>Some people might say "holy crap," but others will
only say "crap."
That's the human condition though. 1) Some people
are never satisfied, 2) No matter what, sooner or
later someone will screw it up.
>Some fans see the human implications of a character
and others only want to
see blood, boobs and lots of action. Trying to please
all those folks is an
Well, personally, I'm all for blood, boobs and lots of
action. I don't want to watch David Lean's Merchant
Ivory version of "Princess of Mars."
>A good director, who has a feeling, some kind of
feeling -- not your
feeling, or my feeling-- about the material and wants
to make it come alive
with some epic quality, will have to make it according
to his/her own
vision. That's what will make it be an honest piece of
work that just might
have a chance at some individual insight worth
Exactly!!!! This is exactly what I'm talking about.
A director with a feeling about the material, with a
This is my problem with the hollywood generics. You
can watch them all you want, but all too often,
there's no feeling. Zathura had no feeling.
>Yes, there's a lot of visual description in the
Barsoom series that needs to
be adhered to...
Some, but it's not necessarily overpowering. An
exotic Arabian nights desert fantasy scape, eight
legged horses, big ass green men... But on the other
hand, what does a Zitidar look like?
> but the rest of it is ripe for a LOT of
to make the characters come alive. The story is so
basic it's skeletal. Of
course there'll be battles, green men, fliers, swords,
and princesses, that's not really the issue. Will it
be a cardboard,
over-wrought videogame of a movie, or will it make you
believe that there
once was, might be, could have been a real Barsoom?
And a lot rides on the central character of John
Carter, a man who is the ultimate fish out of water, a
man who could cope with being in a tribe of green men,
a man who has a bloodthirsty streak, and yet a man who
is capable of generosity, nobility and passionate
stirring love. Someone that the audience can identify
as intimately as they identified with John McClane in
Die Hard, but as superhuman as a Shwarzenegger
>Trying to please the fans is an exercise in futility.
At this point the
property has just as much chance of being an FX-driven
slam-fest as it has
of being something with a little subtlety to it.
When I think of catering to fans, I think of the guys
who did Badman Forever and Badman and Rubin. It's
guys who look at the material, look at the fans, and
make it all a mocking in joke.
I think that its all about respecting the material.
Respect the material, and the fans will love it,
because in the end, they respect the material too.
>A lot of fantasy fans loved Jackson's LOTR, a lot
didn't. Some think anime
is the highest form of entertainment, others think it
is puerile, adolescent
I don't know many people who didn't like Jackson's
LOTR. I liked it and I hated the books passionately.
My only problem with Jackson's LOTR is that the third
movie kept on ending. A half dozen times I stood up
to leave with my coat... and it would keep on ending.
As for anime, it is puerile, adolescent and vapid. Or
at least the good stuff is. You don't want to see it
when its not, think Hentai.
>For my money, give me a director who knows how to see
what makes a concept
great and let him run with it. It's nice to get the
fans buzzing, but leave
them out of the creative decisions.
I can go with that.
So, Phil, in your perfect world, who would be the
great directors for John Carter?
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around