Mars Needs Moms (ImageMovers)

The_Iceflash · Post by **The_Iceflash** » Sun Mar 13, 2011 5:43 pm

Kyle wrote:
The_Iceflash wrote:I guess that's what happens when one values style over substance.
Your suggesting this movie has style?

I guess you got me there.

Prince Edward · Post by **Prince Edward** » Sun Mar 13, 2011 8:25 pm

Glad that it failed so epicly. Disney spent 150 million dollars to produce it?!

Now Disney, start focusing all your effort and money making great movies instead of this crap.

ajmrowland · Post by **ajmrowland** » Sun Mar 13, 2011 11:17 pm

So many here are happy about a Disney movie failing.............

The film must be *really* bad.

Either that or we have impossible standards which I dont think we do.

SWillie! · Post by **SWillie!** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 12:00 am

ajmrowland wrote:So many here are happy about a Disney movie failing.............

The film must be *really* bad.

Either that or we have impossible standards which I dont think we do.

Yeah, I'm happy about it too.

I think most are happy because maybe Disney will take a good look at this massive failure of a movie (which many of us could have guessed based on the very first viewing of the very first trailer) and see that it's time to stop making movies that AREN'T GOOD.

All the interviews with Disney spokespeople, with them saying "we released this during Spring Break with the hopes that it would do the same thing Alice in Wonderland did last year" is just pathetic. If anyone actually believed this movie was a solid piece of filmmaking, they should be fired.

ajmrowland · Post by **ajmrowland** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:10 am

^A rather tall order that means really cutting the annual bottom-line for the second-largest media corporation in the world, isnt it?

Elladorine · Post by **Elladorine** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:33 am

Sigh . . . if you're making an animated film, make sure that the world and the characters are appealing. The story is important too of course, but people aren't going to even bother looking into the story if they don't see any characters worth caring about or a world worth exploring from the trailers. This film is just . . . ugly.

Disneyphile · Post by **Disneyphile** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 11:02 am

SWillie! wrote:If anyone actually believed this movie was a solid piece of filmmaking, they should be fired.

It was a solid piece of something, that's for sure!

Mickeyfan1990 · Post by **Mickeyfan1990** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 11:58 am

OHHHHHHH! No you didn't! Snap-snap!

SWillie! · Post by **SWillie!** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:25 pm

ajmrowland wrote:^A rather tall order that means really cutting the annual bottom-line for the second-largest media corporation in the world, isnt it?

Yes it is. But they ought to be up to the task, or else in fifty years there will be no such thing as the giant corporation we know today. It will have gone to shit.

"Quality will out."

disneyboy20022 · Post by **disneyboy20022** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 4:38 pm

http://boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=3113&p=.htm

Mars Needs Moms was an utter disaster, eking out just $6.9 million on around 4,400 screens at 3,117 locations (including 2,440 3D venues that accounted for over two thirds of business) or just over a quarter of Gnomeo and Juliet's opening last month. That was the third least-attended launch for a Disney animated movie on record (only Ponyo and Teacher's Pet were less popular) and the lowest debut yet for a broadly-released modern 3D-animated movie, replacing Alpha and Omega for the dishonor. Sci-fi animation can be a tough sell, yet Mars still had one of the sub-genre's weakest launches ever, selling fewer tickets than even Planet 51, Space Chimps and Astro Boy. Mars was severely limited by its premise, which was better suited to a television cartoon, and its execution looked awkward, incoherent and creepy in the marketing. Mom appreciation was presumably the movie's point, but mom was minimized in the ads in favor of a random wild ride, featuring Three Dog Night's "Mama Told Me Not to Come" in a feeble attempt to connect with older adults.

Ok...Space Chimps sold more tickets....I don't know whether to be surprised or go as bonkers as a bobcat trying to be police officer

buffalobill · Post by **buffalobill** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 4:50 pm

What's really sad is Space Chimps did better without 3D & IMAX which MNM had. Just imagine what the grosses would've been had all the tickets been for 2D.

pap64 · Post by **pap64** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 5:17 pm

To those celebrating the demise of this movie... grow up.

Before anyone says anything, I haven't seen the film, and I have my own issues with motion capture (as I stated a while back), so I am not biased in any way.

