John Carter and the Gods of Hollywood
Page 33
Speaking in August 2012 at a gathering to honor the Centennial of Tarzan and John Carter of Mars, John Carter Producer Jim Morris acknowledged that a “perfect storm” of executive decisions and marketing factors, including “three turnovers” within the marketing department during John Carter’s campaign, resulted in disappointment.333
What would Walt Disney think?
One cannot help but wonder whether any of the principals other than the filmmakers would regard such a question as even relevant. Do the personal values of the company’s founder matter any more? Does The Walt Disney Company of 2012 have an obligation to continue to reflect the values of its founder? Or has it evolved beyond that and is it accountable only to Wall Street and its investors -- and not the creators of the intellectual property itself -- the filmmakers and the authors of the material that underlies the film, and their constituencies?
The answer seems clear enough.
Iger himself said it best, and quite clearly:
“The baggage of tradition can slow you down. I’m not going to eliminate that, but I’d like to reduce it significantly.”334
Indeed.
Iger continues to build Disney’s value through acquisition of established brands created by others. It began with Pixar in 2006; continued with Marvel in 2009, and in October 2012 he announced the acquisition of Lucasfilm and the Star Wars franchise, simultaneously announcing that a new Star Wars trilogy representing the seventh, eighth, and ninth films in the cycle will be produced. Iger’s vision for Disney is clear, and it is clear that John Carter is not part of that vision. Analysts and stockholders applaud Iger’s choices.
The “baggage of tradition” is not an issue.
In Conclusion
In the end, there will always be those who will say that any attempt to argue for the continuation of the John Carter cinematic franchise is an exercise in futility and a fanboy delusion. But it is not the actual performance of John Carter in the marketplace that causes the idea of continuation to seem far-fetched -- the film, after all, earned close to $300M at the global box office in spite of tragically inept marketing, and spawned a global fan movement. The performance is respectable, but the film is stigmatized as an epic flop. Is there a way forward, or is it truly game over?
I am convinced there is a way forward.
Why?
First, the underlying literary property is exceptional; it inspired arguably the greatest creations of modern science fiction, both cinematic and literary, and has stood the test of time. At a time when the idea of a “global market” hardly existed, Burroughs’ books were translated into 58 languages and outsold all others, and the magic within those books is timeless and works its magic today.335 The “strip-mining” has never thoroughly tapped the true genius of the original, which retains multiple treasures that have yet to be unearthed and presented on screen. Andrew Stanton’s John Carter scratches the surface; much remains. There are eleven books in the series; an entire planet to explore, filled with fascinating cultures, a detailed and compelling history, and poignant turmoil with John Carter becoming deeply emotionally invested in the dying planet that is his adopted home.
But is it economically viable to continue, either through sequels or a reboot?
Again, the answer is yes.
Why?
In the first place, because there is a substantial fan base in place and ready to support future films.
John Carter yielded close to $300M in global sales with an audience favorability rating of 75%, according to Cinamascore and other exit polling mechanisms. That means that at least 30 million moviegoers saw the movie and 75% said they liked it and would recommend it -- and as the growth of the fan movement has shown, the intensity of the appeal to a core group of highly motivated enthusiasts is especially high. In excess of 20 million viewers are ready to receive the next film with open arms. And this is an understated figure because it only addresses those who saw the film in theaters, and ignores the millions more who missed it in theaters but discovered it later on blu-ray or cable TV broadcasts. There is truly an “Army of Barsoom” ready to support any future films, and within this number there is a core group of potential influencers numbering in the tens of thousands including film journalists, bloggers, a social media mavens armed with the tools of modern digital marketing and ready to use those tools.
What market outcome can reasonably be projected for a sequel or reboot?
The evidence is conclusive that Disney’s failed promotional campaign depressed the performance of John Carter, particularly in the United States, and it is reasonable to assume that a sequel with simply adequate marketing would do better. How much better?
