The mess that is "John Carter" is signaled early on when our hero finds himself on a strange planet that literally puts a bounce in his step. Why, he could leap tall buildings in a single bound. Instead, John, played with chest-baring kitsch by "Friday Night Lights" Taylor Kitsch , ends up sprawled on his face, eating a lot of dirt.Sadly, John's problems are "John Carter's" problems, it's just that while our hero eventually figures out how to stop falling down, the movie never does. "John Carter" is the latest version of a long and rich Hollywood tradition: The big-budget (a reported $250-million-plus) fiasco. It's enough to make your jaw drop.That "John Carter" is so hit and miss, and miss, and miss is unfortunate on any number of levels. It starts with a great story — of love and politics, time travel and mystical pathways between planets — badly sucked dry. Based on "A Princess of Mars," the post-Civil War/pre-Tarzan brainchild of arguably one of the most entertaining non-Disney imagineers of all times, Edgar Rice Burroughs , the book and the Barsoom (a.k.a. Mars) series that would follow has been picked over for plot points by Hollywood for years.So what will feel like ideas stolen from other movies in "John Carter" (echoes of " Star Wars ," "Star Trek," Superman ," to name just a few),is really more a case of going back to the source. But just as you can't put Pandora back in the box, filmmaker Andrew Stanton can't find a way to make Burroughs' now-familiar fantasy themes feel fresh.Stanton, who directed and shares writing credit with Mark Andrews and novelist Michael Chabon , is a Pixar veteran who won an Oscar for 2004's "Finding Nemo" and another for 2008's " Wall-E ," both wonderful mixes of fun and fantasy. But in making the move from animation to live action, he never finds his footing. There is much more heart in "Wall-E's" junkyard robot and in the merest flick of Nemo's fin than you'll find in all of Barsoom with its dying-planet woes, warring factions, beautiful warrior princess and brazen four-armed green alien savages, despite its fantastic look.The film starts playfully and promisingly in some dusty Western outpost on planet Earth with John, a former Southern Civil War hero, conscripted by the cavalry to help tame the badlands and the Indian tribes. Or at least they try, making for one of the film's funnier bits, because John has other things on his mind. Soon both he and we will be transported to Barsoom (Mars to both John and to us) with the help of a cheesy-looking medallion. Getting back is even weirder, what with the chanting that's required to activate some not-so-special special effects.There is a glimpse of the red planet's issues before John gets involved, starting with a raging battle with very cool spaceships that look like ancient sailing vessels plucked out of the sea. It serves to introduce the chief villain, a fierce Zodanga fighter named Sab Than ( Dominic West ), and the difficulties that ultimately undo the writers: How to fill in a complex back story for newcomers without boring fans.Sab is just the beginning of Barsoom's problems. It turns out that he's under the control of the shape-shifting, agenda-setting immortal Therns, with Matai Shang ( Mark Strong ) the main man of action here. Meanwhile, Sab is out to crush the residents of Helium, the smart, peaceful set, with the first step to marry their beloved princess, Dejah Thoris ( Lynn Collins ). Then there are the Tharks, multi-armed green savages riding around in their loincloths, staging barbaric arena-style spectacles and waiting for Helium and Zodanga to destroy each other. And you thought our planet was in trouble.Once John does land, dazed and confused, on a Martian desert, he's captured by Thark leader Tars Tarkas ( Willem Dafoe ). Tars is entertained enough by John's jumping that he saves him, and soon John's fate is tied to another Thark, Sola ( Samantha Morton ), something of a rule-breaker herself. Eventually circumstance will throw John in Dejah's path, sparks will fly, sort of, plans will be hatched, and so on.All of the intrigues play out against an exceptionally fine background, from the cave dwellings of the Tharks, whose misunderstanding of John's name provides the film its best running gag, to the towering spires of Helium. Barsoom's barren wasteland is a terrific visual staging ground for the many battles to come and where Stanton's strengths come to the surface. The action itself is intricate but ultimately not that satisfying since, even as guns blaze, there is never a feeling of real jeopardy.Kitsch, who has brought so many moods and so much swagger to his football bad boy in "Friday Night Lights," simply fades here. When John should overpower not only his enemies but that very big screen, it never happens. Meanwhile, Collins ( "X-Men Origins: Wolverine" ) is much better when she's armed and dangerous than when she's smitten. All of which leaves "John Carter" in serious need of someone, something, to really root for other than this two-hour-plus film to finally end. ||||| If only Andrew Stanton's John Carter had sneaked into the multiplex with its mostly shirtless Earth-man hero (Taylor Kitsch) fighting fourarmed green dudes and assorted hairy apes from Mars, audiences might have given it a pass as the mildly entertaining, old-school adventure it is. 
 
