Where John Carter failed

I actually got out to see a movie the first week it opened, a rare thing for me these days. And John Carter is the first big movie this Spring, so it was an easy choice, of course, a shirtless Taylor Kitsch had nothing to do with it.

And if you've heard the press, or read the reviews, they're actually mixed, it's not the wholeheartedly negative press that seems to be connected with the movie now. And what's different from other big effects blockbusters, like Transformers, or the last Pirates of the Carribean, there's actually a story and a pretty good one.

A lot of the cast is unknown, from the supporting cast, which comes from Rome and The Wire, and are all talented to the lead, Taylor, who was so amazing on Friday Night Lights, and he does really well. He's obviously pretty to look at, but he gives everything a nice, down to earth gravitas, which is a pleasant contrast when you've set a movie on the moon.

some critics complained about the beginning being too long, but it made sense to me, and was connected to the story, so it wasn't a pointless prologue, and had a nice connection to the ending in a clever plot point.

some of the emotional connections in the movie felt rushed, including the main romance, and John Carter's arc, he went too abruptly from refusing to get involved in the conflict, to headlining it, but overall the movie had an old school feel and was really entertaining.

What it lacked and I think this is where a lot of critics had problems with it, was a sense of humour, or a wink towards the fact that the source material was old and perhaps a little outdated.

It lacked the humour that was so much a part of Ironman, or even Thor, and that made the movies a favourite of critics and propelled them to box office success.

But I would recommend seeing the movie, I enjoyed it. And early reviews for Hunger Games are in, and they are great. Another week and it opens.