| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Dennis |
Posted - 23 Mar 2012 : 03:29:57
The only good thing about it is the super-quick dog that looks a little bit cute even though it resembles a frog. The rest of the movie is quite disappointing. But I'm not here to discuss how the movie sucks big time...
I wonder, if humans from Earth migrate to Toril, will they exhibit the same capabilities as John Carter in Mars, given how different the physics of Toril is?
[Edit] Conversely, would Toril's humans exhibit 'superpowers' if they go to Earth? |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Dennis |
Posted - 01 Apr 2012 : 04:46:04
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
If a bad movie stopped producers/directors from making more movies, then they would have stopped after the first Incredible Hulk film.
The first was a flop. That's why instead of continuing the story, they rebooted it instead. And 'normal' reboots (like The Amazing Spider-Man and The Dark Knight Trilogy) mostly happen after a series is finished, not when it's still starting. |
| Dennis |
Posted - 01 Apr 2012 : 04:41:31
quote:
Originally posted by Quale
It's not that bad, tough I imaged most of the creatures differently, with that fixed the sequel could be successful.
It is almost definite now that they are never going to make any sequel. They might do a reboot. But that's many years from now... |
| Kentinal |
Posted - 01 Apr 2012 : 02:11:49
Well, some do not believe it was that bad to watch, that said.
The movie was not named well, only those that read the Burroughs series might even place the name. Warlord of Mars might have been better.
When critics even paid attention to the release the few I heard said it was not promoted well. IMO another fail.
Of course and likely most damaging fail is the adverts that they put out that would turn off any that read all eleven books of the Mars series.
If it was up to me I would send script writer, promotion department to Mars. Oh, maybe a few executives that decided to be sold on the project as well. In part the movie had a high production cost because the movie made John Carter more powerful then in the book. Jumping 500 foot or so, clearly not was intended. The one advert where John Carter is told Mars was in a Civil war and asked to pick a side, that also appears to have been a flaw. As soon as John saw Dajah Thoris his side was picked.
Oh I am sure the movie has great special effects and many worked very hard on it. Overall however because of executive decisions it likely will go down, like Tron as a failure. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 01 Apr 2012 : 01:04:57
If a bad movie stopped producers/directors from making more movies, then they would have stopped after the first Incredible Hulk film.
To this day, I haven't been able to sit through the whole thing... and I owned it on disc. On the other hand, I would highly recommend it to insomniacs. 
You have to feel sorry for them for trying - how could they possibly not make a silly Hulk movie? Big & green, in purple shorts that managed to stretch 70 sizes or so... and ... "Hulk Smash puny humans!". C'mon... there is NO WAY to fix that mess.  |
| Quale |
Posted - 30 Mar 2012 : 07:55:52
It's not that bad, tough I imaged most of the creatures differently, with that fixed the sequel could be successful. |
| Lord Karsus |
Posted - 29 Mar 2012 : 23:16:19
-I don't know if the lack of success that this movie had will have any real impact on studios, directors and writers elsewhere thinking about producing other fantasy/sci-fi genre movies. The Green Lantern movie, by all accounts, was a horrible dud. I wish I could have my two hours or so back. I don't think that the failure at the box office that it had is going to do much to convince other studios, directors and writers to stop production on other superhero movies. |
| Seravin |
Posted - 29 Mar 2012 : 16:56:36
It may break even when all is said and done with overseas, merchandising, DVD/BlueRay/Rentals etc. But yeah. Stinker for Disney! Especially contrasted to Hunger Games.
I hope no one thinking of making a Drizzt movie is scared by the John Carter results! |
| Dennis |
Posted - 29 Mar 2012 : 16:26:29
I kinda pity this movie now. It's on its second week, yet the sales don't even reach half of the production cost. |
| Lord Karsus |
Posted - 26 Mar 2012 : 04:15:12
quote:
Originally posted by BEAST
I liked the movie. I took my little brother out for his birthday, and that's what he chose for us to go see. I splurged for the 3D version, figuring we might as well get the most out of the visuals. And it turned out to be a good action flick, with decent enough principles and themes, and more than a few laughs and whoah! moments.
