|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I thought the film was far too inaccessible for someone mostly unfamiliar with the original stories it was based on. And in this case, as much as the series' fans might want to think otherwise, that's pretty close to everyone. The beginning of the film, instead of really establishing any characters or back story, jumped around way too much (at least that's what I recall my first impression being back when I saw it in the theatre), and it didn't improve from there. I don't think it helped that the director is a self-professed huge fan of the original stories; I think he assumed that the average person would go into this movie knowing something about it already; but 99.99999999% of the audience walked in knowing nothing at all, and left not caring one bit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mars is toxic. Has there ever been a successful film that takes place on Mars? The problem is two fold. Mars is a dead boring lifeless place if you film it realistically. Everyone knows there are no water canals, forests or bug like humanoids living there, so a fantasy approach is a hard sell. Star Wars and Star Trek work because they go to fictitious planets. ROBINSON CRUSOE ON MARS, THE ANGRY RED PLANET
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The current reality of what is known about Mars could be different from the way Mars was in Carter's time...explained by some yet-to-occur planetary catastrophe. Or, it could be explained as a parallel universe Mars. Or, the teleporting gem could be a time shifting device as well...with Barsoom being thousands or millions of years past.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|