Monday, September 15, 2014

The Giver (2014)

 
Dystopian fiction is all the rage these days as young adult books like The Hunger Games and Divergent have massive fan bases and just beg to be adapted to the big screen. So why has Lois Lowry’s 1993 immensely popular book taken so long to make it to theaters? The quick and easy answer is that some stories just aren’t meant to exist out of their original medium and I’d say The Giver is a perfect example of this, now I’m not saying The Giver is an impossible book to adapt but much of its charm and power derives from the written word and its connection to the reader. Much of this is lost in a visual medium.

Jeff Bridges spent twenty years trying to get this book made into a film, with his father Lloyd Bridges to play the title character, but he had a hard time getting studio backing. My guess is wiser heads saw the difficulties of translating this particular book to the screen, but now with films like The Hunger Games making huge box office bucks I’m guessing the risk seemed worth it. Sadly the lacklustre reviews and box office results prove they probably should have kept the book on the shelf a bit longer, and director Philip Noyce could have found something else better to do with his time.

evil streep 
Meryl Streep is the Wicked Witch of The Community.

One of the bigger changes from the book is the ramping up the ages of the kids, in the book the three main children are twelve years old while in the movie they shift that up to sixteen, and like in Percy Jackson and the Lightning Thief I’m betting part of the reasoning here is for the ease of shooting with older actors as the restrictions when shooting with minors can be very costly to a production. This I completely understand, and was ready to let slide, but then they also completely changed the characters of the kids. Hell, I can’t even recognize anybody from the book in this movie.

giver 
Did we really need a love story subplot?

The hardest thing in creating a futuristic society is getting your audience to understand how this particular world works; you have to do it in as fast and economical way as possible so as to get on with the main plot of your story. In a book an author has multiple ways of getting that information across but in a movie you can easily run the danger of the infodump on the audience, which could cause them to just give up, but if you don't give them enough you could be leaving them completely confused.

 "Just sit right back and you'll here a tale a tale of a fateful trip."

In this “Community” there are no emotions, colors or anything but a nice bland engineered sameness, it’s when Jonas (Brenton Thwaites) starts seeing colors that he realises he may be different from everyone else and which is what leads him to be selected as “The Receiver of Memories.”  An important job with grave responsibilities.  Being as the movie spends so little time showing us how this society functions we don't know how grave or how important this job is.

giver bikes 
Welcome to Pleasantville.

The Giver was not an action/mystery book but that is exactly what we get here. In the movie Jonas must fight the system, expose it to his friends and escape to the outside world, while in the book his growth through the acquisition of memories is subtle and profound and does not lead him to punching out is best friend. His best friend Asher (Cameron Monaghan) becomes a Drone Pilot and ends up chosen to hunt down Jonas; this is so far from the book Asher that it almost had me abandoning the film at that point to go and make a nice cocoa and calm myself down. Fiona (Odeya Rush) plays the girlfriend that Jonas tries to expose the conspiracies to; he also gets her to stopping taking her medication so she can fall in love with him.

Soylent Green is People 
"Soylent Green is people!"

His parents are played, and completely wasted in this movie, by Katie Holmes and Alexander SkarsgĂ„rd who both provide almost nothing to the story.  In the book the relationship between Jonas' father and the baby Gabriel is crucial to understanding how this society functions.  In the movie he is just bland euthanasia guy, while Katie Holmes is given the sole job of just staring worriedly at things.  Also Taylor Swift is in this movie for some reason.

the giver gives 
Jeff Bridges seen here explaining to Brenton that story and character don't matter.

Jeff Bridges isn't terrible so much as looking incredibly bored most of the time and really isn’t given much to do anyway; he’s just a plot expository device and does almost nothing to motivate Jonas. The movie also has this ridiculous idea that the baby Gabriel, who Jonas finds out will be euthanized,  has same birthmark that he and The Giver have as if they are somehow genetically marked to be memory receptacles. I think not wanting a baby to die is enough motivation we didn’t need any more reason than that.

the giver desert escape 
Gone Baby Gone.

