John Carter . . . is smarter

I've always been curious about the John Carter series, even though I've never read the books, simply because it influenced so many classic SF filmmakers. So I was looking forward to the film despite the atrocious job Disney did of marketing it. The end result is . . . not bad at all. It's a fun adventure with a talented cast, great visuals and a nice sense of humour (I especially like the running gag of the aliens calling JC "Virginia" because of his home state). Andrew Stanton does a decent job in his first live action directorial effort following several triumphs for Pixar and the ending nicely sets up the (hoped for but unlikely) sequel.
So why has the film being so widely rejected by critics and audiences? Part of the problem is that, after providing the inspiration for properties such as Star Wars and Avatar, the movie looks overly familiar, despite the source material being a hundred years old. There's nothing here we haven't seen done before, and better, and the plethora of alien names in the dialogue is likely to make non-sci-fi fans' eyes glaze over. Aside from Willem Dafoe as the voice of Tars Tarkas, JC's pet, Woola, and the feisty heroine played by Lynn Collins none of the characters really make an impression.
I hate to put a studio down for taking a risky gamble, but putting $250 million into a movie with no stars and an unproven director is just asking for trouble. And unfortunately John Carter isn't quite good enough to make up for its box office failure with cult status years from now. But you could do a lot worse than spend two hours watching this enjoyable nonsense.