Automotive Deals Best Books of the Month Amazon Fashion Learn more Discover it $5 Albums Fire TV Stick Health, Household and Grocery Back to School Handmade school supplies Shop-by-Room Amazon Cash Back Offer TarantinoCollection TarantinoCollection TarantinoCollection  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Introducing new colors All-New Kindle Oasis STEM Segway miniPro
Customer Discussions > Science Fiction forum

New, Upcoming Science Fiction Movies

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 126-150 of 908 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Mar 9, 2012 8:37:46 AM PST
M. Helsdon says:
"It opens today, March 9th."

And from the reviews around the world where it has been shown, it sounds as though the Barsoomian atmosphere factory is pumping out CO2.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 9, 2012 9:16:38 AM PST
(I'm trying to think of a joke related to 'So how many times are they going to remake Dune?' ...)

Maybe until someone finally gets it right. Which is funny because Dune is not really a difficult story to tell. It would probably work better as a series like "Game of Thrones". The real problem is, that there have been so many stories that have borrowed elements of Dune, (Star Wars among them) that it wouldn't feel as innovative as it should be. The Lynch film looked great, and the majority of the actors were well cast. Sting made a great Harkonnen "I will kill yooou!" The Sci-Fi mini series got the story basically right, but it looked cheap. Now we all know the story (at least the first part), but I don't know if anyone will care. It might feel like yet another Three Musketeers remake.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 9, 2012 9:24:18 AM PST
Still, it looks much better than that god awful one from a few years ago.

Which one was that. I remember seeing pre-production stills of a John Carter film back in the 70's when they were still thinking of using stop-motion animation, but I don't remember anyone ever filming anything.

Posted on Mar 9, 2012 11:19:37 AM PST
I've read a bunch of the JC reviews and they have not been good, but I'm going anyway tomorrow.

Who was the idiot in Hollywood who decided to add shape shifters?? There are no shape shifters in JC of Mars!!

Posted on Mar 9, 2012 11:44:34 AM PST
Who was the idiot in Hollywood who decided to add shape shifters?? There are no shape shifters in JC of Mars!!

Well they wanted vampires, but shape-shifters were the next best thing.

Posted on Mar 9, 2012 12:03:35 PM PST doubt someone probably asked if they could have vampires somewhere in the script creation ;-(

Posted on Mar 9, 2012 1:19:32 PM PST
I plan on seeing JC. I do note that reviews aren't great, and the metascore on IMDb is low, yet is still higher than Breaking Dawn or the last Transformers movie.

Posted on Mar 10, 2012 1:52:43 PM PST
I went to see JC (of Mars) this afternoon. I try not to be an old curmudgeon when a movie doesn't even come close to following the book and just go with it, like Zodanga being a walking city. So with that in mind (and NO spoilers), here is what I thought. I did NOT see it in 3D:

- Overall I was entertained. I would give it a B. It was a bazillion times better than that "Princess of Mars" fiasco.

- I see why some reviewers were befuddled by the plot. It helps if you've read the book(s) so at least you know some of the basic stuff even though they don't follow it. At times they did some things, like Dejah's escape in a flyer and being chased, that is only clear AFTER the fact that this is what is happening.

- I like humor, but there were only a few funny parts, mostly at the beginning.

- I'm OK with a strong woman, but Dejah Thoris is not just a princess, she's a feakin' WARRIOR Princess SCIENTIST!!?? At least she was hot, esp. in her wedding dress.

- The plot centers a lot around the 'ninth ray' and how the Therns use it and how JC gets to Mars, so even though I accepted it this whole shape shifting thing was very bizarre. It was almost like they loved doing the effect, esp. near the end.

So be ready for things like the start being an awesome sky battle which I was really enjoying and which all of a sudden stops and -- what just happened???

It still irks me that they go down the river IS which is a BIG no-no in the books and no one thinks anything about it. They are mostly about 'don't go into ISUS's cave which is sacrilege' (and which is right where the Tharks have their camp??) Oh well.

BTW..for battles, Helium = blue capes, Zodanga = red capes. Some reviewers couldn't tell who was fighting whom.

Overall, if you're a fan, it's worth going to see. I could say a lot more but that would give things away and I don't want to spoil it.

Posted on Mar 10, 2012 11:12:29 PM PST
D. Politis says:
I saw John Carter tonight and loved it. I have not read the books (yet) so can't say what the differences are.

The movie had a ton of action and lots of humor. The entire movie theater laughed out loud at least 4 times. The sword fight scenes and flying ships were really fun to watch. The Thark warriors were very badass but John Carter was the biggest badass of them all. I enjoyed the story of a man who somehow ends up on Mars and gets dumped into the middle of a civil war.

I highly recommend John Carter. I plan to buy it the day it comes out on dvd and put it on my keeper shelf, which tells you how much I loved it.

Posted on Mar 12, 2012 8:44:55 AM PDT
Looks like "John Carter" is shaping up to be another "Armaggedon" - critics hate it, but the fans love it.

From the NYTimes today on "JC": "Ishtar In Space"

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 13, 2012 11:34:31 PM PDT
I mostly enjoyed it. At least they managed to explain how Carter got to Barsoom in the first place. I always thought that maybe he was originally from Mars and had been exiled to Earth. Michael Chabon was one of the writers, so that was good. The ad campaign was terrible and that is why the movie is tanking.

