Above, Andrew Stanton, director of Finding Nemo and Wall-E discusses the creative process at Pixar. Stanton is currently working on a live-action version of Edgar Rice Burrough’s John Carter of Mars, a classic sci-fi series from the 1910s through 1930s. Despite previous rumors, John Carter will not be a Pixar film, but instead a Disney-produced film that will be rated PG-13.
The series was previously going to be produced by many different directors, including Robert Rodriguez (Spy Kids), Kerry Conran (Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow) and Jon Favreau (Iron Man). This version looks like it has a good shot at actually hitting the silver screen by 2012.
Because John Carter has been around for a while, several classic artists have taken a crack at an adaptation, including Ray Harryhausen (Clash of the Titans, Mighty Joe Young) and John McTiernan (Die Hard). But the first adaptation attempt was by Looney Tunes director Bob Clampett, who intended to make John Carter into the first full-length animated feature. If it had not been abandoned due to studio pressure from MGM, who wanted a comedy version, it would have predated Disney’s Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs as the first feature-length animated film by five years.
Below, Clampett shows some of the test footage that was created in spare time. (A bonus for other fantasy dorks: Classic pulp cover artist Frank Frazetta also did lots of John Carter work which would have been used as the visual touchpoint for Rodriguez’s adaptation.)
It will be interesting to see how “A Princess of Mars” is re-interpreted. The book has many elements that would be somewhat unpalatable to contemporary audiences.
I hope the character of the noble Green Martians is respected.
“I replied in our good old English tongue merely to convince him that neither of us could understand the other; but I noticed that when I smiled slightly on concluding, he did likewise. This fact, and the similar occurrence during my first talk with Tars Tarkas, convinced me that we had at least something in common; the ability to smile, therefore to laugh; denoting a sense of humor. But I was to learn that the Martian smile is merely perfunctory, and that the Martian laugh is a thing to cause strong men to blanch in horror.”
Love the John Carter, really excited about this project! I hate to nitpick though, but why is this on Gadgets?
Nerdler: No reason, really, except that Gadgets is more my home than the front door, and when I feel like there’s a post that makes more sense over here than I the front door I put it here. It’s all the same big family though, right?
These are all on Google Book Search now, you can get your Dejah Thoris fix in line at the bank.
Personally I just don’t get this. There’s a million other great sf stories out there that aren’t so antiquated that would make fantastic movies. Why don’t they make one of those?
I can’t understand making JCoM unless it’s done in the style of sci-fi from the age when it was written. I mean, is it really so recognizable a brand name to warrant a big budget movie treatment? I don’t think so. So if it’s not, why not just make something original and not be chained to source material? That’s basically how Star Wars (the good ones) got made and that series had some success.
Art Bot,
Star Wars is original?
see
The Hidden Fortress
Numerous Myths
While I do agree with you how ever, JCoM would be cool, but there are alot of other great stories that could be told.
“Original” was the wrong word. I meant, “safely outside of actionable copyright infringement”. I was referring to the widely told story that Lucas wanted to make a Buck Rogers movie, but was rebuffed by the rights holders. So he made his own version of it.
#5 – Why make it into a movie? Because its a fantastic swashbuckling story of heroism, loyalty, honour and love. Its more fantasy than sci-fi and has thus dated extremely well, considering.
Why *not* make it into a movie? Yes, you could go and write 14 novels worth of brand new material, but these are great stories that deserve to be brought to life and brought to a new audience.
As long as it is done well, of course, but its just as easy to make a poor film with *original* material as it is to make a poor film out of classic fiction, so the “they might screw it up” argument really holds no water.
Why would it matter if something was “antiquated” or in copyright or not? If a story lasts in our public view, it’s probably interesting. 50 years form now, I have fond hopes that Robert Jordan will be long forgotten, but people will probably still remember John Carter of Mars.
Maybe they’re doing this story because they like this story.
Will it be true to the original novel w.r.t. boobies?