When “John Carter” came out a couple of years ago, most critics hated it or were indifferent to it, and audiences stayed away; but it did have a few defenders, including me and Scout. We recently spent a half-hour on the phone talking about what a buoyant and sweet film it was to be so gigantic, and how the complaints that it was “derivative” of “Star Wars” and “Avatar” seemed ignorant of the fact that Burroughs wrote the original tales almost a century ago, when Mars was not just a nearby planet but a red blank slate upon which fantasies could be projected. Burroughs captured the imaginations of generations of future storytellers who cherry-picked his themes and images, and in so doing, unfortunately made them less remarkable. (Trivia note: the movie was originally called “John Carter of Mars,” but Disney dropped “..of Mars” when it became convinced that films about Mars never made money. Since “John Carter” was a box office failure anyway, I wonder what the studio executives told themselves—that if “..of Mars” had stayed in, it would’ve done even worse?)
Read the full article at: RogerEbert