-See? This. Other movies in the past that were generic enough action movies with laughs, whoa moments, and so on, haven't been harpooned and generally ill received as this movie has been (by critics and customers). I just don't get why. |
| BEAST |
Posted - 26 Mar 2012 : 03:54:14
I liked the movie. I took my little brother out for his birthday, and that's what he chose for us to go see. I splurged for the 3D version, figuring we might as well get the most out of the visuals. And it turned out to be a good action flick, with decent enough principles and themes, and more than a few laughs and whoah! moments.
I could analyze the hell out of stuff, but I found out a long time ago that that stopped being fun.
I think that the critics have had a heighday thumbing their noses up at this movie primarily because there weren't any big stars associated with it. That's terribly elitist industry insider crap. Contrarily, I've found a few positive reviews, but they mostly focus on the director and his evolution from Pixar CGI-based films into the mixed CGI-and-live action medium, which means that they're still boiling it all down to the individuals, instead of focusing on the product--the story. These critics all seem so petty and off-target to me.
Snootiness sucks!
Yeah, if we think about it, the book and movie are anachronistic and dated. The real world doesn't work the way that the author--understandably--thought that it did, way back when, or the way that the director shows it, here.
But that's not a big deal. If we watch a movie based on Greek mythology, we should realize that the original stories were based on an earlier people's understanding of the universe--an understanding which our modern knowledge contradicts in many ways. (How many flying horses, fire-breathing dragons, and lightning-hurling OG's do we see in the real world?)
And to that, I say, "So what?!" A Greek myth-based movie can still be hella entertaining, even though it's based on a dated world view. It can still have good characters and good action, with great eye candy.
That's John Carter, in a nutshell, for me.
Incidentally, what's the actual title of the movie? All the public material calls it John Carter. But right there at the end, before the credits rolled, there was a dramatic graphic that said "John Carter . . . of Mars: JCM". That confused me a bit.
I guess the movie-maker didn't want to spoil the story for the casual movie-goers by putting "Mars" right there in the title. I certainly had no idea that the story was about a trip to Mars, based on the TV commercials.
I also find it funny that the original author had no such qualms when it came to the title of his serial story or book.
People are so superficial and easily off-put, these days. Grr!!!
On a side note, I think John Carter would have superior physical ability to the Barsoomians, but only for a short time. Wouldn't his muscles, which were adapted to Earth's gravity, eventually begin to re-adapt to Barsoom's gravity? Wouldn't his muscles atrophy, over time? Wouldn't his bones lose some density? In effect, wouldn't he devolve into a Barsoomian, after awhile?
I don't think that the movie made it clear exactly how long Virgeenia John Carter lived on Barsoom, so I can't say for sure. But I know for a fact that my muscles begin to show signs of atrophy if I don't run for three or four days. My legs get tighter, and they feel like they're burning more easily if I try to force myself to go faster, and my lungs struggle to keep up. I lose conditioning very quickly when I fail to consistently expose my muscles to the same load.
Watch reality TV game shows in which there's much food deprivation at all, and the big burly types tend to suffer. When they can't continue to eat their special diets and do their special workouts, their bodies start catabolizing their own muscles, and that's nasty. They display physical superiority over competitors at first, but after awhile, they start to show dramatic degradation in their performance.
(Not that that matters to me. I still enjoyed the movie just fine.)
And I don't really care that the movie's struggling to make a return on its investment. That doesn't affect my level of enjoyment of the product.
Lots of movies have been more popular out there, while I thought they sucked. Others have been more critically acclaimed, while I thought there was some serious ass-kissery going on.
I would say that I was more disappointed by Spielberg's overstating of the Tuskegee Airmen's accomplishments in the movie Red Tails, which was based on true events; than I was with this science fantasy film, which was based on a science fantasy book, which was based on a science fantasy running storyline in a newspaper. I give fantasy story-tellers a lot more leeway than I do history-tellers.
Oh well. Cheers! |
| Dennis |
Posted - 26 Mar 2012 : 01:35:57
While those things count, for me at least, they aren't the only ones that do. Besides, they didn't really help the John Carter movie rise from the quagmire it's stuck in. As sales have it, it's still millions of dollars away from its production cost. |
| Lord Karsus |
Posted - 26 Mar 2012 : 00:18:08
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Its unrelatable.
