How do you think John Carter should have been marketed?

Everybody's still nervous that Andrew Stanton's John Carter will fail at the box office — and the latest article on the subject goes deeper into the politics inside the Mouse House, and the ways that they've messed around with Carter and his leather thong.

The Daily Beast has an article that quotes from a collection of recently ousted Disney executives who are (unsurprisingly) calling for the head of studio boss Rich Ross. But beneath all the vitriolic political talk comes out one interesting question. Who exactly is the studio marketing John Carter to? Are they marketing it to anyone at all?

Clearly they're not courting the Geek market. Dropping the "of Mars" in the title was clearly made to appeal to everyone (but sadly we think makes it lose its twinkle a bit). An unnamed rival studio exec who talked to the Beast agrees that, "You don't know what it is... The geek generation isn't responding. It's too weird for the family audience. Then it has the Disney brand and PG-13? I'm not sure who it's for."

So we ask you folks, how should this movie have been marketed? Could it still be hailed as the next Star Wars with its Tatooine-esque landscapes, alien life forms and epic Hero's Journey? Or how about as the next big blue bloody action flick gunning for the dudes and fans of the chest-pounding Fast and Furious movies?

Another angle is to push the family friendly ace-in-the-hole this movie already has. Andrew Stanton. He made Wall-E, Nemo and Toy Story. This man is an Oscar winning family movie making machine, we'd love to see a lot more silly Woola moments or oddball Thark jokes featured in the trailer. And finally, how about selling it with sex! Make Taylor Kitsch the next "Hey Girl" Ryan Gosling participant. He can retake promo stills at my apartment.

What do you think would have worked?


And if you can't find an answer you like on the poll, sound off in the comments.