Uh Oh Houston. Mars Needs Moms Flames Out

[Disneyfanman]

It looks like Disney Pictures may have its first full "flame-out" disaster in awhile. Mars Needs Moms earned 1.7 Million on Friday, good for 5th place in the U.S. With a reported budget of 150 Million and pretty crummy reviews, this one could lose a lot of money.

Animated Sci-Fi Action flicks seem to be prone to big splats. Combine that genre with Robert Zemeckis' motion capture style of late and I think they may get a rest for awhile. I would love to see him go back to making live action films.

Anybody see it?

 

[imagineer boy]

I'm not really surprised. I thought it looked pretty crappy.

And I agree, Zemekis needs to go back to live action (and PLEASE make a Roger Rabbit sequel). I thought Polar Express, Beowulf, and Christmas Carol were all just okay and only worth watching in theaters in 3-D. On DVD they lose a ton of their appeal.

 

[happymom52003]

We are planning on taking the kids to see it this week since it is spring break and we aren't going anywhere, but I have not been impressed with the previews. And I don't like the title at all. It sounds odd and feels awkward to say it, kind of like the beginning of a tongue twister.

 

[Crockett]

Looking at how this, and other computer animated films such as: Bolt, The Wild, Meet The Robinsons, Chicken Little... etc. And even halfway decent films such as Tangled which, even though it wasn't a "flop" per-say, it still fell short of budget. Disney needs to learn eventually that without Pixar...they simply cannot successfully compete in the computer animated scene. Please, please, PLEASE stay with Pixar!!

 

[Hakunamatata]

Never was impressed with the previews. Don't plan on seeing it at theaters and will likely wait until it comes out on the Disney Channel if I want to see it.

 

[FigmentJedi]

Looking at how this, and other computer animated films such as: Bolt, The Wild, Meet The Robinsons, Chicken Little... etc. And even halfway decent films such as Tangled which, even though it wasn't a "flop" per-say, it still fell short of budget. Disney needs to learn eventually that without Pixar...they simply cannot successfully compete in the computer animated scene. Please, please, PLEASE stay with Pixar!!

The Wild wasn't Disney, it was made by a canadian studio owned by William Shatner and distributed by Disney.

Also, Robinsons was great.

 

[disneypearl]

Not surprised at all. The previews looked awful. Not sure what Disney was thinking with this one.

 

[Malvito]

I thought it looked cute; will probably see it in regular 2D, at the less expensive rates. Got to admit, though, that I find that particular form of motion capture to be off-putting, at least in terms of characters that are supposed to be human.

 

[Disneyfanman]

It looks like Disney canceled Zemeckis' next project, a remake of Yellow Submarine in Motion Capture. Apparently he can shop it around at the other studios.

 

[ABigBrassBand]

It looks like Disney canceled Zemeckis' next project, a remake of Yellow Submarine in Motion Capture. Apparently he can shop it around at the other studios.

As much as I want to say that I was looking forward to that, I knew it was going to be bad, so I'm relieved they cancelled it.

As for MNM, it looked horrid, so good riddance. Killed two birds with one stone in this case, eh?

 

[clarksfan95]

This wasn't a Disney film either. It falls into the same category as "The Wild" and "Vanguard", it was done by ImageMovers Digital which was a Canadian based animation company.

Disney Feature Animation had no hand in the actual creation of this film so the quality is going to be far less than what one would expect from a major studio.

I first saw a commercial for this film during the Superbowl and was left wondering if it was a Disney film. I even asked everyone else in the room if they had heard the Disney name attached to the commercial, but no one was really paying attention.

I personally think the film looks lousy. The character models are very "standard" and nothing to write home about, the story I don't think really translates well into an animated film....some things are better left in books.

Also, no need to worry about Disney dumping Pixar...they bought them for quite a bit of money so Pixar won't be going anywhere anytime soon. Plus it's the only super successful studio in North America at the moment.

 

[Silver Figment]

Whether Disney made it or not, they still decided to distribute it. I'm honestly not too sure what they were thinking because it looked terrible. Not surprised one bit that it bombed.

 

[erasure fan1]

Yea the person or persons responsible for green lighting this need a big fat slap in the head. The average person has no idea the film wasnt made by disney feature animation so they just associate it as a really bad disney movie.

 

[britdaw]

I'm not really surprised. I thought it looked pretty crappy.

Totally agree. When neither one of my kids was even remotely interested in seeing it, either, that pretty much told me it was going to bomb. My kids like some of the dumbest stuff, but they didn't want to see this one 'cause they said it looked stupid. LOL

 

[Hakunamatata]

Whether Disney made it or not, they still decided to distribute it. I'm honestly not too sure what they were thinking because it looked terrible. Not surprised one bit that it bombed.

I agree. When they elected to associate their name with it, it became a Disney movie.

 

[kal1484]

We saw it, and I actually liked it. Thought it was cute, and liked the storyline.