Let’s start with the realistic assumption that if John Carter earned $282M global gross with a tiny pre-existing fan base and clueless marketing, then $350M global box office gross for a second film is a reasonable minimum likely projection.
At $350M global box office, Prometheus was regarded as a success and quickly generated a sequel. Why? Because it only cost $140M to make, not $250M as was the case with John Carter.
Do future John Carter films have to cost $250M each?
Realistically, what budget level could John Carter sequels be produced at? Can a budget of $175M be attained?
Could two sequels be produced concurrently for a total budget of $350M, or $175M per film?
Yes, and here’s why.
First, the one-time costs associated with the first film have been absorbed. Prototype development is complete. A second and third film would have to bear none of the one-time development costs that burdened the first film.336
Second, the first John Carter story is extremely reliant on scenes involving multiple Thark characters, who are created via motion capture CGI, onscreen repeatedly throughout the movie. The animation of these characters, who must be rendered at a level allowing them to seamlessly occupy the screen with live human characters, was the core reason driving up the budget of the first movie, and future installments, if they even remotely follow the stories originated by Burroughs, rely substantially less on having multiple Thark (and hence CGI) characters on screen for extended periods. This too, would produce a savings without sacrificing production value.
But while some savings would be achieved by producing two films concurrently; and some would be achieved by having less Thark screen time to deal with -- in the end, to achieve a budget of $175M would require that the filmmakers make a commitment to “be smart” about the story and the production and produce the film to a price point. Would this be creatively stifling? The truth is, it is rare indeed in the history of Hollywood for a live action film’s production budget be allowed to “seek its own level” in the way that was the case for John Carter. The old verities of the industry need to apply: The business model for a sequel needs to start from an assumption of $175M per film for two films; and then the filmmakers must craft an operating plan that meets this price point. It’s not impossible -- savvy Hollywood producers work this way all the time. And at a $175M budget, with a projected minimum global theatrical gross of $350M, John Carter 2 and John Carter 3 become interesting business propositions.337
Is there more global gross available than the $350M projected as a minimum?
Again, the answer is yes. The global market is expanding at a much higher rate of growth than in the US. Two markets where John Carter did extremely well, Russia and China, are particularly noteworthy. According to the Motion Picture Association of America’s annual report “Theatrical Market Statistics 2011”338
Each international region experienced growth in 2011. Chinese box office grew by 35% in 2011 to become the 2nd largest International market behind Japan, experiencing by far the largest growth in major markets. International box office in U.S. dollars is up 35% over five years ago, driven by growth in various markets, including China and Russia.
Writing of dramatic growth in box office in Russia, Matthew Garrahan writes in FT.com (Financial Times):339
Box office
revenues in the country have soared over the past decade to more than $1B, rising at a compound annual rate of 27 per cent since 2006, according to Renaissance Capital, a Russian investment bank. The increase has been fueled by a multiplex construction boom and growing appetite for Hollywood movies, as well as Russian-language productions. “Russia’s growth has outpaced established markets and emerging markets like China,” says Dave Hollis, Disney’s executive vice-president for theatrical exhibition sales and distribution. “It’s not just because of higher ticket prices, box office has gone up with more admissions. There’s a cultural revolution under way there in terms of people embracing cinema. Russia has become a top-five market for us and for some movies it’s even more important than that,” says Andy Bird, the chairman of Walt Disney International. “Seven years ago our presence there was two employees working out of a Moscow hotel room.”
In addition to their general growth, Russia and China have both shown themselves to be extremely “sequel-friendly,” as the following chart illustrates:
CHINA
FilmOriginalSequel
Kung Fu Panda 1/2$26.02M$92.17M
Transformers 2/3$57.22M$172.00M
Pirates/Caribbean 3/4$16.97M$70.00M
RUSSIA
Kung Fu Panda 1/2$20.58M$31.83M
Transformers 2/3$18.18M$45.13M
There is more to this than just an expanding box office.
