Discussion in 'Other Media (TV/Film, Comics & Games)' started by JunkMonkey, Jul 15, 2011.
I don't know, seems like this may be worth a look...
I can't see too many little girls being dressed up like her, at least in Britain with the rows of over sexualising children's clothing.
Well after the major downturner above, this review sounds a lot more positive:
Am feeling a lot more positive about this movie, though it still doesn't match what I think of as 'my' Barsoom. Next week!
Some words from the review:
> "planetary romance" – that hasn't been popular for well over half a century
Remember when they stopped making Westerns? Then started again?
> populated by bizarre creatures
Lets get rid of the creatire from Narnia and Lord of the Rings as well whilst we are about it.
> mind of a writer apparently endowed the ungrounded imagination of a small child.
Kids have great ideas which if we add some romance and sex to them make fantastic stories.
OK so I don't think that it is going to be the greatest film in the world. Howwver, it looks like being head and shoulders above a lot of the tripe put out today.
PS A pity the writer did post their name so I would run it through the web to discover what tosh they though was good.
My thinking there Michael was that this is a UK national newspaper where the usual response to SF is a lot lot worse.
Viewed in that context, this is a good review.
It's not perfect, but it is entertaining and could be a lot worse is the general impression I'm getting here in the UK.
He did, it's at the side. Here's a list of his articles.
Most kids of my acquaintance, mine included have fertile but utterly undisciplined imaginations, their 'Let's Pretend' play is often vastly complicated in detail but very simple in progression - and in this respect ERB is a very childlike writer who sets his characters going through the same sets of hoops and meeting the same situations time and time again with great attention to pointless detail.
Ferinstance: I've just finished Llana of Gathol and he's always stopping the action to tell us what the time is and how that relates to Jarsoomian (Earth) time -
Okay, part of that is padding (of which he is a master, "The incomparable Dejah Thoris" takes twice as many words as "My wife" and every opportunity he gets, ERB reels off people's lineage and ranks and titles. And a lot of it is laziness. Llana of Gathol is essentially four near identical shorter stories strung together with a minimum of editing (the same things being described within pages with almost identical phrases). He's not a complex writer. Or even a good one.
But in general, I'm with the Hobbit. Though, it must be said, The Guardian is more liberally inclined and knowledgeable about SF than most of the UK newspapers. I took that to be a good review. Made me a little less sceptical.
I agree, we just have to wait and see. You have to keep in mind that this was ERB's first pro writing gig so the material is a little flimsy. But it is a good rule of thumb to be wary of anything Disney does.
He does this an awful lot on his Venus series as well. If it was not for Wizard of Venus I would have probably cleared my copies.
I like that they didn't even attempt to give this sword anything resembling an edge....
I'll give it a shot.
Maybe it's on the other side. Like a knife.
Turns out the Graun wasn't impressed
One out of Five. Ouchies.
I just saw the movie - I liked it!
Yes, it is very Disnefied, and yes, it appears that huge chunks of the story were skipped and whatnot, but because I haven't read the books, it seemed fine to me and a lot of fun. Of course, it was also the first film I ever watched in 3D and that added a lot of fun factor to it. I probably could have watched anything in 3D and I would have thought it was great.
I'll give it this, it made me interested in reading the book which I will pick up this weekend. So, there.
From editor Lou Anders on Facebook:
Can't disagree with that, myself.
Have not seen it yet but still looking forward to it, reviewers, especially for SF films, almost never get it right. Does anyone recall the dreadful reviews Star Wars (A New Hope) got from the NY Times?
Yeah - but they were right.
JunkMonkey, you never fail to make me laugh.
Have you seen it? John Carter, I mean.
I don't see what's so dreadful about the NYTimes review of Star Wars (link to review here). The initial reviews for Star Wars were very positive, and the film was even nominated for the Academy Award for Best Picture in 1977.
I think Anders's analysis is also off. There have been plenty of popular, critically acclaimed science fiction movies that have not been rehashes of Alien or Blade Runner (E.T., Back to the Future, Terminator 1 and 2, Jurassic Park, 12 Monkeys, Star Trek, Rise of the Planet of the Apes, etc.). According to the NYTimes, Disney was hoping that John Carter would be their Avatar.
Well, they definitely didn't get that right. If I were to rate it, I'd give it 3.5 stars out of 5. It was fun, and that was about it.
Separate names with a comma.