In defense of 'John Carter'

When it comes to movie companies cashing in with stupid movies or repetitive sequels, I don't hold back in my criticism. Studios that produce garbage like The Lorax, the Alvin and the Chipmunk series or Shrek sequels deserve all the mockery we can throw at them. When a studio takes a chance on something different and does so with a director looking for a new challenge, that studio should be applauded, regardless of how much money the film makes.

Which is why I'm going to defend John Carter.



I saw the film on its opening day. Me seeing movies on its opening day isn't directly related to that movie's quality. I've just learned that if I don't see a movie during its opening weekend, I probably won't see it in theaters. The opening day thing aside, I honestly did want to see John Carter. The early trailers had drawn me in (especially the first trailer that used Peter Gabriel's "My Body is a Cage") and I wanted to see what Andrew Stanton would do with a live-action film. Stanton's work at Pixar included Finding Nemo and WALL•E — he clearly knows what he's doing when it comes to animation.

So what'd I think of John Carter? Well, I actually really liked it. In no way am I saying that John Carter is going to be part of the 2013 Oscar conversation. It was fun though. The acting wasn't horrible, the CGI was top-notch and the plot was coherent. Yes, I realize this isn't a hugely ringing endorsement, but like I said, this isn't supposed to be an Oscar film. I'd compare the John Carter experience to the Tron: Legacy experience. It's a movie you go to to have a fun time.

The most interesting part of John Carter was to see just how heavily science fiction has borrowed from Edgar Rice Burroughs' series over the past decades. While watching John Carter, I repeatedly thought to myself, "Wow, they stole that from Star Wars?" or "Why would they take that idea from Avatar?" I then realized that John Carter has been around for a century. It was already part of pop culture when George Lucas wrote Star Wars or when James Cameron realized that he had to cobble together a plot to go along with the 3D CGI world he had created for Avatar. John Carter is basically the Rosetta Stone of science fiction.

The weekend box office estimates show that John Carter came in second place this weekend, making only $30.6 million to The Lorax's $39.1 million. John Carter clearly did not connect with moviegoers, which is sad. Like I said at the beginning of this post, when a studio and a director take a chance with a film, they should be applauded. Disney and Stanton took a risk with John Carter. The property had baffled numerous filmmakers and studios, getting passed around for decades. No one could figure out how to adapt John Carter for the big screen. Disney spent heavily to make the movie, dropping $250 million. Maybe they didn't market the movie right. Maybe they shouldn't have released it in March. Franchise launches are generally tentpole films that get released during the summer.

Regardless of what went wrong with John Carter, let's focus on what went right. Let's focus on the fact that the film got made to begin with. Just like with Watchmen, studios shouldn't get attacked when they take a chance on a risky film that doesn't perform at the box office. It's easy to green light the ninth Alvin and the Chipmunks sequel. Let's not criticize Disney and Andrew Stanton for the chance they took. We need more studios to take big risks when it comes to storytelling.