The design of The Community in the movie is fine, that until we see it is on some lost plateau above the clouds where below it and beyond the desert are huge energy pylons of some kind that keep memories from getting into The Community. That is some seriously unnecessary bullshit here and only added so we can get ridiculous scenes of Jonas escaping and running from drones.

Giver tracter beam 
"Beam me up, Asher!"

I just recently read the book, on recommendation of a friend, so I’m really curious as to how long time fans of this book who read it and loved it as children take to this Hollywood version.  My advice to those that have not read the book, please avoid this movie and head to your local library or book store and pick up Lois Lowry's amazing novel.

the giver book cover 
A fantastic read awaits you.

Sunday, September 14, 2014

Dracula (1979)

Before there were vampires being interviewed and well before any of them sparkled there was John Badham’s Dracula in what must be the earliest truly romantic vampire movie. Now Dracula has always been tied with sexuality but this 1979 version, based on the Broadway play by Hamilton Deane and John L. Balderston, is more geared toward a female perspective than what you got from Bram Stoker’s novel.
nice chest 
“It’s ladies night every night at Castle Dracula.”

This version of Dracula begins with the wreck of Demeter as the ship is tossed by a storm while some horrible creature kills the crew. So right off the bat *snicker* we diverge wildly from the novel as this movie skips Transylvania completely. No poor Jonathon Harker being harassed by the Brides of Dracula and no final showdown between our heroes and Dracula on his home turf.

Dracula-1979 
We may not get Castle Dracula but Carfax Abbey is pretty awesome.

The other major change is what I call “Character Scrabble” as in this version Mina (Jan Francis) is the first London victim of Dracula and it is Lucy (Kate Nelligan) that becomes the focus of the battle between Dracula and our heroes, a complete opposite of the book.  This Mina is also the daughter of Van Helsing (Laurence Olivier) and not engaged to Johnathon Harker (Trevor Eve) while Lucy is now the daughter of Doctor Seward (Donald Pleasence) and is the one engaged to Harker. These changes seem completely arbitrary and made more to separate themselves from the original than for any artistic reason I can imagine.

A sickly Mina is the one that finds poor Dracula washed ashore after the wreck of the Demeter and she clearly immediately has the hots for him, and can you blame her? Sadly she is only the Count’s appetizer and it is Lucy that is the films main course.

sexy dracula 
Can you really blame her?

Dracula (Frank Langella) is more your Jane Austen type character than the one from Stoker’s book, he is a monster as so far as it goes that he must feed on blood to survive, but he and Lucy do seem to genuinely fall in love throughout the course of the picture. Langella originated this version from the aforementioned stage adaptation and he made it quite clear that he would not be wearing fangs or dripping blood in this movie, so the studio had to make due with vampire Mina and Lucy popping fangs.

Mina 
Mina, not the most attractive of vampires.

Gone in this version of Dracula are Lucy’s suitors as the cast is cut down to just three heroes; Van Helsing, Harker, and Seward. At no point do these guys ever come across as a threat to Dracula, and Harker is so boring one cannot blame Lucy for picking Dracula over him.

The Men 
The vampire hunters.

It’s Mina’s death that summons the great Doctor Van Helsing and one can only thank the stars and John Badham for casting the great Laurence Oliver as he is just fantastic in the part, as well is the scene stealing presence of Donald Pleasence who is always a welcome addition in any movie. With these two great actors you know you’re in for a fun time and they both elevate the material.

Dracula_1979--021 
“Jonathon, I think we should see other people.”

Now as good as Oliver and Pleasence are the star of this film is clearly Frank Langella as the title character. Langella’s Dracula is pure sex on toast. With flowing capes and low cut blouses, this Dracula is designed to get women’s juices flowing and almost every frame he is on he exudes raw sexuality. His vampire powers are almost unnecessary as what Victorian woman could resist his pure animal magnetism.

dracula-1979-01-g
Look into my eyes.”

It’s the love story between Lucy and Dracula that really makes this version stand out among its peers, this Lucy is a strong and capable woman that though Dracula attempts a little vampiric mesmerism it is soon clear to all that he need no such tactics to win Lucy.
dinner with Dracula 
Dinner with the Count.

