Take our user survey and make your voice heard.

'John Carter' loses $200 million for Disney


The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2012 AFP

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

Nowhere mentioned is the fact that the story was originally written by Edgar Rice Burroughs (the creator of Tarzan) nearly a century ago. (OK, so I'll mention it.)

That a great screenwriter-director with a solid string of winners like Stanton should suffer a failure like this is very interesting. I am now very interested in seeing it.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

...about a Civil War veteran transplanted to Mars...

Umm.....Enough said.

7 ( +11 / -4 )

Absolutely no pity for Disney. If they went bust, I would celebrate. If you want to know why, look up "Mickey Mouse law". This company has far too much money and power on its hands.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Umm.....Enough said.

It sounds no more ridiculous than if you described any other sci-fi/ fantasy movie or book into one sentence. Or even just mentioned a title. How about this one: A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court

It seems the critics had better reasons to deride the film.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

. The film was made from the book called "A Princess of Mars" written by "Edgar Rice Burroughs".

You can read the book on line at


Havn't seen the film yet, so can not say if it is close to the original story or miles from it.


3 ( +3 / -0 )

wow... in the real world, if you lose $200 million you are screwed, but not in the magical world of Disney

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Joss Whedon's Firefly series, took a similar theme, with cowboys in space, in a universe 400 years into the future, after the earth had been exhausted by famine, wars and environmental problems. However, the series was extremely well-written, and went on to make the cult movie 'Serenity.'

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I saw the movie a couple of days ago. It was OK and as with most book to film productions, a lot had to be cut out.

Here is a reading of the book "A Princess of Mars" It's free and and downloadable.


2 ( +2 / -0 )

What a surprise, yeah right!

It's a not-so-secret Hollywood secret that movies are always losing money. It's called "Hollywood Accounting."


"Expenditures can be inflated to reduce or eliminate the reported profit of the project thereby reducing the amount which the corporation must pay in royalties or other profit-sharing agreements, as these are based on the net profit."


"Techdirt has the details on how it was possible for the last Harry Potter movie to lose $167 million while taking in nearly $1 billion in revenue. If you ever wanted to see 'Hollywood Accounting' in action, take a look."

1 ( +1 / -0 )

"Pacing," "plotting," and "characterization"? BAHAHA!

It's a movie about a guy with a sword killing space aliens in cool ways. Yeah--I am going to see it but am expecting to see a guy with a sword beating up monsters, not proper verisimilitude.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I think a martian transplanted to the Civil War would have been a lot more entertaining!

1 ( +1 / -0 )


Cowboys and Aliens

1 ( +1 / -0 )

If i recall correctly, Edgar Rice Burroughs was a pioneer in terms of writing fantasy/sci-fi whose writing surely inspired many others who tried to follow in his footsteps. I grew up reading all his books and loved them! Like so often happens, Hollywood gets its clutches on a great story and warps into something "new". Haven't seen the movie, but it is a shame what happened to some truly original ground-breaking sci-fi literature.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I am surprised they made this film so close on the heels of the Traci Lords version.


0 ( +0 / -0 )

Critically-panned fantasy adventure film “John Carter” is expected to lose $200 million for makers Disney,

It soesn't matter. You see the Hollywood types are against other businesses with their tax breaks, but yet they get them all the time. They have already lobbied Congress and will get some type of tax refund or stimulus to recover the loss.

I am for tax breaks for companies, don't get me wrong. But I find it interesting that an industry like Hollywood and the big time producers and actors decry business and for wanting lower tax rates, and yet they will film series and movies in different areas that offer them the incentive with reduced taxes to do so. The film "Battle for Los Angeles" was actually filmed in Louisiana. Yet try to reduce taxes for everyday people and the Hollywood machine goes into action.

A good book to read on Hollywood that is recent is called "Hollywood Hypocracy." Interesting reading.

