Disney's Failed Next Big Thing: John Carter

Summary

This video explores Disney's 2012 film 'John Carter,' a high-budget adaptation of Edgar Rice Burroughs' influential sci-fi novel 'A Princess of Mars.' Despite decades of development and the involvement of acclaimed director Andrew Stanton, the film became one of Disney's biggest box office flops, grossing $284 million against a $307 million budget. The video examines the production challenges, confusing screenplay, casting choices, poor marketing, and pre-release negative press that contributed to its failure. It also highlights the film's strengths, including impressive world-building, special effects, and respect for the source material, while reflecting on its potential as a franchise that never came to fruition.

Takeaways

• 📚 The 2012 film John Carter is based on Edgar Rice Burroughs' 1912 novel 'A Princess of Mars', which heavily influenced sci-fi franchises like Star Wars, Dune, and Avatar.
• 🎬 Disney spent decades and multiple attempts trying to adapt the story into a film, with the project only finally being realized under director Andrew Stanton.
• 🎥 Andrew Stanton, known for Pixar hits like Finding Nemo and Wall-E, directed his first live-action feature with largely unknown lead actors, including Taylor Kitsch and Lynn Collins.
• 💸 Production faced major challenges, including expensive CGI, extensive studio filming in England, harsh conditions in Utah, and multiple re-shoots, causing the budget to balloon to $307 million.
• 🎞️ Marketing was poorly executed, with trailers failing to highlight Stanton's credentials, the film's source material, or exciting visuals, contributing to public perception of failure before release.
• 📉 John Carter opened with $30 million and grossed $284 million worldwide, failing to recoup its budget and marketing costs, resulting in an estimated $250 million loss and becoming Disney's biggest box office bomb.
• 📝 Critics and audiences were mixed, with complaints about confusing plotting, uneven pacing, weak characterization, and a generic main protagonist, though Dejah Thoris was praised.
• ⚠️ Analysts suggest the film was 'doomed on arrival' due to pre-release negative press and poor marketing that undermined audience interest.
• 💡 Some theories speculate that Disney may have purposely limited the film’s promotion due to acquiring Star Wars around the same time, reducing competition for their major sci-fi property.
• 🌌 Despite its failure, John Carter was made with love for the source material, featuring impressive world-building, action sequences, and visual effects, earning it a cult appreciation among fans.
• 🚫 Plans for sequels were abandoned, leaving potential storylines unexplored, and the film now stands as a cautionary tale in Disney's attempts at launching new franchises.
• 🧩 Key criticisms include weak Earth-based framing scenes, a lack of romantic chemistry, and a main character who only becomes compelling late in the story.

Q & A

What is the origin of the story behind the film John Carter?

John Carter is based on Edgar Rice Burroughs' 1912 science fiction novel A Princess of Mars, which follows Civil War veteran John Carter being transported to Mars and interacting with its alien populations. The series influenced major sci-fi works like Star Wars, Dune, and Avatar.

Why did Disney take so long to produce a film adaptation of John Carter?

There were multiple failed attempts over decades due to technical limitations, production difficulties, and changes in film rights. Visual effects technology was not advanced enough in earlier decades, and rights shifted between studios until Disney acquired them in the early 2010s.

Who directed the 2012 John Carter film and why was he chosen?

Andrew Stanton directed the film. He was chosen due to his successful track record with animated classics such as Finding Nemo, Wall-E, and A Bug's Life, as well as his personal passion for the source material.

What were some of the major production challenges faced during the making of John Carter?

Challenges included extensive CGI, studio constraints, harsh desert filming conditions, confusing initial cuts, and costly reshoots. Post-production involved creating a mix of 2/3 live-action and 1/3 animation-heavy sequences, making the workload immense.

Why was the film's title changed from 'A Princess of Mars' to 'John Carter'?

The title was changed to John Carter to emphasize the main character rather than the original source material, although this decision was controversial among fans and filmmakers who felt it weakened the connection to the book.

How did marketing contribute to the film’s box office failure?

Marketing failed to highlight Andrew Stanton's background or the story's influence on sci-fi. Early trailers lacked action and context, while later ones overcorrected. Pre-release articles and negative press framed the film as doomed, discouraging audiences.

What was the box office performance of John Carter and why is it significant?

The film grossed $284 million worldwide against a $307 million budget (excluding marketing), resulting in an estimated $250 million loss. This makes it one of Disney’s biggest box office bombs in history.

What criticisms were commonly mentioned about John Carter?

Criticisms included uneven pacing, confusing plot, underdeveloped protagonist John Carter, weak Earth-based framing scenes, lack of romantic chemistry, and derivative elements that felt familiar due to the story's influence on other sci-fi franchises.

What aspects of John Carter were praised despite its commercial failure?

The film was praised for its faithful adaptation of the source material, world-building, impressive CGI, large-scale action sequences, supporting performances (notably William Defoe and Lyn Collins), and overall production ambition.

What theories exist regarding Disney’s handling of the film and its release?

One theory suggests Disney intentionally minimized support because it was negotiating to acquire Lucasfilm and would soon own Star Wars. This could explain the poor marketing, lack of merchandising, and quick labeling of the film as a failure.

How did the film’s character development impact audience engagement?

The protagonist, John Carter, was considered bland and generic, with limited backstory exploration and minimal initiative until the third act. This made it harder for audiences to connect with him, diminishing overall engagement.

What could have been done differently to improve John Carter’s chances at success?

Better marketing that emphasized Stanton’s credentials and the story's sci-fi legacy, a more streamlined plot by removing unnecessary Earth-bound scenes, casting more recognizable actors, and a smaller, more controlled budget could have improved its reception and potential for sequels.