the ride is Pirates of the Caribbean and it made a lot of money iirc
eta: o man I hope I’m not being whooshed
Not quite a whoosh. They made Pirates and Haunted Mansion about the same time. One was a hit that turned into a franchise. The other was a flop. So right now, making a movie based on a theme park ride has a 50-50 track record.
I had not heard about the director having this much power on that film. Where did you read about this? I’d like to read it too.
Here’s a detailed article on the fiasco.
John Carter puzzles me-I agree, the movie going demographic (16-30 year olds) probably never had a clue who the hero was.
I don’t think the Edgar Rice Burroughs Martian tales had been published since the 1970’s-they people who know them were probably SciFi geeks.
Plus, the stories are so damn old-we’re talking pre -WWI. I don’t see how kids reared on video games and computers are going to like a plot about a Civil War officer entering a medieval-type Barsoom.
Of course this is not true. The Princess of Mars page on the Internet Science Fiction Database shows over 30 editions - print, digital, large print, library, every possible format - between the 1970s and the date of the movie. It’s in the public domain, making it available for anyone, and anyone has been busily publishing it virtually every year. You’ll find similar pages for all Burroughs’ other Mars books.
I don’t know who exactly has been the audience for it but the thought that the books and the characters weren’t available is ridiculous.
Damned if I can find it now but I once read a scathing article about why internet/comic/geek audiences should be ignored when it comes to movie making. Tons of hype over films like Kick-Ass, Suckerpunch, Serenity and famously Snakes on A Plane and then crickets at the box office. Everyone says how awesome it’ll be and how they’d be all over a movie like that until it actually comes out to tumbleweeds and cobwebs.
When I first saw the trailer for this (which I thought was a hot mess, honestly–boring and didn’t really say anything at all about what the movie was about beyond “it has monsters and people fighting”) my first thought was “Why did they remove the ‘of Mars’ from the title?” I mean, come on. If you haven’t heard of the books at all (and I’d imagine many younger people haven’t), how stoked are you going to be to watch a movie about some guy named “John Carter”? The could have come up with a more generic name, but only if they’d called him “John Smith.” At least the “of Mars” part tells them it’s…well…on Mars. And it might nudge a vague memory of hearing about the books, where “John Carter” on its own would be (IMO) less likely to do so.
They may actually have been all over the movie. It’s just that there are so few of them. They make a disproportional noise on the Internet but are a tiny percentage of the entire population. A successful comic book may pull in 100,000 readers. A movie hit needs 5,000,000 to go over opening weekend. The difference explains nearly everything. A hit has to draw from more than the core audience. Otherwise it could have 100% penetration and still seem like a flop.
“John Carter” immediately makes me think of ER and Noah Wyle.
I can’t be the only one.
I know exactly what you’re talking about and looked for it myself for this thread and couldn’t find it either. IIRC after the films you listed there was one more which all the fans trashed and went on to make hundreds of millions in the box office.
I got a “poll” on the phone the other day from Nielsen something/movies? I was on the phone and answered questions about movies I’ve seen in the last 2 months and last year (apparently they didn’t like my 0). However, they asked if there were any children 7-14 in the house that they could talk with. They then preceded to ask each of my children in succession a list of already released and soon to be released and then other concepts for movies (horror movie about a haunted high school, robots from another planet, etc) and for each A. Had they heard of it? B. Did they want to see it? C. Do they know any of the characters? D. Would they go to see it if it were made?
I made them do it on speakerphone and interjected whenever movies or concepts that were either too violent or scary were discussed - horror movies that were clearly rated R, etc.
My interview time 30 seconds, theirs 20+ minutes each! All they wanted were ages, gender, and ethnicity. So I would say there definitely some serious market research as far as trying to understand what pre-teens are interested in seeing.
You forgot Country Bear Jamboree.
And now they advertise “sneak previews” in the newspapers. How the hell is it a sneak preview if you read about it in the paper? No. The way it works is, you buy a ticket for Movie A, and go in and sit down, and the manager/promoter/PR person comes out and says “You’re not going to see Movie A; you’re going to see a sneak preview. If you don’t want to see it, we’ll give you your money back, but you have to decide now. You’re in or you’re out.” And then you watch Movie B and fill out a card telling them what you thought about Movie B, and changes may or may not be made to Movie B based on audience reaction. That is a sneak preview.
The way it worked back when they came to my hometown was: the movie would be the one advertised, but there had been no marketing campaign. Maybe one in eight movies shown in a 2-theater town (so, one movie a month) would be one that hadn’t been released or even had trailers in theaters yet. I got to see quite a few movies before my big-city cousins did.