The one scene that is a bit of an oddity is when Dracula and Lucy finally do the nasty.  For the most part the film is a true gothic tale but once our two leads start to get it on we get an abstract laser light show.  It is a pretty enough visual, created by fame credit sequence designer Marice Binder, but doesn’t really fit in with the tone of the rest of the movie.

dracula sex 
Pink Floyd’s Dracula.

The heroes will of course try and thwart the evil Count.  They will hunt down his minions, figure out his game plan and do whatever it takes stop to his centuries long reign of terror.
Dracula19793 
Staking your daughter has got to be tough.

This is a rare Dracula movie that ends with a strangely hopeful ending. The Prince of Darkness, having escaped Carfax Abbey with Lucy, battles Van Helsing and Harker in the hold of a ship bound for Romania. Van Helsing is ironically staked by Dracula during the struggle but with his dying act he sends a cargo hook into Dracula’s back allowing Harker to haul him up out of the hold and into the sunlight. We see Dracula scream in rage as his skin begins to burn but we don’t get the shot of him turning to ash as has happened to poor Christopher Lee on so many occasions, what we see is a cape fluttering away on the winds. The music and Lucy staring up at fluttering cape with a wistful expressions makes one believe that she thinks he got away and that maybe someday they will be reunited.
dracula-79-badham-04-g 
Hoisted on his own petard.

John Badham’s Dracula is an excellent entry in the filmography of the world’s most famous vampire, Frank Langella’s creature is more charm than horror and vastly entertaining.  Another thing I shan’t forget to mention is the score by legendary film composer John Williams which is just hauntingly beautiful and quite memorable.

dracula-1979-dracula-20671869-1200-819

Sadly the poor box office results showed that maybe the public weren’t quite ready for a “tragic” vampire love story.  At least not quite yet.

Thursday, September 11, 2014

John Carter: Book vs Movie

John Carter (2012) was based on the Edgar Rice Burroughs novel A Princess of Mars and is most notable for its disastrous box office than the actual quality of the film, and I think most can agree that the biggest stumbling block the movie had was that it was saddled with one of the worst marketing plans in film history. Trailers and posters both seemed intent on hiding the fact that the planet Mars was involved at all, which is kind of a strange thing to do when your movie is based science fiction fantasy series based almost solely on Mars. But because the heads of Disney were still reeling from the failure of the film Mars Needs Mom, and somehow got it into their heads that it was the use of the word “Mars” in the title that caused that film to flop, they did their best to dance around the Mars aspect in their ads. The studio heads are not totally to blame for all this as Andrew Stanton’s trailers, which he insisted show little of the story, failed to hook audiences and most likely the biggest reason for its poor box office results.

A movie based on Edgar Rice Burroughs Barsoom series had been in the works in Hollywood for decades and would make fascinating film all on its own. Bob Clampet, of Looney Tunes fame, back in 1931 wanted to adapt A Princess of Mars into an animated feature. Burroughs was excited with that notion as at the time animation would be about the only way one could do that book series justice. Sadly the test footage shown to local exhibitors did not receive much positive feedback and the project was shelved.

It wasn’t until 1980 that Disney acquired the rights to the book and approached John McTiernan (Die Hard) to direct and Tom Cruise to star as John Carter. Realizing that the current movie magic still wasn’t up to the task of bringing Barsoom to life McTiernan exited the picture and John Carter went into limbo again.
legend-722544l 
This could have been John Carter.

Next up at bat was Robert Rodiguez at Paramount with the plan to use the same digital backlot technology that they used for Sin City. Studio politics ended this teaming which they led Jon Favreau entering the picture. Favreau wanted to remain faithful to the books but also wanted the first movie to contain; A Princess of Mars, Gods of Mars and Warlord of Mars and to use mostly practical effects with as little as much CGI as possible. I love Favreau but cramming three books into one movie is a bad idea. But he went on to make Iron Man so that worked out for the best.
Disney Studios re-acquired the rights and Pixar director Andrew Stanton was given the task of once again trying to bring this Martian epic to life. Stanton was a professed Burroughs fan and always wanted to see the Barsoom stories on the silver screen, so what went wrong?

jcm_logo-fin 
The lame title for one.