The reason I don't celebrate the demise of ANY studio, regardless of the work they do, is because they are made up of thousands of people who have families to feed and bills to pay. They may not have worked in the best movies ever produced, but a paycheck is a paycheck, and in these tough economic times that is extremely valuable.

Do we want better animated movies? Of course we do. But should we celebrate the fact that a movie bombed so hard many were left out of jobs? Of course not. We can criticize their work, saying what worked and didn't work, but remember they are still human beings with needs, and before you celebrate their demise put yourself in their shoes.

rs_milo_whatever · Post by **rs_milo_whatever** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 5:48 pm

pap64 wrote: The reason I don't celebrate the demise of ANY studio, regardless of the work they do, is because they are made up of thousands of people who have families to feed and bills to pay.

Can't they pay the bills by selling a better product? Yeah, it sucks that a lot of people will have to omit something off their resume, but they already got payed. A kick in the pants is a good thing, they can't expect us to give them millions of dollars on a condescending movie forever.

pap64 · Post by **pap64** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 6:12 pm

rs_milo_whatever wrote:
pap64 wrote: The reason I don't celebrate the demise of ANY studio, regardless of the work they do, is because they are made up of thousands of people who have families to feed and bills to pay.
Can't they pay the bills by selling a better product? Yeah, it sucks that a lot of people will have to omit something off their resume, but they already got payed. A kick in the pants is a good thing, they can't expect us to give them millions of dollars on a condescending movie forever.

First of all, the ANIMATORS don't decide what movie they make. The ones that do are the producers, directors and the corporate people. They often do these projects because work is work.

I realize that the topic lies in a gray area, but all the fault should NOT lie in the animators alone, especially when all they do is get the movie made under the rules of the company and its producers. Again, not saying that the movie should be an extreme success, especially if it doesn't deserve it. Just saying that there is more to a movie than just a director, some producers and a corporation, that hundreds of people are affected by the poor decisions of these people, so regardless if the movie was great or not it demise shouldn't be of celebration because in the end EVERYONE is affected by it.

rs_milo_whatever · Post by **rs_milo_whatever** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 6:17 pm

That's kind of funny. I had a long list of people who weren't at fault but I erased it because I couldn't find a way to make it ok for them. You're right. But you have to admit, this was bound to happen, now that it happened we might get more of an effort out of those execs.

Big One · Post by **Big One** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 7:51 pm

I'm glad I took part in hyping up this movie to various users on /co/ and telling them to not see it by showing how shit it looks like. Where's my money, Dreamworks?

pap64 wrote:The reason I don't celebrate the demise of ANY studio, regardless of the work they do, is because they are made up of thousands of people who have families to feed and bills to pay. They may not have worked in the best movies ever produced, but a paycheck is a paycheck, and in these tough economic times that is extremely valuable.

First of all they can easily get work somewhere else, animators aren't exactly desperate for work nor are they disposable considering there's so much of them. No one is blaming them, however, they're blaming the people that greenlit this garbage in the first place. This movie didn't have to be made.

Secondly sacrifices must be made to keep up quality, simple as that.

Prince Edward · Post by **Prince Edward** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 7:53 pm

Sources say this weekend’s disastrous opening for “Mars Needs Moms,” which Zemeckis produced, played a major factor in the decision.

Disney Pulls the Plug on Robert Zemeckis’ YELLOW SUBMARINE
http://collider.com/yellow-submarine-ro ... ney/80582/

Disney Kills Robert Zemeckis’ ‘Yellow Submarine’
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-v ... low-167415

Sotiris · Post by **Sotiris** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 8:20 pm

Prince Edward wrote:Sources say this weekend’s disastrous opening for “Mars Needs Moms,” which Zemeckis produced, played a major factor in the decision.

Disney Pulls the Plug on Robert Zemeckis’ YELLOW SUBMARINE
http://collider.com/yellow-submarine-ro ... ney/80582/

Disney Kills Robert Zemeckis’ ‘Yellow Submarine’
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-v ... low-167415

That's great news!

Even if Zemeckis finds a new sponsor and the film gets made after all, at least it won't bear the Disney name.

Big One · Post by **Big One** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 9:17 pm

We dodged a bullet.

Elladorine · Post by **Elladorine** » Mon Mar 14, 2011 9:19 pm

Like I said, just . . . ugly.

DVDizzy Forum

Latest Movie Reviews

🎬 DVDizzy Top Stories️️

Mars Needs Moms (ImageMovers)