Mark Strong On Why He Thinks JOHN CARTER Failed; Says He Really Enjoyed The Movie

Even though the movie didn't have many fans, John Carter still had a few. Including actor Mark Strong, who was asked, and gave, his opinion on why the movie wasn't as successful as people would have hoped.

Follow Jake "WaylonJones":
By Jake "WaylonJones" Lester - 1/21/2013

Last year Disney rolled out John Carter, a movie based on the beloved books written by Edgar Rice Burrough. The film was not only a critical disappointment, but a financial one too loosing Disney millions of dollars. Actor Mark Strong, who played Matai Shang in the film, was on The Kermode and Mayo Show where he offered up his opinion as to why the film failed. Strong also went on to say that he enjoyed the film. Check out the full quote below.

"Well I really liked it, and I thought people were really harsh on it. It suffered from the fact that we have seen everything in it before. It was written at the turn of last century, and every thing Star Wars, Star Trek, even Tarzan all comes from it really. The idea of science fiction, he (Edgar Rice Burrough) was the granddaddy of it all really. So there was nothing in there that really surprised anyone, and it looked a bit dated. I really enjoyed it, my kids enjoyed it, and people I know enjoyed it."


As of right now, there has been no word on a sequel. With them film loosing Disney close to around 100 million dollars, the expectations for another movie are pretty low. Whatever the outcome maybe, make sure to check back here at CBM for the latest on anything John Carter.

free twitter icons

DISCLAIMER: This article was submitted by a volunteer contributor who has agreed to our code of conduct. ComicBookMovie.com is protected from liability under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) and "safe harbor" provisions. CBM will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please contact us for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. You may also learn more about our copyright and trademark policies HERE.
0
LIKE!
59 Comments
1 2
P862010 - 1/21/2013, 6:46 AM
pretty much agree everything from star wars,superman,avatar

took many things from john carter

w/o john carter there would be no superman
Jazza815 - 1/21/2013, 6:49 AM
I actually loved the film, its a shame it did very badly, but the budget was ridiculous, some of the cgi was pretty substandard, but it deserves a sequel, just scale the budget back by about $125 Million
Jolt17 - 1/21/2013, 7:01 AM
True words, although my biggest gripe about the movie is that it tried to expand its scale, while the book simply puts the main focus on the sword-and-princess element - that the makers' attempt came at the cost of the book's classical charm. But for what it is, I still greatly enjoyed the movie, and besides the marketing problems, Mark Strong nailed it there.
DukeAcureds - 1/21/2013, 7:06 AM
It lacked structure and presentation and that's one of the reasons that people were put off, by it. I think if it was tailored a lot more to the structure that we're used to, though, it might have ruined it.
Also, a lot of people thought it was just an effects driven action film and that's what they were expecting, then, when they saw it they didn't see anything special about the effects or the action sequences.
As a film that works to please the general movie-going audience and it's basic, shallow expectations, it ails.
But as a geek-pleaser, it's perfect. I'll be watching this for some time to come, I'm sure. It's failings are completely inconsequential to me. It's awesome and I know it.
xXkryptoniteXx - 1/21/2013, 7:12 AM
I like the movie it was fun and very entertaining. I think that why people hate it was the fact that it had life in mars when really there is none. I think that the movie could have done a distance planet rather than mars. That would have gotten people to come and get lost in the fantasy.
jessepostal - 1/21/2013, 7:19 AM
It failed to get people in the door because no one knows or cares who John Carter is, than it failed by keeping the people who did go see it in there seats and spreading the word with a mediocre movie.
Shamo - 1/21/2013, 7:20 AM
couldn't even finish it. perhaps a better lead actor and actress (whats his face and whats her face are forgettable at best) could of saved it.

amazing actor though. its a shame all his "blockbusters" turn to duds. because he's always the most impressive thing about the movie. Marvel or Fox should tap him for a role. he's pretty much THE villain actor these days.
JanAustin - 1/21/2013, 7:37 AM
John Carter was a brilliant film! And it 'DOES' have thousands and thousands of fans from all over the world who want to go Back To Barsoom. Fans are discovering John Carter everyday through DVD and TV now. I see them come in on Twitter on Facebook everyday. And all looking for a Sequel! There is much more of a following and fan base for John Carter than people realize.
Opt1mu5Pr1m4l - 1/21/2013, 7:44 AM
John Carter for me was an awesome movie. It's disappointing to know that it did really badly at the box office and disney loads of money. I would be gutted if a sequel isn't made soon.
gillri - 1/21/2013, 7:44 AM
John carter, Robin Hood and Green lantern!?