-And Megatron and Optimus Prime are any more? For most people, all they want out of movies are explosions, eye candy, and surround sound. |
| crazedventurers |
Posted - 25 Mar 2012 : 00:17:08
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis.
I tend to agree. Though in my case, it's largely due to the fact that I rarely read sci-fi.
The Barsoom books are not hardcore sci-fi - they are swashbuckling swords and planets tales and had a massive impact on what what become the worlds first role-playing game.
Burroughs wrote excellent 'pulp' sci-fi/fantasy/swords and sorcery/sword and planet books that capture the wonder of adventuring very well. At the Earth's Core, (which is in the public domain takes a couple of hours to read and is free here: http://www.feedbooks.com/book/173/at-the-earth-s-core), has a great section with the 'hero' adventuring through the dungeons of the city, escaping large beasts in an amphitheatre, and trekking across country having more adventures on the way. Its a perfect example of D&D play in action.
Cheers
Damian |
| Dennis |
Posted - 25 Mar 2012 : 00:05:03
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I'm sure a large portion of the movie-going populace, regardless of age, has no idea who John Carter is.
I tend to agree. Though in my case, it's largely due to the fact that I rarely read sci-fi.
quote:
Originally posted by Icelander
Besides, he goes there by magic. Who's to say that the magic didn't 'fix' his body so that he could survive the local conditions?
They didn't exactly call it magic, but some sort of advanced manipulation of their planet's energy. But yes, such thing might have significantly altered his body, granting him those superhuman abilities.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Suppose Elminster does not cast spells at all (to travel), but rather, uses an existing portal network? It could be the back of Ed's pantry (or whatever) works similar to the wardrobe in the Narnia tales.
Didn't Ed mention that Elminster used teleportation spells, and not portals? Then again, even that is a non-issue, because his silverfire is more than enough to power any translocation spells. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 24 Mar 2012 : 22:42:05
Surface gravity on earth has been fairly constant over the ages and continents, but the gravity field is less in equatorial regions than at the poles, it is affected by oscillating tidal motions, and local conditions do change local gravity moment to moment (even footfalls and weather masses can momentarily change local gravity fields) - of course you need extraordinarily precise seismic instrumentation to measure these miniscule changes. And you're really measuring changes in mass/density, momentum transfer, and acceleration/inertia vectors, not "gravity" itself because the gravitational constant is definitively constant in classical physics. NASA still treats gravity as pretty constant when calculating how far they can throw things into space.
Incidentally, these sorts of metrics are now very sophisticated and used primarily for discovering underground deposits which can be mined. I suppose the military is also big on applying the technology towards surveillance and detection and targeting, as always.
We might expect the gravity of Luna and Mars to be similarly constant. Precision accelerometer instruments weren't part of the payloads on any of the probes or vehicles landed at either place.
We can only guess about how things are in the Realms. After all, gravity is easily affected by magic, spells like levitation and reverse gravity are known to many wizards (invented in ancient Netheril, not to mention Greyhawk/etc) ... and besides, our fancy electronic lab gear just won't work there anyways. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 24 Mar 2012 : 22:33:58
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
Apparently Elminster's plane shift, gate, portal, or worldwalk spells work well enough on Earth to get him back home, with little risk since he's reportedly visited Earth many times in many times. Then again, he is/was a Chosen of Mystra (perhaps her favourite) and as such might possess extraordinarily potent magic even in distant low-magic worlds normally beyond her reach.
On the other hand...
Suppose Elminster does not cast spells at all (to travel), but rather, uses an existing portal network? It could be the back of Ed's pantry (or whatever) works similar to the wardrobe in the Narnia tales. Portals are permanent magics, so like devices (and other permanent effects), we know from the SApellplague that such magics do not cease to exist when the magical field responsible for their creation collapses (meaning that Earth could have had much stronger magic in the past - our 'Weave' is decaying).
Then again, he has cast other high-end spells while on Earth, so even if he is using portals, we'd need some other explanation for that. Personally, I'm still rather fond of the idea that Earth's magic is breaking down (either tech or disbelief - or both - may be responsible). If this is true, and El is still capable of high-end spells (and he cast some sort of uber-timestop IIRC), it could mean that he - as a Chosen - brings a small portion of the Weave with him when he travels (kinda like a 'magical embassy'.. sort of..)