 But nooo! John Carter, a post-Civil War-era Confederate soldier from Virginia who finds himself zapped onto the red planet (called Barsoom instead of Mars), must face a deadlier enemy than author Edgar Rice Burroughs could have dreamed up when he created the character 100 years ago. I'm talking about the toxic buzz that has curled around the movie before anyone had seen it. How dare it cost so much money ($250 million)! How dare Stanton think he can switch from animation (WALL-E, Finding Nemo) to directing live actors! How dare they rip off Star Wars, Indiana Jones and Avatar? (Hey, haters: Burroughs got there first.) 
 
 My advice? Shut out the noise and just watch the movie. For all the bumps in the narrative, concocted by Stanton, Mark Andrews and novelist Michael Chabon, and less-than-stellar 3D effects, John Carter exerts the pull of a tall tale told by a campfire. Stanton takes his time to show us how life lost meaning for Captain Carter after the war. And the Canadian Kitsch, so fine as the alcoholic bad boy on Friday Night Lights, brings a bruised heart and welcome gravity to a role a lesser actor might have turned into heroic cardboard. It's fun to watch JC find that the atmosphere on Mars allows him to leap around like a human shot put. And though it's shameless to give JC a mutt as a protector, Woola – the toothy, 10-legged lizard dog – is a beauty of a beast. Uggie from The Artist needs to watch his back. 
 
 I've been avoiding the plot, since its convolutions are headspinning. Burroughs, who later created Tarzan, wrote 11 books on Carter. You may leave this movie never knowing the difference between a Thark and a Thern. Willem Dafoe's matchless growl enlivens Tars Tarkas, a 10-foot-tall Thark who befriends JC. And Mark Strong, as the shapeshifting Matai Shang, is one wily Thern. But you will know that JC truly loves Dejah Thoris (the excellent Lynn Collins), a defiant princess who won't stand behind any man in a fight. John Carter bites off more than even Woola can chew, but it's built on something rare: wonder instead of Hollywood cynicism. ||||| John Carter 
 
 March 7, 2012 
 
 Cast & Credits John Carter Taylor Kitsch 
 
 Dejah Thoris Lynn Collins 
 
 Tars Tarkas Willem Dafoe 
 
 Tal Hajus Thomas Haden Church 
 
 Sola Samantha Morton 
 
 Sab Than Dominic West 
 
 Tardos Mors Ciaran Hinds 
 
 
 
 Disney presents a film directed by Andrew Stanton. Written by Stanton and Mark Andrews, based on the story “A Princessof Mars” by Edgar Rice Burroughs. Running time: 132 minutes. Rated PG-13 (for intense sequences of violence and action). Printer-friendly » 
 
 E-mail this to a friend » 
 
 I don't see any way to begin a review of "John Carter" without referring to "Through Time and Space With Ferdinand Feghoot." That was a series of little stories that appeared in the magazine Fantasy and Science Fiction from 1956 to 1973 and had a great influence on my development as a critic. In one of the Feghoot adventures, the hero finds himself on Mars and engaged in bloody swordplay. He is sliced in the leg. Then in the other leg. Then an arm is hacked off. "To hell with this," Feghoot exclaims, unholstering his ray gun and vaporizing his enemies. 
 
 I may have one or two details wrong, but you understand the point: When superior technology is at hand, it seems absurd for heroes to limit themselves to swords. When airships the size of a city block can float above a battle, why handicap yourself with cavalry charges involving lumbering alien rhinos? When it is possible to teleport yourself from Earth to Mars, why are you considered extraordinary because you can jump really high? 
 
