Has anyone read the review of “John Carter” in The Guardian? Well if yes, don’t buy in to it if no don’t read it. I don’ t know what the most of you think when it comes to movie reviews, but I do not like direct statements like, the movie was a bore or the likes, I like more hidden comments like A. O. Scott at the New York Times gives. It gives the whole review a more neutral perspective and does not make it seem like it is trying to talk the movie down. Reviews should give the viewer an idea about the movie and not make them want to run away from it. IMDB viewers have voted the movie “John Carter” up to 7.0 points (March 12), which is surprising to me, since I would have guessed lower after most of the negative reviews I’ve read in papers about the movie. As long as a movie doesn’t suck and is really really bad, try to argument between what was good and what not and then make a statement on how you liked the movie, fact is a lot of people would probably go and see a bad movie that has one plus point and that being for example that the movie was entertaining despite all.
I am not a huge fan of 3D movies, they give me a headache for whatever reason, and I do strongly believe that 80% of the 3D movies do not have to be in 3D, but are only made that way to draw in more viewers. If things come flying at the audience and the likes 3D is just awesome, but just the pretense of making the movie more real on 3D is a lie. Most of the 3D movies are actually more enjoyable on 2D, you are not wearing annoying glasses and do not get a headache from watching the movie. The same goes for “John Carter”. The movie would have been way more enjoyable in 2D rather than 3D, however I still made it through and found it entertaining. It will never become one of my favorite movies, but at least I had fun watching it, which for example I can’t say about Avatar, which I did not enjoy and still to this day believe it to be a marketing success than anything else like all other James Cameron movies. I say this knowing that most of you will not agree with it. If you ask me what I liked about "John Carter" I’d have to say that from time to time it just feels good to watch a cheesy movie, where you know from the start on what will happend, but that still leaves room for a little surprise.
The effects in the movie were pretty good, the plot, the pre-history of John Carter and all that follows made sense, the love part was obvious and cheesy, yet fun to watch the clichés.
The movie is based on the book “The Princess of Mars” by Edgar Rice Burroughs and the screenplay stayed as true as possible to the book. This book was first published 100 years back.
It does not go as deep as maybe the Star Wars movies and Star Trek movies, since love is obviously the center of attention in this one, though the movie does include at least 2 other sub-plots. But I honestly don’t get what critics were expecting. I do not need to be a critic at New York Times or Washington Post to know beforehand that this movie will not be THE GREATEST MOVIE EVER MADE. Why? Well first it’s a big budget blockbuster movie and second it was produced by Disney, take a look at the dog with its cuteness factor an obvious Disney trademark, we have a princess, love and a happy ending, what else would you expect. When I go into a Disney movie that is what I expect and got that from this movie: ENTERTAINMENT, FUN, A DIFFRENT TYP OF FAIRY TALE ON THE PLANET MARS. Next thing we know critics will start criticizing "Aladdin" and "Mickey Mouse" as well.
If you seek entertainment a movie that does not make you think hard and leaves you happy at the end, go and watch it. If you seek a movie that gives you something to think about and has a deeper meaning in it then hardly any blockbuster is for you, but I would recommend you do watch foreign movies or independent movies, for example “This Must Be The Place”, would be more suitable there.
My rating for "John Carter" is 6.5
No comments:
Post a Comment