John Carter is a perfect example of a film that gets treated completely unfair by the media, who deem it a complete failure before it even gets released to the public. Yea, the marketing campaign wasn't exactly aces either, but this was a film that was deemed a failure before it even was released. There is this notion in the industry that money defines a film's quality, and while there is no denying its importance, they are not as highly correlated as one would think. I'll say it right now, John Carter was a better film than other blockbusters to come out around the same time like Hunger Games, for example. I will be the first to admit that the film isn't great by any means, but it's a solid adventure film that does a good job at taking the viewer on an epic adventure to a mystical world. One of the main things that I really liked about this film is that it really did not cater to the audience in it's narrative, really unfolding in a way that isnt very typical for a big blockbuster movie. Early on in the film, it's borderline confusing but I believe this was all part of the plan to put the audience into Carter's point-of-view The special effects are solid and the action is decent, though not exceptional. The character of John Carter is a reluctant hero, and I thought Taylor Kitsch did a good job in the role. This is a fun film that really got unfairly treated by the media, and it's a shame cause as far as big budget spectacles go, its one of the better ones.
Love of all things cinema brought me here.