John Carter

John Carter may be brimming with breathtaking audiovisual effects and lavish production design, but on the other hand, there is a fairly bland story (to what extent this is the fault of E. R. Burroughs, I really don't know), which is marred by a lot of clichéd dialogue and a few completely deaf spots. Andrew Stanton is much more suited to directing animated films that stand very tall within their genre (Finding Nemo, WALL-E). The lead actor, Taylor Kitsch, also doesn't have that much potential to grab the audience's attention - which (in my opinion) was mostly taken care of by Mark Strong (and that cute "dog"). In short, a film that is solid in terms of form, but not so much in terms of content. (08/03/2013)

Two stars for the technical aspect, otherwise, awfully dull. It kept me interested for about 45 minutes, then it lost me. An unlikeable hunk jumps around in Mars surrounded by four-armed green creatures, there’s the expected fateful encounter… and I don’t give a toss… If it was at least funny in any way! But no, just sterile boredom. Millions of dollars wasted and one of the most pointless blockbusters in recent years. (18/05/2012)

I resisted the John Carter phenomenon for many years, but the beauty of Dejah Thoris is immense, and in the Dynamite comics, it's also an enjoyable read. It was thus necessary for me to watch the film that was released for the 100th anniversary. The opening scenes, admittedly, are not great, and the introduction to the complex plot unfolding on several levels is not entirely successful. But once this predecessor to Superman and Star Wars rolls into one, it's awesome. The excitement of a pre-World War I future, the fascination with the unsuspected possibilities of craters on Mars - all these aspects are there for the taking and entice us. (27/06/2019)

Martian soap opera. Technically brilliant, which was to be expected of Stanton, but problematic in all other respects. John Carter is a return to the "great stories", but it does not update them in any way, and unfortunately, it is not even able to draw on their receptivity and magnetism. As a hero, John is controversial because his "superpowers" are quite doubtfully laid out - for a while he acts awkward, then suddenly he accumulates enemies into neat pyramids. Unfortunately, the enjoyment of similar heroes stems, to a certain extent, from predictability and the resulting sweet expectation of the triumph of the hero over those who have no idea. Carter can jump, but he is unable to excite. Also because Taylor Kitsch is pretty kitschy. And also because the script sinks into weak-minded phrases and useless nonsense, which is crowned by a bit of moralizing. There is even talk about the destructive impact of social differences in a film that cost two hundred million dollars. Weak is not only the chatter, but also the characters as such - harmless derivatives seen many times without any major appeal. I'd love to write that I saw a charming old-school sci-fi. In fact, I saw something much closer to The Phantom Menace than A New Hope - and unlike Lucas, Stanton doesn't have an open treasure trove of working mythology. He goes into debt, he promises, he promises, but he never pays it... Two moments from the whole film remain in my memory: a flashback that pays off nicely and a slap. But Carter and his creators really needed a lot more of them. Three stars out of respect for the technical aspects (and perhaps also out of respect for the courage to resurrect this literary mummy). (06/03/2012)

It's a wonderfully positive and magnificent affair, unfortunately with a very poor script and dramaturgy. I can only give it an average rating for a few things that will be deeply embeded in memory: the visual effects (a mix of Avatar and Star Wars), the adventurous music, and the mythology to some extent. Don't expect any great performances, because there aren't be any. Taylor Kitsch is one of the most plankish actors in Hollywood, but it's unbelievable to say that occasionally he is also likeable. I don't understand those 250 million and I understand that the return is meager. It's a classic popcorn movie through and through, but without transcendence, proper catharsis, groundbreaking ideas, or political incorrectness. And that's generally not in fashion today. In the 90s, though, it would have been a hit. (18/06/2012)