Since he was trained in Mythals and understands (perhaps better then anyone alive) the use of mantles, I can definitely see Elminster having his own personal, portable 'Weave' (which draws directly from his own supply of Silver Fire, which means its not perpetually sustainable). To use the computer analogies I love so much - he is like a laptop when away from Mystra's Weave - he can only last so long before his 'batteries' run low (and then he has to 'plug back in' to The Weave to recharge).
As for John Carter, its like our astronaughts on the Moon, except far less (1/6th that of Earth, if the Internet is to be believed). However, that means someone on Mars should still be capable of some pretty cool stuff - about 1/2 the ability they would have on the Moon.
So yeah, no Krypton super-jumps, but you'd still be superior to a native.
On a related note, in my 'One World' (the First, true world which was destroyed during the Godswar) theory, the Giants were that world's first people, which makes sense in that it was unimaginably large (ergo, larger flora & fauna), but doesn't make sense in that a planet with higher gravity would have smaller folk (like Dwarves). Then again, Earth had some pretty large creatures at one point, and I don't think our gravity has changed in the past few million years (anybody here know enough about physics to answer that one? Is gravity effected at all by rotation or other factors?) |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 24 Mar 2012 : 22:32:07
I understand what you're saying about iron as an example, it's traditional for warding against magic and faeries in many occult references. Although I don't happen to agree with this particular example, given the preponderance of enchanted swords and armors made of the stuff. For all we know, magic doesn't operate on Earth because we have too many radioactive isotopes, while Ao ensured there weren't any on Abeir-Toril. Insofar as magic is concerned within the Realms (and D&D in general), I'm more inclined to believe the rules put forth by Gygax and Volo than those of Crowley and Regardie. |
| Mournblade |
Posted - 24 Mar 2012 : 21:16:10
quote:
Originally posted by Kris the Grey
Ayrik,
I've got to believe it's all about the silver fire baby, you can draw that reservoir down for all sorts of reasons (including doing some funky things to truly dead magic areas), so why not power a few spells? What's more, I think Earth (and this is very consistent with the Earth/Realms linkage theories) is more low/untapped magic than truly magic dead. I forget who it was (Icelander?) who commented on the power of belief and who (you?) commented on the genetic element of magical talent, but I assume Earth has enough residual magic, it's just a lack of the Weave (to allow for the really good stuff), enough genetically predisposed magical Earthers (one imagines most were sorted off world along with the Earth deities that migrated in the dim past and all manner of magical beasts no longer found on Earth), and people simply not knowing they can (and thus how to) tap into the weak raw magical field about these parts that matters.
Which raises a thought... To get all 'modern physics' on you (sparked by what Icelander said about the density contrasts between Earth and Toril owing to the Underdark on Toril), maybe the issue is core size and composition between the two worlds? Earth's core might be made up of too much iron (and not enough of whatever exotic materials promote the existence of a Weave) in the same way that Mars has a core too small to have sustained internal volcanic activity on the scale needed to maintain an active planet wide electromagnetic shield (and thus not have lost it's water and it's atmosphere to space).
Of course, it's probably not that sophisticated at all. Arthur C. Clarke and all that stuff. Lol.
I am a stickler for science in science fiction. In fantasy though I like to leave that far behind. That is one thing that annoys me about Paizo. They try to come up with the scientific 'why' about things in their products. Typically it is often faulty, and it is very jarring, because of cascading effects.
I am a biologist by trade changing into a geologist by trade. I don't want to hear an untrained author's speculation on the biology of how a monster should work. Usually it is a misconception that fails to answer one aspect without accounting for the holes. I like when game designers leave the explanation at magic.
|
| Kris the Grey |
Posted - 24 Mar 2012 : 20:05:06
Ayrik,
I've got to believe it's all about the silver fire baby, you can draw that reservoir down for all sorts of reasons (including doing some funky things to truly dead magic areas), so why not power a few spells? What's more, I think Earth (and this is very consistent with the Earth/Realms linkage theories) is more low/untapped magic than truly magic dead. I forget who it was (Icelander?) who commented on the power of belief and who (you?) commented on the genetic element of magical talent, but I assume Earth has enough residual magic, it's just a lack of the Weave (to allow for the really good stuff), enough genetically predisposed magical Earthers (one imagines most were sorted off world along with the Earth deities that migrated in the dim past and all manner of magical beasts no longer found on Earth), and people simply not knowing they can (and thus how to) tap into the weak raw magical field about these parts that matters.