Mark Strong has been in alot of expensive flops
KnobGoblin - 1/21/2013, 7:49 AM
Movie just plain sucked. Bad script, bad casting for the lead, and ugly production design.
GodzillaKart - 1/21/2013, 7:51 AM
John Carter had plenty of fans, and was a good film...just not a film that justified a 250,000,000 budget.
SpideyQuad - 1/21/2013, 7:57 AM
I enjoyed it very much. Disney dropped the ball terribly in my estimations on the marketing end. Much like Dredd in that you really according to judge the movie by its poor cinematic run. M
KnobGoblin - 1/21/2013, 7:58 AM
They should've gone full on Frazetta with the look of the movie.







CaptainPresley - 1/21/2013, 8:00 AM
John Carter was great! Great script, great casting and beautiful prodcuction! My second favorite film of 2012.
MrDonut - 1/21/2013, 8:07 AM
It was entertaining, shame it flopped...
Whovian - 1/21/2013, 8:13 AM
Love, love, loved that movie!
sameoldthing - 1/21/2013, 8:18 AM
It was waaay better than the box office results.
Not every good movie is a hit & obviously many crappy films make a ton of money.

What bugs me is that Taylor Kitsch is a much better actor than say Channing Tatum who for some reason keeps getting roles in successful films.
Taylor deserves a super successful movie at some point.

Lynn Collins is very good actress & so beautiful.
Sorry guys but Emma Stone & Kristen Stewart get a lot of attention but those girls are not as attractive as Lynn.
Richardness - 1/21/2013, 8:19 AM
I enjoyed the movie. Thought it was just a fun sci-fi. And going in knowing a bit of its history really helped. I think one of its biggest flaws was its marketing campaign. Just wasn't delivered very well.
Danbojohnj - 1/21/2013, 8:34 AM
I liked it,watched it again a few weeks ago,much better than folk gave it credit for.Certainly better than a few comicbook adaps from last year I could mention.
Show4God1 - 1/21/2013, 8:51 AM
It flopped because of critics. People who didnt see it in theatres, who have seen it after the fact, really enjoyed it. It was a great film.
Maximillion - 1/21/2013, 8:55 AM
I liked it, I think it suffered from really, really lousy marketing!! IMO
beane2099 - 1/21/2013, 9:16 AM
I think it's one of the best pieces of scifi I've seen in a long time. It's like seeing 20,000 Leagues on the big screen. There was a lot of politics going on behind the scenes that lead to bad marketing for this movie. It's a shame. IMO Andrew Stanton is one hell of a director and he deserves another shot at live action.
Ceejay - 1/21/2013, 9:36 AM
It was outstanding entertainment ruined by the dumbest marketing campaign of recent years and the worse studio statement made after release that I can ever remember.

1: Changing the name from "John Carter and The Princes of Mars" to simply "John Carter" turned the whole thing into a presentation gimmick. Instead of a title that suggests its genre, they delivered a title that made consumers ask themselves "What, who gives a shit?"

2: The day after its lousy opening weekend, some dumb Disney exec cam out with a statement about how the film is going to loose them several million. DUMB ASS, you never declare your movie still born in its first week, you might as well tell everyone to stay away!

3: The hottest woman on the screen this year in the film and she didn't even make it on any of the terrible posters for the equally terrible ad campaign.

4: The USA cinema-going public! The movie did 73% of its business internationally, a half decent $200 million for a brand new franchise. But domestically in its own country it did a mere $73 million because of the stupidity above. To put things into perspective, the first Twilight movie made slightly less than John Carter internationally with $199 million. Yet Domestically it made $192 million, enough to show the studio its worth investing the potential growth of the franchise and look what happened, the final Twilight movie made $823 million worldwide.

