Now here is a movie with cowboys and aliens that mostly works. After only one viewing of "John Carter," I'll be darned if I could follow exactly what is happening every step of the way, but it's so visually stunning that it hardly matters. This is perhaps the movie that "Prince of Persia" should have been. While it may not succeed at telling a completely coherent story for its entire two hour, twelve minute run time, it provides an experience that is far and away more vibrant than any of those "Star Wars" prequels. Director Andrew Stanton is a veteran of Disney and Pixar and with his first live action motion picture, we sense a familiar visual flare, and it is because of this that "John Carter" does so much so well.
Did you catch all the comparisons to other films in the first paragraph? At first glance, "John Carter" would appear to be inspired by the design and feel of those features, but when you consider that it is based off a series of novels from the beginning of the last century, perhaps it is the other way around. Not being familiar with the source material by Edgar Rice Burroughs, I can't say how faithful this Disney adventure is to his novels, but if it comes close, then I envy that man's imagination. Granted, I'm not sure I could tell you precisely what this film is about, but it sure has a good time getting where it's going. As far as I could surmise, John Carter (Taylor Kitsch) is a confederate soldier searching for a cave of gold marked by a spider symbol. We follow John as he rebels his way toward his goal, only to be captured by some fellow confederates (I think). We are treated to a pretty darned funny series of escapes attempts, that climaxes with a traditional chase on horse back. These early passages rival much of what we'd find in a traditional western and also set a specific pace for what's to come.
Wouldn't you know it, John stumbles upon his cave quite by accident, and before long is whisked away across space and time to "Barsoom" (Mars). Here he discovers the pleasures of a less-restrictive gravity, as he jumps leaps and bounds above what any other life form on this planet is capable of. This ability assists him when he gets into trouble with a race of green, husked creatures called the "Tharks." One of the leader Tharks, Tars Tarkas (voiced by Willem Dafoe) is captivated by John Carter, and subsequently dubs him "Virginia" afer mistakenly assuming that John's state of origin is his namesake. Pretty soon, John Carter of Earth discovers that the Tharks share Barsoom with many other races of Martians, some of them more human than others. The various races also seem to be at war with one another and I am afraid I must concede my plot description with that.
To attempt a plot synopsis of "John Carter" would confound my mind. There are so many characters whose names I can't pronounce and so many threads of plot that I found many of the goings on hard to follow. However, know this: there is eventually a prominant Martian Princess who inspires John Carter's, uh...talents and recruits him to fight a war that, by all rights, galactic or otherwise, is not his to fight. That he will do it anyway is a given of stories like this. Among the proceedings are multiple captures and escapes from each of the Martian races, some intriguing creatures and a whole lot of shooting and sword play. I realize that these faint descriptions may imply that I didn't enjoy the film, but by golly, I did. While it may be a mixed bag as far as plot and character development, the sheer scope and stunning visuals are so deceptively distracting that it elevates the film to a great entertainment. If you need a comparison, look at the merciless creative theft commited by "Avatar" and how even that film was lifted solely by its marvelous visuals.
If anything, I think what Andrew Stanton proves with "John Carter" is that he is a competent live action filmmaker. He may have a hard time juggling so many characters and plot politics, but that may also be a reflection of the source material. Again, never having read the novels, I can't say. Thing is, I'm not sure "John Carter" could be any longer or shorter than it is. If it went longer, the audience might lose patience and if it went shorter, the movie would be a mess. Early reactions were mixed and if you scrutinize it enough, it wouldn't be hard to see why. I just found the bombastic nature to be so enthralling that I was engaged for the entire movie. Even with all the familiar elements we've seen in other motion pictures, here I found them to be superior, especially considering they come from such an old source of inspiration.
There is plenty to take away from "John Carter" if you go in with the proper mindset. It is certainly better than its lackluster marketing campaign made it look and if you're willing to give it shot, it may just exceed your expectations. There is a lot of creative talent apparent on the screen and it would be a shame if it went unappreciated. I can tell you it is certainly more friendly to family values when compared to something like "Immortals" or "300." Disney does not have the best track record when it comes to their live action entertainments, but "John Carter" is a step in the right direction even if it falls just short. Perhaps the early scene showing John trying to gain his footing for those miraculous jumps is somewhat symbolic of what Disney is experiencing trying to sell this movie. Once he's able to get the hang of it, though, it's pretty awesome to behold. And those Tharks, they just keep asking for it.