Which raises a thought... To get all 'modern physics' on you (sparked by what Icelander said about the density contrasts between Earth and Toril owing to the Underdark on Toril), maybe the issue is core size and composition between the two worlds? Earth's core might be made up of too much iron (and not enough of whatever exotic materials promote the existence of a Weave) in the same way that Mars has a core too small to have sustained internal volcanic activity on the scale needed to maintain an active planet wide electromagnetic shield (and thus not have lost it's water and it's atmosphere to space).
Of course, it's probably not that sophisticated at all. Arthur C. Clarke and all that stuff. Lol. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 24 Mar 2012 : 17:15:37
Apparently Elminster's plane shift, gate, portal, or worldwalk spells work well enough on Earth to get him back home, with little risk since he's reportedly visited Earth many times in many times. Then again, he is/was a Chosen of Mystra (perhaps her favourite) and as such might possess extraordinarily potent magic even in distant low-magic worlds normally beyond her reach. |
| Mournblade |
Posted - 24 Mar 2012 : 15:22:45
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
The only good thing about it is the super-quick dog that looks a little bit cute even though it resembles a frog. The rest of the movie is quite disappointing. But I'm not here to discuss how the movie sucks big time...
I wonder, if humans from Earth migrate to Toril, will they exhibit the same capabilities as John Carter in Mars, given how different the physics of Toril is?
[Edit] Conversely, would Toril's humans exhibit 'superpowers' if they go to Earth?
The physics of mars are not different from earth. The martian gravity is .38g so there would be no crazy jumping.
Toril's physics I imagine would be much the same as earth except that tech does not work well. Likewise I am sure when Elminster visited earth his magic was curbed.
|
| Mournblade |
Posted - 24 Mar 2012 : 15:21:09
quote:
Originally posted by entreri3478
I haven't seen the movie nor read the Burroughs books, so what abilities does John Carter have? Toril and Earth are roughly the same sized planets, so any gravity based physics (most) should be similar.
John Carter's abilities were vastly exaggerated for the movie. John Carter was a hero because of his abilities. The book had very little to do with the difference in gravity. Furthermore, the gravity on mars is not different enough to warrant those abilities. g=.38 on mars. I think. That means after about any jump he makes his bones would still break if he was jumpin that high. Yes His bone density is higher, but not enough to warrant him surviving impacts with rock.
I liked the movie. Alot. And I have read the books and loved the books. I thought the movie got the spirit right if nothing else. The only jarring thing was the gravity jumps. Edgar rice burroughs portrayed John Carter as a great warrior (yeah yeah wars not make one great I know) not a Cal El. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 24 Mar 2012 : 15:19:22
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
EDIT: And the dog was just TOO 'Jar-Jar Binks', IMHO. A movie should either try to be a serious drama, or ridiculous Disney affair aimed at children - it can't do both. I'm not saying it isn't possible - just epically hard to be taken seriously with such silliness implemented (especially in a film aimed specifically at older audiences - kids have no clue who John Carter is).
I'm sure a large portion of the movie-going populace, regardless of age, has no idea who John Carter is. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 24 Mar 2012 : 14:58:42
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Karsus
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
To others that have posted concerning the movie, I saw a few promos and I knew I did not want to consider even watching of SciFi when it becomes released for cable. I have no idea why what might have become a series of movies was so poorly executed, oh in fairness I only saw a few promos however they are supposed to some of the best most interesting parts of a movie.
-Surprised me, too. I haven't seen it, but you figure, what won't the audience like about a generic sc-fi action movie with plenty of eye catching special effects and fight scenes?
Its unrelatable.
To Buroughs' audience, 'Martians' were feasible. To us, its just silly nonsense. They would have done better to give it a Planet of the Apes-like update (modify the science to fit today's more advanced information).
In other words, have John Carter fall through a worm hole and wind-up on some strange, 'unknown' world (which could turn out to be Mars, either a million years into the future, or tens of thousands of years into the past).