To best understand we look back to 1912 when Edgar Rice Burroughs released his story Under the Moons of Mars which was published in serial form under the pen name Norman Bean to protect his reputation because Burroughs himself believed the book to be “Too outlandish.” Much to his surprise his story of a Confederate soldier on Mars went over like gangbusters with the public and his
 publishing company decided to later collect the stories in novel form and title it A Princess of Mars.

Princess_of_Mars_large

And here begins the first problem in adapting A Princess of Mars to film. The book is basically a travelogue of adventures with no main plot or story structure, John Carter arrives on Mars, has exciting adventures and that’s about it. That’s a pretty simple format and as a monthly serial this works great but as a two hour movie not so much, so Andrew Stanton and the folks at Disney had their work cut out for them. How do you remain faithful to the source material but still make a structural coherent movie out of it. It’s a balancing act that many have tried and more have failed.
Another difficulty in translating a story written back in the early Twentieth Century is that audience sensibilities change, things that were wildly acceptable in 1912 may not fly so well 2012. The biggest change the movie John Carter made is that of the lovely Martian princess Dejah Thoris who in the book is your standard damsel in distress but in the movie she is a kick ass action hero and a scientist. I whole heartedly agree with this change, Lynn Collins as Dejah Thoris was damn awesome and she gave us a character I think worthy of starring in her own movie.
dejah thoris movie 
Dehah Thoris, Badass!

As much as agreed with that change there were a few a really questionable choices throughout the film and the one that stands above them all like a sliced Achilles is that of the film’s opening…or should I say openings.
bad kitty 
“Bad kitty!”

The book A Princess of Mars starts out with a forward by Edgar Rice Burroughs stating that he has decided to publish this manuscript about his incredible Uncle John Carter and his adventures on Mars. He describes his Uncle as to have been this most amazing man; great horseman, excellent swordsman but still one of the courtliness men he knew. Upon hearing of his Uncle’s death Burroughs arrives at his estate to find instructions about putting the untreated body of John Carter into a strange tomb that can only be opened from inside and that this manuscript would remain sealed and unread for eleven years and not divulged to anyone its contents for twenty-one years after his death. The forward is roughly three pages and is beautifully economical in its set-up.
The movie John Carter  starts off with a prologue giving the viewer a crash course history of Martian or Barsoomian politics, of how only the city of Helium stood against the evil world conquering forces of Zodanga and how for a thousand years they kept them at bay until one day the Therns, led by priest Matai Shang (Mark Strong) stepped in to offer the Zodangan’s villainous leader Sab Than (Dominic West) an ultimate weapon and a plan to marry the Princess of Helium (Lynn Collins) thus ending this destructive conflict.

johncarter036 
Evil Therns.

The adventures of John Carter (Taylor Kitsch) is your basic fish out of water story, the hero is the readers or viewers identification figure and we learn and explore wondrous new lands with him, we do not need a six minute prologue explaining the machinations of the people of Barsoom. We will find out about these things along with Carter. In Star Wars: A New Hope our hero Luke is part of this expansive universe and knows much of what is going on so we get an opening crawl getting us up to speed with what’s going on but then the rest we find out while traveling with Luke. In the case of John Cater he knows as much about Mars as we do and so we should be finding information on this strange world at the same time as he does. Also the opening crawl at the beginning of Star Wars: A New Hope was not six minutes long.
The movie then jumps to Earth and we get the Forward that was in the book with young Edgar Rice Burroughs (Daryl Sabara) inheriting his Uncle’s estate and receiving the manuscript of his adventures. This section uses some elements from the book while introducing the idea that there are villains on Earth that were pursuing John Carter.

john-carter-movie-image-19-600x400 
“Dear Diary.”

