Trailers, teasers, promotions and marketing can either win people over or turn them off and from the several trailers I saw I was not won over enough to warrant running out and seeing the film. Didn't say that I would never see it, just that it was a "probably/maybe" film for me.
I really liked Wall-E and think that Stanton and his team are incredibly talented. I'm sure it will all pay off in the long run!
Either way, I'm really glad that you and many others are enjoying this film and give it high marks. That is great to hear.
Trailers, teasers, promotions and marketing can either win people over or turn them off and from the several trailers I saw I was not won over enough to warrant running out and seeing the film. Didn't say that I would never see it, just that it was a "probably/maybe" film for me.
I really liked Wall-E and think that Stanton and his team are incredibly talented. I'm sure it will all pay off in the long run!
Exactly.
Same here.
Hollywood is in the business of separating fools from their money. It's about the Benjamins
Disney doesn't care if the reviews suck or not (the content fart), which JOHN CARTER may or may not subjectively be when reviews accumulate over the next six months and some hard data can be referenced.
If 2,000 people LOVVVVVVE IT!!!!! then they love it.
And if 20,000 say it sucks the sweat off dog balls then... the consensus is that it sucks.
Disney/Hollywood DOESN'T CARE!
Did it make their quarter 2012 Q1 and Q2 look good? Yes/No?
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/dis/financials/income/quarter
Critic and public content fart - Doesn't matter.
Revenue/income fart - All that matters.
Are those exact quotes from movie goers? Wow, people can be harsh...
Fart Logic. 
LOVVVVVE IT!!!
At least it wasn't of the SBD variety. That would have been bad, veddy veddy bad.
LOVVVVVE IT!!!
At least it wasn't of the SBD variety. That would have been bad, veddy veddy bad.
No, sir.
Figurative numbers to illustrate a point.
No one is ever going to make everybody universally pleased or even satisfied.
- POTUS gets elected 51% to 49% still makes at least 49% unhappy.
- Coke outsells Pepsi 10/1, Pepsi drinkers still love their brand.
- JOHN CARTER make X% of audience happy and Y% unhappy and Z% neutral.
Can't make everyone happy all the time.
Deal.
Now that would have been completely uncalled for.
Disney's $350,000,000 dog ball sweat sucks
Well... you know I'm all about being PC. (Excuse me while I vomit... )Now that would have been completely uncalled for.
Disney's $350,000,000 dog ball sweat sucks
Nah, you're using it wrong!
Here's how it goes: Disney's $350,000,000 Fart Film COULD Suck the Sweat Off Dog Balls
There. That's muuuuch better.
"Dog ball sweat sucks" doesn't make much sense.
Last edited:
Well not to get all zoologically anatomical on you, but the whole "dog balls sweat" thing is impossible, as dogs don't have sweat glands on their ball-sacks...
Just thought I'd throw that out there...
Just thought I'd throw that out there...
Perhaps if you referenced "monkey balls" instead...
I went to see it with my wife... in 3D... We both loved it. The 3D wasn't the throwing crap at the screen 3D, but the expanding the world 3D. The story we well told, and they took their time with it a bit achieving a nice balance between story and action. The trailers say nothing about the film.
The set pieces were Epic, huge scope and scale. Good humor moments blended with tragedy taking you on an emotional roller coaster, just like any good movie should do (so far as I'm concerned). Best film I've seen in a while.
The set pieces were Epic, huge scope and scale. Good humor moments blended with tragedy taking you on an emotional roller coaster, just like any good movie should do (so far as I'm concerned). Best film I've seen in a while.
Great to hear these positive reviews! I saw the trailer and thought it looked like more of the usual crap. Now I plan to check it out.