Without an update, its just...... dated.
EDIT: And the dog was just TOO 'Jar-Jar Binks', IMHO. A movie should either try to be a serious drama, or ridiculous Disney affair aimed at children - it can't do both. I'm not saying it isn't possible - just epically hard to be taken seriously with such silliness implemented (especially in a film aimed specifically at older audiences - kids have no clue who John Carter is). |
| Icelander |
Posted - 24 Mar 2012 : 10:48:55
Well, John Carter of Mars was written a fair while ago. Since there were actual scientists claiming that Mars had breathable atmosphere, we probably shouldn't be all that hard on Burroughs for going with it.
Besides, he goes there by magic. Who's to say that the magic didn't 'fix' his body so that he could survive the local conditions?
Much the same as English-to-Common translation convention. Sure, it's nonsense scientifically, but it's the 'one impossible thing' which has to be there so that the story can happen at all. After all, John Carter appearing on Mars and then choking to death would have been a short novel series. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 24 Mar 2012 : 09:44:59
But the critical issue is that science is a package deal, one cannot select some science to fit the facts and ignore/discard the rest. Not without invalidating all science (even the "privileged" science which receives preferential treatment).
Sure, gravity on Mars is roughly 1/3 that of Earth, Earth humans could indeed jump much higher on Mars than on Earth. They'd also start asphyxiating from lack of oxygen (while their lung tissues strain, tear, and boil within relative vacuum pressure) before they could land. I doubt an unprotected human on the surface of Mars would be able to make a second or third jump, I think it far more likely he'd be a spastic gurgling wheezing dying lump on the ground.
So what we're left with is a story, call it science fiction call it fantasy, where it all boils down to an arbitrarily pseudo-realistic setting and/or the characters being able to use "magical" (rule-making) powers. John Carter's powers in the Realms setting depend entirely on the judgements of those importing him to the Realms ... judgements which are no less arbitrary than the settings themselves, even when officially submitted by a "canon" source. |
| Kentinal |
Posted - 24 Mar 2012 : 00:39:42
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
He became relatively stronger and "light," allowing him to jump so high he can probably reach the top of a mountain in one leap.
Only 50 foot was highest reported jump.
Well, in the movie, the distance from where he jumped to the tower where the princess was preparing for her wedding is definitely way higher than 50 feet.
That reply was based on books, not the movie. The movie, based on promos, makes John Charter far more powerful then Burroughs ever wrote. Of course that copyright is expired and the Idea of a trademark of a name "John Carter" back then likely did not occur. I suspect even "Tarzan" was not trademarked. They did not do business much that way back then. |
| Dennis |
Posted - 24 Mar 2012 : 00:21:39
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
quote:
Originally posted by entreri3478
I haven't seen the movie nor read the Burroughs books, so what abilities does John Carter have? Toril and Earth are roughly the same sized planets, so any gravity based physics (most) should be similar.
He became relatively stronger and "light," allowing him to jump so high he can probably reach the top of a mountain in one leap.
Only 50 foot was highest reported jump.
Well, in the movie, the distance from where he jumped to the tower where the princess was preparing for her wedding is definitely way higher than 50 feet. |
| Lord Karsus |
Posted - 23 Mar 2012 : 23:41:07
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
To others that have posted concerning the movie, I saw a few promos and I knew I did not want to consider even watching of SciFi when it becomes released for cable. I have no idea why what might have become a series of movies was so poorly executed, oh in fairness I only saw a few promos however they are supposed to some of the best most interesting parts of a movie.
-Surprised me, too. I haven't seen it, but you figure, what won't the audience like about a generic sc-fi action movie with plenty of eye catching special effects and fight scenes? |
| Kentinal |
Posted - 23 Mar 2012 : 23:35:24
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
quote:
Originally posted by entreri3478
I haven't seen the movie nor read the Burroughs books, so what abilities does John Carter have? Toril and Earth are roughly the same sized planets, so any gravity based physics (most) should be similar.
He became relatively stronger and "light," allowing him to jump so high he can probably reach the top of a mountain in one leap.
Only 50 foot was highest reported jump.
<snip>
quote:
To all:
I slightly modified the OP.
To the modification, a spell caster might be able to use magic on Earth. |
|
|
