What's new

*** Official SKY CAPTAIN AND THE WORLD OF TOMORROW Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

Tony_Ramos

Second Unit
Joined
Sep 13, 2003
Messages
496
I think it may have just been that the ending outdoor scenes are much brighter than the rest of the film.



another problem is when scenes are very high contrast, it can be hard for your eyes to focus in on an area. Those shots near the end are more uniformly lit, therefore, you're eyes don't have to refocus as you look over the screen.
 

TheLongshot

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 12, 2000
Messages
4,118
Real Name
Jason
quote:I interpreted Sky Captain, as a SciFi film pretending to have been made in 1939, which is a fine idea.




No, that would be, "The Lost Skeleton of Cadavera". (Actually, that would be 50s, so that isn't quite right either.)



What I think he was going for was to have it look like the SF artwork of the time. In that, it looks to me like he succeeded.



Jason
 

Kenneth

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jul 31, 1997
Messages
757
quote:And why does launching a rocket to build a new Earth require the destruction of the old one??




My impression (they didn't go into the physics of this) is that because of the size and mass of the rocket it required an enormous booster to break free of the Earth's gravity. This booster was so powerful that when it kicked in it would incinerate the Earth (or the atmosphere). The physics are obviously shakey since even to get the rocket as high as they did would require pretty massive engines and large amounts of fuel (far beyond anything they could have carried). However, like many films of the period they were emulating, they used suspension of disbelieve to get around those issues.



Kenneth
 

Jason Seaver

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 30, 1997
Messages
9,303
I just assumed that they were using ca. 1938 physics where it was popularly believed that an atomic explosion could, perhaps, start a fusion chain reaction that incinerated the entire atmosphere. Wasn't this considered possible, if exceedingly unlikely, even by some Manhattan Project scietnists?
 

CharlieD

Grip
Joined
Oct 24, 2000
Messages
22
I find myself very hot and cold on this film. Personally, I love these kinds of movies. The action/adventure films (Raiders, SW, Back to the Future, etc) are my favorite genre to see on the big screen. They are everything great about seeing movies in the theater in my opinion, but this film seemed to lack the requisite skill at the helm to make the payoffs deliver smiles and laughs.

While I am sure on paper the appearence of the floating airstrips, the arrival at Shangra-La, the chain rattle of other giant dog, the dead villian, and the joke at the end all seemed like great moments of discovery or fun for the audience, they just seemed to lack any suspense. Without that, they did not become "moments" on the screen. I personally chaulk this up to an inexperienced director not knowing how to make the moments magical. Say what you want about Speilberg or Lucas or Zemeckis, they can deliver magical things, and that is what makes these kinds of films wonderful. When Indy shoots the swordsman, when Marty first goes back in time, when the first Death Star is destoryed, etc, etc, etc. Sky Captain potentially had those kinds of moments. I even think they recognized them in the script, but were unable to translate them effectively to the screen.

Also, it seemed strange to me that in 1939 anyone would refer to the first World War as "World War One" (which they do several times). The second World War either wouldn't have started or had just started (September 2nd 1939 Germany invades Poland). Either way I don't think people would have called it "WW1." Minor but distracting... If anyone knows me to be mistaken, please let me know.
 

Kenneth

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jul 31, 1997
Messages
757
Good point on WWI. Wasn't it referred to as "The Great War" or "The War to End All Wars" until after WWII

Kenneth
 

John Miles

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Jan 16, 2000
Messages
236
quote: I even resorted to the old soda technique, by sucking some soda into the straw then holding it with my finger and finally releasing it on top of both pupils.




Well, there's a new one.
smiley_jawdrop.gif
 

DaveGTP

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2002
Messages
2,096
We went and saw this this weekend.



I must say, I enjoyed it, for an empty action flick. Not very often I enjoy one (except I seem to have a weakness for some comic-book based flicks).



I thoroughly enjoyed the alternate-reality style. Brought to mind what makes alternative history sci-fi so cool. And brought to mind classic sci-fi.



For those that liked the syle, I recommend the anime series "Last Exile". Very very similiar stylistically - advanced technology in a WWI/II-era style.





Personally, I took the acting as stylistically chosen. It seemed like it was trying to come across with a bit of 1930's B&W feel. Worked for me.



The overuse of CG that I dislike in the SW prequels was cleverly hidden by the extremely vintage style color grading and softening of the image. I loved the style, the visuals, and the classic film elements/nods. Otherwise it was just another empty action flick.
biggrin.gif
But the style won me over on it. At least it is unique.
 

Lewis Besze

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 28, 1999
Messages
3,134
quote:It's not about agreement, its about understanding where the reviewer is coming from so you can adjust their reaction to your tastes.
I really don't have a problem to see where he's[Ebert] coming from.Which is why I found myself agreeing with him 80% of the time.
 

MishaLauenstein

Supporting Actor
Joined
Sep 4, 2002
Messages
774
Location
Vancouver, BC
Real Name
Misha Lauenstein
quote:