Chapter one of the book has John Carter, late of the Confederate Army, telling how while working as a prospector he discovered a mysterious cave while running from a group of Apaches that killed his partner. In the movie we get this overly long set-up where he is arrested by the Union Army who wants his expert skills to fight the local Indians. Carter just wants to find this mysterious “Spider Cave” and its rumored gold and has no interest in fighting. He escapes and while fleeing the army runs into the Apaches and a nasty skirmish which ends up with him hiding in the vary cave he had been looking for all along. Nothing says well written script then starting off with a major coincidence, and it doesn’t stop there because in the movie it just so happens a Thern was using the cave transport system as Carter arrived. The Thern activates his transport medallion after being mortally wounded by Carter and accidentally sends John Carter to Mars. If that many contrived elements in so short of a time is required to get your heroes journey started you best chuck the script and start over.

medallion prop JohnCarter 
Space MacGuffin

In the book there is no Thern in the cave. There is no MacGuffin transport device that moves a person between planets, Carter enters the cave and is overcome by some sort of gas and is paralyzed, when he tries to force himself up off the cave floor he ends up yanking himself out of his own body.  This would freak anyone out.  A naked John Carter looks down at himself wondering if he is dead, but he feels solid enough and so wanders out of the cave to look up at the stars. He notices Mars, god of war, bright and mysterious in the heavens and he reflects on how it has always fascinated him. Whoosh bang he is whisked off to Mars. Why the movie thought we needed such a huge set-up for getting our hero to Mars is beyond me. If your audience is already set to go along with your story about life on Mars you really don’t need to spend that much time getting us there.

johncarter-truth1
Able to leap tall plot devices in a single bound.

Now that we are finally on Mars/Barsoom let us take a quick look at the differences in plot. In the book as I said early it is more of a travelogue of adventures rather than plot centric story. Almost immedialty after his arrival Carter is discovered by the Tharks, the green men of Mars, who think he is raiding their hatcheries (all the humanoid races on Mars lay eggs) but quickly upon realizing a naked unarmed individual isn’t much of a threat they bring him to a nearby dead city. His ability to leap great distances due to the planet lesser gravity as well his great fighting skill earns him great respect and titles among the Tharks. It’s when the Tharks shoot down a Helium science vessel and capture the Helium princess Dejah Thoris that things for Carter get complicated. The Tharks hate the people of Helium, the red men of Mars, and when Carter finds out that they plan to take her to the Jeddak of the Tharks, where she will most likely be tortured to death. This is something he will not allow to happen so he decides to rescue her. That is the plot in a nutshell. Everything that follows is basically a serial adventure of Carter trying to escape with the Princess and getting her home to her people. Many misadventures befall them along the way but that’s the gist of it.

JOHN CARTER 
“Come with me if you want to live.”

The movie has John Carter encounter the Tharks in roughly the same way though they take his jumping ability as some kind of indicator that he is a “prophesied one” that will lead the Tharks in battle, but how Carter encounters Dejah Thoris is vastly different here. In the movie it is a Zodanga craft that attacks Dejah Thoris’s ship not the Tharks, and it is John Carter who saves her from the clutches of Sab Than the evil ruler of Helium’s mortal enemies. The movie’s plot is basically Carter escaping the Tharks with Dejah Thoris and then eventually helping defeat Sab Than and the evil Therns. And when I say “eventually” I mean it takes forever for him to step up as a hero. So now let’s take a look at the characters and how the differ from book to movie.

johncarterfrankfrazetta

 John Carter: In the book John Carter is a bit of an enigma, he states he has no memory before the age of thirty and has always appeared the same, without ever aging. When we later learn that the humanoid races on Barsoom are basically immortal we start to wonder just where John Carter originally came from. That he and Dejah Thoris are able to have a child together is another clue. As to John Carter’s character in the book he is your standard stalwart hero that cannot stand by when he says an injustice, he will fight against incredible odds if he thinks someone is being wrongfully treated. His superior strength and fighting skills keep him and his friends alive on more than one occasion.

Taylor Kitsch 
Taylor Kitsch is John Carter.