Scifi fanboys especially needed to back their own genre and go see this on opening weekend instead of sitting on the fence with their piggy banks waiting for Dark Knight and Spider-man. It could have been the start of a very successful franchise!
ToTheManInTheColdSweat - 1/21/2013, 10:00 AM
John Carter was meh-okay, for a 250 million movie that's a fail of epic [frick]ing proportions. RIP taylor kitsch career, say hi to sam worthington on the way down.
ForeverPowerful - 1/21/2013, 10:11 AM
It wasnt bad, but it sure as hell want good. Really hope we dont see Kitsch again, he's just...not good. And if he has the potential, he needs to stop taking crappy movie deals. Like Battleship....really?
RexDartEskimoSpy - 1/21/2013, 10:23 AM
Taylor Kitsch is the Casper Van Dien of the 20teens. He has quite a few made-for-TV movies ahead of him.

Poor Mark Strong just can't catch a break. He needs to do a fluffy romantic comedy or something to get out of the British villain rut.
Shamo - 1/21/2013, 10:25 AM
he was also a horrible Gambit.

him and Ryan Reynolds need to both stay away from these movies.
poop23 - 1/21/2013, 10:27 AM
Wasn't so bad.

Though its really getting annoying to me how they keep getting all full of it saying that that is the ultimate sci fi story that started it all. Like as if no one would've ever come up with a scifi story if it wasn't for John Carter
CharacterAssassin - 1/21/2013, 10:32 AM
It really wasn't that bad.
MrNiklander - 1/21/2013, 10:46 AM
Okay let me tell you why it flopped MARKETING I mean Disney produced it Disney for crying out loud I mean whatever happened back at the times when you put commercials on cerials[Yeah cerials but it worked] With John Carter we got some lame trailers without explaining the story. Saw it on Blu Ray the other day man IT DESERVES A [frick]ING SEQUEL
InfiniteMonkey - 1/21/2013, 11:10 AM
They should have made it rated R. Sex sells.
TruGrave - 1/21/2013, 11:17 AM
Its pretty sad it was such a great movie too i hope they look the other way like with tron legacy and do another anyway
NillaSoul - 1/21/2013, 11:36 AM
My problem was it wasn't alien or Mars like enough and was too close to Avatar but we know why now. Plus it looked like it was filmed near Yuma; where's the RED planet? And I really think they over did it on his ability to jump, he's from Earth not Krypton. Having said that, I don't think it deserved to be slammed as harshly or to become the biggest financial flop ever, it did have some good action. It's too bad, it could have made for a good franchise I think.
Durf - 1/21/2013, 11:36 AM
I liked the movie. It's a shame that the movie failed, but that can be attributed to 2 things: Terrible marketing and Taylor Kitsch. Not because Kitsch is a terrible actor necessarily, but he is a death sentence to blockbusters

@CeeJay: add Taylor Kitsch to that list. the bane of blockbuster success

@Suspense and @Nomis: Yeah I just recently saw Dredd, and that movie is awesome! Deserved a lot more than it got
Montrovant - 1/21/2013, 11:41 AM
Marketing was not the reason this movie flopped.

Bad script, substandard acting, unimpressive effects and weak action scenes are the reasons this movie flopped.

It was hard to sit and watch the whole thing. I don't know how the original books were, but the story from the movie was both weak and full of ridiculous inconsistencies. And the dog! Why do these big budget sci-fi movies feel the need to add the incredibly stupid comic relief characters that don't work?

Maybe the books were wonderful, but this movie deserved to flop.
SkaarJones - 1/21/2013, 11:52 AM
I enjoyed the movie and have watched it many more times since it hit cable. I am not sure where the disconnect was, but it was a very cool flick. It did mix a lot of things from other movies that have already been seen, but I think it did so successfully. It just didn't draw the crowds it needed to match the budget. I think critics tried to bury this movie for some reason and it kept people from getting out to see it.
SkaarJones - 1/21/2013, 11:56 AM
@niklander - Great point! I forgot about how horrible the marketing campaign for this movie was. I had really not planned to see it and was not excited about it at all. Some of my friends (also comic book fans) told me I needed to see it, and I was pleasantly surprised. The marketing was definitely garbage.
Kyos - 1/21/2013, 12:32 PM
I really enjoyed the movie, just bought the blu-ray. I might have wished for a stronger lead actor, but all in all it was one of the few summer blockbuster type action movies with comedic elements I actually liked. I thought it had heart and I'd wish for a sequel!

It's really amazing how badly they [frick]ed up the marketing for it, though... :(
TheSoulEater - 1/21/2013, 12:33 PM
It was an underrated movie, one which i enjoyed.
1 2

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.