The growth noted above, particularly in Russia and China, means that foreign co-producers in those territories are available to share a substantial portion of the production risk. Disney is already a beneficiary of this type of an arrangement in several of its current films.
For Iron Man 3, Marvel entered into a coproduction arrangement with DMG Entertainment,340 a Chinese coproducer. Dreamworks did the same for Kung Fu Panda 3, making Oriental Dreamworks a co-production partner,341 and other US studios are entering into similar agreements.
With a little effort and imagination, Chinese and/or Russian co-production partners can be recruited to lower the risk for the US Studio Distributor.
So, reasons for continuation include the underlying value of the literary property; the availability of an established, motivated, and digitally savvy fan base; a likely global gross of at least $350M; and the availability of foreign co-producers in countries like Russia and China to lower the risk.
Yet it is undeniable that a sequel or reboot is still considered a long shot proposition, not because of hard economic realities -- but rather because of psychological factors. The film has been labeled by its own studio as an epic failure, with the largest announced write-down in cinema history. The press has passed judgment on it as a failed enterprise. John Carter is dead.
What comes next?
In all likelihood, before there can be continuation, there must be gradual rehabilitation of the image and reputation of the film and the underlying property it depicts.
If there is an Army of Barsoom ready to support a sequel, it must first gradually change the narrative about the first film from “epic flop” to beloved classic. Fans and bloggers and others who can comment, write, create fan art, carry out fan activities, and otherwise use their voices and be heard, have the power to gradually accomplish this. It would not be the first time in cinema history that the narrative about a film undergoes such a transformation. Flops-turned-classics include the Wizard of Oz, Citizen Kane, Blade Runner, and It’s a Wonderful Life. None of these films are perfect; none were widely praised on first release; all found a place in history that leaves them regarded today as cinematic gems. The initial financial result of a film is one thing; the final verdict on its worth is another matter altogether.
Even those who object to the Stanton adaptation and only support a reboot, not a sequel, have a role to play, because nurturing the idea the Edgar Rice Burroughs’ Barsoom deserves an ongoing life on the screen helps keep Burroughs’ legacy alive and moves the conversation forward.
But why does it matter?
Why all this effort in support of one potential film franchise?
John Carter was, after all, just a movie, one of hundreds released each year. Some succeed, some fail, and those that fail are generally allowed to pass quietly into library status with no one clamoring for a sequel.
Why the special attention for John Carter?
Those who have been touched by Burroughs’ Barsoom understand that Edgar Rice Burroughs’ creation is a global cultural treasure that has shown, over its century long history, a unique ability to capture the imagination and inspire. In our own lives it is natural for us to succumb to the human tendency to let other human beings define what is possible. Burroughs’ stories counter this. Through dazzling imaginative transport and ennobling characters his genius evokes a sense of wonder and a realization that not just in Burroughs’ fantasy realm -- but in real life too, more is possible. The stories inspire a belief that something more awaits us if we just go for it and trust that we have what it takes to keep fighting, in whatever struggle or cause it is that we take up or that life throws at us. This is not the lonely personal observation of one author writing an unlikely book about a bungled film enterprise; it is the observation of profoundly successful creators like Ray Bradbury, Carl Sagan, and others who found in Burroughs unique inspiration for their lives. Burroughs was a genius with a unique capacity to inspire wonder and self-belief.
In sum, Burroughs stories do far more than just entertain us -- they touch our souls and remind us of the possibilities that await us and teach us that no matter how bleak our circumstances may seem, as John Carter would say: “We still live!” Burroughs’ imagination illuminates the fertile possibility of life, and urges us to believe in that possibility. There is a timeless, global value in that, and it is something that must not be lost, and is worth fighting for.
In Hollywood, ninety percent of all films do not simply coalesce -- they happen because someone becomes a champion of a particular project and fights for it, sometimes for years - sometimes for decades. Usually it is a lonely struggle behind the scenes by an individual filmmaker, perhaps with a few key associates, who carries the argument forward, refuses to take ‘no’ for an answer, and eventually prevails.
