Disney didn't have the first clue how to market the film. They just thought they'd throw it out there and the Star Wars fans would eat it up. Forgetting -- or not knowing -- that the Star Wars fans would see John Carter as DERIVATIVE, not as one of the grandfathers of the genre. Like the guy on Usenet years ago who -- I kid you not -- complained that that Tolkien guy was ripping off Terry Brooks.
Plus? Disney TOTALLY FORGOT TO MENTION that 2012 is the 100th anniversary of the first publication of A Princess of Mars; they produced some of the most boring trailers I've ever seen out of Disney -- I'm just thinking that the creative home-team wasn't on-board with the project -- that Corporate had shoved it down their throats.
Plus, plus -- as many have said John Carter was just a stupid title. John Carter: Warlord of Mars, or as Mike says, A Fighting Man of Mars, or even Under the Moons of Mars -- all much more exciting, all in-canon titles that evoke the flavor of the Golden Age.
Da Mouse just blew it.
Or, yanno, maybe there's a contractual advantage to them. Maybe if they can show the first movie to have flopped, there's an exit clause and they won't have to pay the Burroughs family a piece of any future films made from the property. Maybe the Burroughs family was stupid enough to agree to receive a share of the "profits," and now things have been arranged so that there was a Really Big Loss and any "profits" from subsequent films will go "pay back" the loss, first.
Re: John Carter
Plus? Disney TOTALLY FORGOT TO MENTION that 2012 is the 100th anniversary of the first publication of A Princess of Mars; they produced some of the most boring trailers I've ever seen out of Disney -- I'm just thinking that the creative home-team wasn't on-board with the project -- that Corporate had shoved it down their throats.
Plus, plus -- as many have said John Carter was just a stupid title. John Carter: Warlord of Mars, or as Mike says, A Fighting Man of Mars, or even Under the Moons of Mars -- all much more exciting, all in-canon titles that evoke the flavor of the Golden Age.
Da Mouse just blew it.
Or, yanno, maybe there's a contractual advantage to them. Maybe if they can show the first movie to have flopped, there's an exit clause and they won't have to pay the Burroughs family a piece of any future films made from the property. Maybe the Burroughs family was stupid enough to agree to receive a share of the "profits," and now things have been arranged so that there was a Really Big Loss and any "profits" from subsequent films will go "pay back" the loss, first.