Movie John Carter is slightly different animal, gone is any hint of a mysterious origin and it is sadly replaced by a tragic past where is family was killed during the Civil War and so he has decided to no longer fight for anything. Your character is going to lose points right off the bat when you introduce him as an ex-Confederate soldier and then add on the “Reluctant Hero” trope, this is a mistake. John Carter is Superman on Mars; we don’t need him to be a brooding hero with tons of emotional baggage. When Dejah Thoris tells Carter that she is being forced to marry the evil Sab Than he refuses to help her, it’s not his problem, he’s done fighting. That’s not a reluctant hero that’s a dick.

johnca48

Deja Thoris: As mentioned earlier this is the one great improvement Disney makes as in the book she is your standard damsel in distress and her beauty and unbridled love for John Carter her only real character traits. In the movie she is shown to be an incredible fighter as well as a scientist, not something common in science fiction heroines. Movie Dejah Thoris is being forced into marriage with Sab Than by her father and she tries everything to get out of it, while book Dejah Thoris agrees to marry Sab Than to end the war even though her people would rather die than see their beloved princess marry for any reason other than love. I kind of like the book better here as it gives her a nice noble aspect in what was mostly a generic heroine, but overall action movie Dejah Thoris is the fuller, richer character in the end.
Dejah wedding dress 
Lynne Collins is Dejah Thoris.

Tars Tarkas: In the book the Tharks are green four armed humanoids that stand fifteen feet tall and sport nasty tusks, movie Tharks are only a bit taller than humans but everything else is the same and one can only say that cinematically a fifteen foot dude talking to a six foot human would be hard to film. So that comparison is wash as they work for each’s medium. As for the great and noble Tars Tarkas himself, well Willem Dafoe gives a very nice performance but sadly because of the added Zodanga plot his character in the movie isn’t given much backstory. In the book Tars Tarkas is notable for being one of the few Tharks that has the rare ability to feel compassion, friendship and love towards others. He had a forbidden love affair that resulted in a child which was incubated in secret (Like in the movie Tharks children are not raised by parents as out of the hatchery no one knows whose kid is whose), while off on a campaign his lover was exposed and killed for the crime of childbearing.  Even under torture she never revealed who her lover was and was able to hide their child among the other newborns before she was executed. In the movie Tars Tarkas is Jeddak (head chief) of the Tharks while in the book he was just a low level chieftain but who becomes Jeddak with the aid of John Carter.

JC_gallery_tarkasonbarsoom_940x529

Sadly movie Tars Tarkas is given no backstory, he does have a daughter that he has kept his parentage a secret from his people as well the girl herself, but because the movie spends very little time explaining how Thark society works it doesn’t come across as that big of deal. In the book Tars Tarkas eventually challenges the Jeddak who murdered is true love and when he defeats him Tars Tarkas becomes Jeddak of the Tharks, while in the movie John Carter kills the evil Jeddak who usurped Tars Tarkas giving his friend his throne back. So basically we get another “White man is better at everything” moment.

John-Carter-Trailer-Still-05 
Willem DeFoe is Tars Tarkas.

Sab Than: In the book Sab Than is just a minor obstacle on the way to true love while in the movie he is one of the chief villains that John Carter must defeat. In both the book and movie Zodanga has been warring with Helium for ages but in the book things didn’t go south because of any interference from magical Therns, no it was when the Helium navy went out to look for their lost princess and left the city vulnerable to a siege. Sab Than barely is a presence in the book, he is just this dude she agrees to marry to end the war. This takes place during the last third of the book when Dejah Thoris believes Carter is dead and when she marries Sab Than and John Carter turns out not to be dead things get complicated. Carter immediately plans to murder Sab Than for the crime of marrying his beloved but Barsoomian culture will not allow Dejah Thoris to marry a man who murders her husband so that plan is out. John Carter goes with the easy work around by having his friend Tars Tarkas kill Sab Than in battle.

JOHN CARTER 
Dominoc West is Sab Than.

Movie Sab Than is almost cartoonishly evil, when the Therns show up to rescue him in the middle of a battle he was losing he turns the super weapon they give him on the Therns themselves. Dick move dude, also very stupid.  It of course doesn’t work on the Therns and he agrees to their aid in conquering Barsoom. Their plan involves him marrying Dejah Thoris and then murdering her on their wedding night. I think someone may have watched The Princess Bride. It’s hard to compare these two Sab Thans because the book version has almost no character at all, but as he is only a small part of the book he didn’t need much of one, while the movie Sab Than is your typical two dimensional villain that we see all the time, but as he is one of the main antagonists in the movie he needed to be better written.

