Ghosts of Mars

Apparently GOM was originally intended to be a 3rd entry of the Escape franchise, with character Snake Plissken (Oh my god, I wish they did that instead, because Ice Cube always was, and still is terrible at acting). Anyways, that info in mind, it made so much more sense. John Carpenter's Escape visual style was right there all along, and I never noticed. The costumes, the train, the future technology, and all the visual effects are exactly the same as the Kurt Russel Escape films, just transported to the Mars location. I think part of the issue with fans is that people didn't understand what this was. It was an old fashioned future (if that makes sense). The story takes place in the future, but using visual techniques and story elements that feel dated in the past. It's actually fun that way, if you don't treat it like the Matrix, or something that actually was progressive at the time.

That's it, no deep dives. This film is Ice Cube playing a dangerous prisoner that was meant to be transferred, when things go amok for all the human survivors. It's Escape from NY/L.A. mixed with Assault on Precinct 13 set on Mars. The bad guys causing all the trouble are the "ghosts"/ weird creepy monsters that self mutilate, and are more or less what happens to people from the Mad Max movies when they have a supply of meth. Oh, I forgot the ghost spirit can travel into people's bodies.

It is fun if you let it be. It's a low budget nothing action. You get a young Jason Statham as a perv, Clea DuVall, Pam Grier in a weird pushy lesbian commander role, and Ice Cube if you are into his wide range of abilities (gangster with a Cali accent on Mars, go figure).

This is the definition of a 4-5 star flick. It is fun, and has people I like long enough to keep watching. I give 5 stars, just because it's been given an unfair wrap over the years. If you treat it like it was made in the 80's you might actually like it a lot!

Packing a badass cast & good dose of gore-filled action, John Carpenter's penultimate film (to date) features an interesting premise and even set things up well in the beginning but once the main plot takes over, the script shortcomings start to surface as dialogues go downhill, characters turn bland, acting takes a hit, VFX inadequacy is exposed, and the scare factor diminishes in its entirety. Not one of Carpenter's best but not a chore either, Ghosts of Mars still has an unabashed quality to it that makes the ride somewhat enjoyable despite the hammy acting & over-the-top execution.

The wild-west inspiration is obvious.

It could just as easily have been made as a "regular" horror-western, and perhaps a remake/reimaging will make it so.

The sets are OK, the CGI is so-so.

The actors are doing a decent job and all in all, the film accomplishes what it sets out to do: A two-fisted action-romp with a splash of horror and gore.

It's not high art but it is silly fun and good enough for an evening along with popcorn and soda.

Carpenter's films tend to age like fine wine. When they're released, they're lamblasted by critics and fans. Ten years later, they're classics; for instance, "The Thing", "Big Trouble in Little China", "They Live", "Prince of Darkness" -- and "Ghost of Mars" is no exception. This is a tremendously entertaining film that shouldn't be viewed as a horror film, but rather, as a tongue-in-cheek western, in the vain of the Spaghetti Westerns. You all have to pull your heads out and watch this film again...in about nine years. I'll bet you'll say, "You know what, that was a hell of a lot of fun." In the meantime, get off Carpenter's ass.

I'm not some naive fan who thinks Carpenter can do no wrong. I didn't care much for Vampires or Village of the Damned (they were alright, but the scripts for those two were not up to snuff for a great director like Carpenter). However, I think Ghosts of Mars is one of his greatest movies. If you can't appreciate this movie then you can't really appreciate Carpenter, IMO. From the Lovecraftian story and atmosphere, to the anamorphic photography, to the excellent music, everything here is Carpenter. Hopefully this movie will find its audience, in time, rather than be forgotten. One criticism of Carpenter I've never been able to understand is that people say he isn't subtle, he relies solely on shocks and violence. Yes, his movies have shocks and violence, they are the release mechanisms for all of the terror he slowly builds up, neanderthals! It seems some film critics are just too good for American horror, they can't stoop to its level from their lofty perch.