In the case that is being made for the cinematic continuation of John Carter, that voice is not a lonely one, nor is it happening behind closed doors in Hollywood. Rather it is a collective voice emanating from all the corners of the world. Disparate individuals from vastly different backgrounds and cultures are finding inspiration in Stanton’s film, Burroughs’ stories, or both. Fueled by that inspiration and empowered by the tools of social connectivity, they are finding each other. Together they are using their voices in ways that are empowered by the technology of the age.
Continue to use your voices; you will be heard.
Afterword by the Author
I would never have undertaken such an endeavor as this book were it not for the fans who emerged and made their voices heard, first on The John Carter Files, and later on Facebook and elsewhere. They inspired me with their passion and gave me confidence that in making the case for not giving up on John Carter, I was not a lone voice - but rather was representative of others who believe there is something special here.
William Faulkner spoke of writing as “agony and sweat.” In the case of this book, the agony and sweat will have been worth it if one person -- the right person -- reads the book and thinks: “You know, maybe there’s something there. Maybe this John Carter thing deserves another look.”
Is that person Robert Iger or Alan Horne at Disney?
Possibly.
Is it another U.S. Studio chief?
A key foreign coproducer?
With a very few rare exceptions, the forces keeping a literary property from becoming a major motion picture are much stronger than those enabling it to be produced. “Development hell” became a common term for a reason. Nothing worthwhile is easy, and the hundred year history of the journey of A Princess of Mars fro
m the mind of Edgar Rice Burroughs to cinema screens is “Exhibit A” of just how hard it can be. Having a passionate proponent is an essential ingredient.
Fortunately, John Carter has many such passionate proponents. I am one of them, but I’m not the only one. There is an Army of Barsoom that feels the same way, and my efforts are not those of a lone individual -- they are the expression of a fan base that is global, vocal, and motivated.
The movement for a continuation of Edgar Rice Burroughs’ John Carter film legacy will continue. The “closing argument” presented as the final chapter of this book is taken from a longer White Paper document, “The Case for a Continuation of John Carter (of Mars),” which can be found online at www.thejohncarterfiles.com/white-paper and which includes a detailed financial operational analysis of the prospects for a continuation.
To find out more generally what is happening in the movement to continue the franchise, go to www.TheJohnCarterFiles.com or visit www.BacktoBarsoom.com.
About the Author
Michael D. Sellers grew up as an “Army Brat” living in various cities in the U.S. and abroad, including Stuttgart, Germany where he discovered Edgar Rice Burroughs in the Post Library as a twelve year old. He was a Magna Cum Laude graduate of the University of Delaware in 1975, where he was a Rhodes Scholarship and Danforth Fellowship finalist. He went on to New York University Graduate Film School, then spent 10 years serving as an operations officer for the Central Intelligence Agency, serving in Warsaw (1980), Ethiopia (1981-83), Moscow (1984-86), and the Philippines (1986-90). His work as a CIA officer specializing in Soviet operations has been cited in nonfiction books that include The Main Enemy by Milt Beardon and James Risen; Inside the CIA and Moscow Station by Ron Kessler, and The Spy Who Got Away by David Wise. He was awarded the Intelligence Commendation Medal for service in support of President Corazon Aquino during a violent coup attempt in the Philippines in December 1989. He returned to private life in 1990 and since then has worked as a writer, filmmaker, and film distribution executive. His films have been selected for more than 100 film festivals and have won multiple awards. Two films released financed via a telemarketing organization retained by Sellers in 2007 and terminated by Sellers in 2009 came under investigation by the Justice Department for fundraising violations. Sellers cooperated fully with the investigation and accepted full responsibility for the violations by the telemarketing organization whose actions were his responsibility. Learn more about Michael D. Sellers’ life and work at www.MichaelDSellersAuthor.com and at his blogs: www.TheJohnCarterFiles.com and www.MichaelDSellers.com