Matai Shang: The character of Matai Shang as portrayed in the movie has to be the greatest departure from the books, in the movie the Therns are this mysterious bald race of manipulators that move from planet to planet, controlling things from behind the scenes. They had discovered the Ninth Ray which powers their weapons and teleportation devices and its Dejah Thoris’s discovery of the Ninth Ray that has the Therns so eager to see her dead. This is not at all how the Therns operate in the book and the Ninth Ray isn’t a weapon but the very thing that operates the Atmosphere Factory which keeps Barsoom alive.
Matai-Shang-john-carter-260212 
Mark Strong is Matai Shang.

The race of Therns do not appear until the second book in the series Gods of Mars, though A Princess of Mars does make references to aspects of the religion that the Therns are the head of, and they are not that pale bald shape shifters that we see in the movie. The Therns are bald, actually completely hairless, they wear blonde wigs to hide this fact. Also they are not pale like in the movie but Caucasian white like an Earthman, but their appearance is a minor quibble compared to what the movie changes or leaves completely out. This leads us to one of the most intriguing element of Edgar Rice Burroughs’s Barsoomian books and that is it’s religions.

fraz102 
White Apes in the Garden of Eden.

The Holy Therns and their churches promote that down the River Issus is the Barsoomian equivalent of Heaven and when one has reached 1,000 years of age, or has just tired of living, they take a pilgrimage down the River Issus to the Valley of Dor where they would spend their rest of eternity in a land of plenty. A nice step up from the arid landscapes of Barsoom. A little wrinkle in this is that it is all total bullshit as the Valley of Dor is inhabited by ferocious white apes and plant men that devour you immediately upon your arrival, those that survive or are spared by the Therns become slaves.

Gods of Mars 
Fighting the plant men in the Valley of Dor.

John Carter has a hard time exposing this evil society because to say anything against is blasphemy and punishable by death, also if one was to escape the Valley of Dor and return home that would also be considered a blasphemous act and you would be put to death. Even stranger is that Carter discovers that the Therns themselves worship the Goddess Issus who turns out to be a living ancient Black Martian who rules over “The First Born”  who are most notable for being one of the oldest humanoid races on Barsoom. This race of black skinned Barsoomians survive by pirate raids against the Holy Thern, taking their brightest and most beautiful subjects to be their slaves. So basically religion on Barsoom is a giant pyramid scam and gives us quite the insight into how Burroughs himself thought of religion.
John Carter by Gino dAchille

This certainly would have made a better movie; sure a plot about generic evil guys wanting to remove smarty pants princess so they can continue to play puppet masters with a bunch of one note villains isn’t terrible, but wouldn’t an adventure where the hero exposes the world’s religion to be a giant fraud be vastly more interesting?  Or maybe that’s just me.
john-carter-mars1

I liked John Carter, it pays better homage to Burroughs than Lucas did in his Star Wars prequels, and it certainly didn’t deserve the box office drubbing it got, but if they had just trimmed up that terrible opening, and maybe gotten a little ballsier with the script, we could have ended up with a great franchise.  As for the cast I liked pretty much every actor in their perspective roles with the possible exception of Taylor Kitsch as John Carter, now he wasn’t terrible but he just seemed a little young for the part and when standing next to James Purefoy  who played the Helium soldier Kantos Kan I couldn’t help but think that Purefoy may have been the better choice to play Carter.  I’m sure the writing of the characters had something to do with it but it just seemed that Purefoy was having a lot of fun with his role while Taylor as John Carter was not.

john-carter-woola 
Woola, man’s best friend.

Special shout out to Woola the Barsoomian dog that befriends John Carter, in the book he is this awesome beast that is loyal and fierce beyond compare and generally just a kick ass companion, while in the movie he is exactly the same thing. Every moment in the movie with this lovable hound was a joy to watch, and it is only sad that with the truncated version of Tharks in the movie we don’t get the sense as to why Woola so loves John Carter. Still Woola is amazing either format.

There you have it, my rather long winded diatribe on John Carter and A Princess of Mars, I hope you found it if not educational at least a little entertaining.