 
 
 Such questions are never asked in the world of "John Carter," and as a result, the movie is more Western than science fiction. Even if we completely suspend our disbelief and accept the entire story at face value, isn't it underwhelming to spend so much time looking at hand-to-hand combat when there are so many neat toys and gadgets to play with? 
 
 
 
 But I must not review a movie that wasn't made. What we have here is a rousing boy's adventure story, adapted from stories that Edgar Rice Burroughs cranked out for early pulp magazines. They lacked the visceral appeal of his Tarzan stories, which inspired an estimated 89 movies; amazingly, this is the first John Carter movie, but it is intended to foster a franchise and will probably succeed. 
 
 
 
 Burroughs' hero is a Civil War veteran who finds himself in the Monument Valley, where he has an encounter that transports him to the red planet Mars. This is not the Mars that NASA's Rovers are poking into, but the Mars envisioned at the time Burroughs was writing, which the astronomer Percival Lowell claimed was criss-crossed by a system of canals. Luckily for Carter, it has an atmosphere that he can breathe and surface temperatures allowing him do without a shirt. In a delightful early scene, he finds that his Earth muscles allow him great leaps and bounds in the lower Martian gravity. 
 
 
 
 This attracts the attention of the inhabitants of Mars, represented by two apparently human cities at war with each other, and a native race called the Tharks, who look like a vague humanoid blend of weird green aliens from old covers of Thrilling Wonder Stories. They have four arms, and it was a great disappointment to me that we never saw a Thark putting on a shirt. John Carter feels an immediate affinity for the Tharks and also gets recruited into the war of the cities — choosing the side with a fiery beauty named Dejah Thoris (Lynn Collins, who is the movie's best character). 
 
 
 
 John Carter is played by Taylor Kitsch, who co-starred with Collins in "Wolverine." Yes, I agree Kitsch is a curious name for a star in action movies. Still, that is his real name, and one can wonder how many fans of "Wolverine," for example, are familiar with the word or its meaning. As an actor, he is perfectly serviceable as a sword-wielding, rhino-riding savior of planets. 
 
 
 
 The film was directed by Andrew Stanton, whose credits include "A Bug's Life" (1998), "Finding Nemo" (2003) and "WALL-E" (2008). All three have tight, well-structured plots, and that's what "John Carter" could use more of. The action sequences are generally well-executed, but they're too much of a muchness. CGI makes them seem too facile and not tactile enough. Although I liked the scene where Carter was getting his Mars legs with his first low-gravity steps, the sight of him springing into the air like a jumping jack could inspire bad laughs. 
 
 
 
 Does "John Carter" get the job done for the weekend action audience? Yes, I suppose it does. The massive city on legs that stomps across the landscape is well-done. The Tharks are ingenious, although I'm not sure why they need tusks. Lynn Collins makes a terrific heroine. And I enjoyed the story outside the story, about how Burroughs wrote a journal about what he saw and appears briefly as character. He may even turn up in sequels. After all, he wrote some.
– John Carter was burdened by production drama and bad press about its giant budget; now critics are getting a chance to see what the fuss was all about. It's no great work of art, but the story of a Civil War veteran turned Martian hero is reasonably exciting, they say: In Slate, Dana Stevens calls the film "a strange, at times misshapen, but somehow lovable thing: a movie that keeps trying to be smaller and simpler than its $250 million special-effects budget will permit." Its best moments are simply as a "bare-bones space western," but there aren't enough of those moments. Roger Ebert calls the movie a "rousing boy's adventure story" that "will probably succeed" at generating a franchise. Does it "get the job done for the weekend action audience? Yes, I suppose it does," he writes in the Chicago Sun-Times. "For all the bumps in the narrative ... and less-than-stellar 3D effects, John Carter exerts the pull of a tall tale told by a campfire," notes Peter Travers in Rolling Stone. But in the Los Angeles Times, Betsy Sharkey can't forgive the movie's flaws. She calls it "hit and miss, and miss, and miss," noting that it's "the latest version of a long and rich Hollywood tradition: the big-budget fiasco. It's enough to make your jaw drop."