I didn't like how they downplayed Carter's swordsmanship in favor of Dejah's. Huh? Carter frequently refers to himself as the best swordsman on 2 worlds and he apparently uses both senses of the word, too. Taylor Kitsch wasn't physically imposing enough. IOW, he wasn't hot enough. Lynn Collins was attractive, but not that uber-hot princess that caused war on Barsoom a la Helen of Troy. The fliers and airships looked like they had been picked out of a remainder bin at Michael's. I mean, come on, on a world without birds, these guys come up with wings on their aircraft? Didn't buy that at all. The music score sucked too. Sorry, Mike.

There was a lot good about it and I will go back and see it in 3D, if it is still out then. "Hunger Games" might just squeeze JC out.

Posted on Mar 14, 2012 8:42:23 AM PDT

I assume you never read the books, so your take on this is interesting that you liked the explanation of how he got transported to Mars. In the books, JC is transported mystically from the cave (smoke that paralyzes and preserves him, eerie noises with movement, and he 'wills' himself to go to Mars as he looks up at it). I have to say that at least it hung together how they did it in the movie (again, I'm avoiding putting in spoilers).

As a guy, I thought Lynn Collins was super hot and I thought Kitsch wasn't bad as JC. I agree with you that I might go to another theater and see it in 3D.

I'm sure "Hunger Games" is going to do a lot better as they'll hype up the teen romance aspect of it hoping it will become the next "Twilight".

Posted on Mar 14, 2012 8:21:42 PM PDT
Not as good as it should have been. Not as bad as I was afraid it would be. Most of the changes from the book served no purpose I could think of, other than to say, "Look: I'm the director and they're the suits and we changed stuff, because we can."

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 11:31:35 AM PDT
Ronald Craig says:
(Since you're not posting your own impressions of it, can we assume you haven't seen it yet?)

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 11:53:41 AM PDT
They certainly are marketing the heck out of Hunger Games that's for sure. It's on the cover of every magazine, and I'm seeing the trailers everywhere. It's going to really hit somebody pretty hard if that movie still fails.

Posted on Mar 16, 2012 12:00:39 PM PDT
Sailor B,

Did you notice that they stole the idea of using musical tones from the book? In the "Princess of Mars", musical tones (that are thought projected) are used to unlock the doors to the oxygen pumps to save Mars. In the movie, they are turned into a song to invoke the 9th ray Thern medallion. All I can say is that at least one of the writers read the book at one point and probably thought it was a cool idea to use somewhere in the movie.

Posted on Mar 16, 2012 12:05:57 PM PDT
The "Hunger Games" merchandising frenzy is already starting. See->

And..."The books' publisher, Scholastic, boasts 600,000 friends on "The Hunger Games" official Facebook page; Lionsgate's Facebook page for "The Hunger Games" movie has almost 3 million fans."

Poor JC never stood a chance in comparison. Did JC even GET a Facebook page?
[Not meaning to diss "Hunger Games". I loved the books and plan to go see the movie.]

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 12:42:20 PM PDT
i am reader says:
i just saw john carter it s adapted from the books not a version of the book, i also finished reading the first five books of barsoom ( john carter saga)so i expected a little more of the first books . visual effects were great the plot disney aimed at 10 to 12 year olds .when i read the books i also thought if this was a bases for superman alien great strength able to leap great distances.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 16, 2012 2:27:42 PM PDT
EdM says:
OTOH, preliminary reviews of "Hunger Games" seem much higher than the corresponding reviews for JC...

Posted on Mar 16, 2012 5:04:58 PM PDT
Just saw "John Carter". I thought is was "OK". Its 80% "re-imagined" from the books. I saw it with my grandson and we both thought "Woola" was the best part as it acts so much like my grandson's Jack Russell, especially with all the running around. Well, I actually thought Lynn Collins was the best part(s).

I can't understand how the movie cost $200m.

Saw the Promethius trailer. Gotta go, hope it doesn't suck and that it scares the crap out of me like the original "Alien" did.

Posted on Mar 17, 2012 8:18:13 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Mar 17, 2012 8:18:50 AM PDT


Hey RC! There's an upcoming movie called "Frankenweenie"!

Posted on Mar 17, 2012 10:10:28 AM PDT
i am reader,

re. whether JC was a basis for superman, all I could think of was this->

Big Bang Theory -- Superman argument

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 17, 2012 11:48:13 AM PDT
Tim Burton/Disney remaking the original?

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 17, 2012 2:22:27 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Mar 17, 2012 2:29:22 PM PDT
Ronald Craig says:
Hey MM! And...?

(You'll have to try a bit harder, dear, it's not at all clear to me what you were trying to insinuate this time.)

Edit: Old Rocker: righto. Looks fun (big Burton fan). Thanks for the heads-up, Marilyn! :D

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 17, 2012 9:37:08 PM PDT
I know I'm utterly geeking out here, but...

I've been hearing this argument for better than a decade now, and it just doesn't hold. Find the relevant scene and pay attention to the building behind Superman and Lois.  You will see that she was not two feet off the ground, and in fact Supes did match speed and decelerate her gently.

As for Kryptonian skin cells, I'm afraid I have nothing to contribute.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in

Recent discussions in the Science Fiction forum


This discussion

Discussion in:  Science Fiction forum
Participants:  63
Total posts:  908
Initial post:  Aug 23, 2011
Latest post:  Jun 29, 2014

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 8 customers

Search Customer Discussions