• Edlak
    link
    387 months ago

    John Carter of Mars

    • @CarlosCheddar
      link
      187 months ago

      If I remember correctly Disney lost a lot of money on that movie. I liked it though.

          • snooggums
            link
            fedilink
            127 months ago

            It is explained in the link, but to summarize: The director wanted to name it John Carter of Mars because yes, that it would make more sense to name it after the main character for movie audiences. Then some dumbass Disney exec made them drop the ‘of Mars’ part because they didn’t like the performance of other recent movies with ‘Mars’ in the name.

            The reason dropping ‘of Mars’ was stupid is because it just made it someone’s name which only works with a decent advertising campaign for a straightforward movie like John Wick.

            • @MiltownClowns
              link
              37 months ago

              When I hear John Carter I think accountant not martian revolutionary. So dumb.

          • @StuffYouFear
            link
            47 months ago

            If I recall correctly it was because of “Mars needs Moms” was such a dumpster fire they were afraid if would stain their movie if it has Mars in the name.

      • Jonny
        link
        fedilink
        107 months ago

        yeah, it was one of those movies that I think was ruined by the advertising. All the adverts at the time tried to make it seems like a star wars rip off, when it wasn’t anything like star wars really.

        • snooggums
          link
          fedilink
          97 months ago

          John Carter inspired the inspirations for Star Wars, including Dune. Heck, if they had advertised it as the story that inspired [list of movies] it would have gone a long way in making it clear that it wasn’t a ripoff.

      • @TehBamskiOP
        link
        7
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Working out the numbers on IMDB, the estimated budget was $250,000,000. Gross worldwide: $284,139,100. Total from these numbers: $34,139,100.

        The number(s) that are not represented, is how much Disney spent to market the movie. And since it was supposed to be their latest tentpole movie franchise, they must have spent the same amount they did on production (and perhaps more,) to market it. This means that Disney might have put $500 million or more into the whole project. Then they would have lost $215,860,900 or more.

    • @CarbonatedPastaSauce
      link
      English
      17 months ago

      I can see why it bombed. It’s one of the very few movies I ever turned off before it was over, and I watch a lot of movies. It was just so dull and had no soul. I could not bring myself to care about what was going on. Haven’t thought about it since, until this thread.