But I am sure the mous will roar back. All they have to do is reach into their vault, and release a classica on Blue Ray and they will make the money back up.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If they went bust, I would celebrate

I would guess that the 144000 Disney employees world wide would not be celebrating with you, nor would the combined charities to whom Disney donates nearly $200 million annually.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

A good book to read on Hollywood that is recent is called "Hollywood Hypocracy." Interesting reading.

A correction, the book's title is "Hollywood Hypocrites" and there is a chapter in it that goes into details on how Hollywood indutries are at the front of the line getting taxpayer funded bailouts.

Disney will not go broke with this film.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Seeing the commercials on U.S. television for this movie, I still didn't have a clue what it was about. I haven't seen the movie, but I can say that the marketing didn't help.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sequel will be John Bush. Now that will lose money and will result in missing WMD.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Civil War veteran transplanted to Mars....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Just make another Pirates of the Caribbean and get your money back....problem solved.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Critically-panned fantasy adventure film “John Carter” is expected to lose $200 million for makers Disney

Who couldn't see this coming from a mile away?

(Apparently the execs at Disney, who should be fired along with the Marketing department.)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

those books are fun old pulp fiction, i wonder how it will do in DVD/Blu-ray sales

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What disappointed me the most was seeing the film in comparison to Burroughs' work, and how Disney and Stanton completely slaughtered the original material. Believe me, if you're a fan of the original novels, you'll undoubtedly be disappointed. It was a fun movie to watch, good entertainment, but Stanton & Co spat all over Burroughs' work.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So exactly why is this movie a disaster? I honestly would like to know.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

200 million? Wow, that 's even more than Michael Ovitz cost the company.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So exactly why is this movie a disaster? I honestly would like to know.

I haven't seen the film, so I cannot comment as to the quality thereof. (I have heard that the adaptation attempted to do to much rather than focusing in on a few major elements of the novel, for what that's worth.)

I can say that the marketing was simply terrible. They started off with the original title - the intriguing "A Princess of Mars." However, the marketing guys decided that boys would not be interested in seeing a movie about a "princess", so they changed it to "John Carter of Mars" - John Carter being the main character. This, however, was not satisfactory as the marketing guys decided that girls would not want to go to a movie about "Mars." So the title then became the incredibly dull and non-descriptive "John Carter." Furthermore, the advertisements for the film did very little to explain who "John Carter" was, what the story was about, or why anyone should care. (They just sort of had a dude in a loincloth hopping around and fighting hordes of CGI aliens with a sword.) The original books had been a landmark sci-fi series, and it seems like Disney imagined that people would recognize the name and want to see the film. Only problem was the books were so old that the vast majority of movie goers have never heard of "John Carter."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Triumvere, thank you. Marketing takes a lot of money, so it must be an unusual case for Disney. I thought they are the best at that.

The only John Carter I knew was Noah Wyle in ER, so I was wondering what this film was all about. Maybe they will do better in Japan. The US poster with John Carter in a desert-like background doesn't suggest SF, but the Japanese version having the face of John Carter and spaceship in the background looks pretty interesting enough to watch, but if its another Cowboys and Aliens.... maybe not.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You are all missing a great movie especially on the big screen. Dont wait for DVD see it now !

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"The Avengers"

Unfortunately Emma Peel is not going to be in it.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

All Disney has to do to recoup losses is increase the price of its goods and entrance fee by 1 yen in Tokyo Disneyland and it'll make its money back within the year.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

hahahahahaha. That is all.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Ok the book was a big hit way back in the day (1920's) but that does not mean it will be a hit in 2012. If Disney can say they are going to make an operational loss of over $200m then they must have calculated the movie to make a lot more, for a serious return on investment. In fact I think that figure will make it the biggest movie flop in history as Cutthroat Island lost $147m.

Stanton is a very good director, but it sounds as if the marketing and executive powers to be at Disney really meddled too much and in the end lost the plot.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

techall, just as every dark cloud has a silver lining, every delicious feast results in a turd.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

This movie was almost as big a loser as Jimmy Carter...

-9 ( +3 / -12 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites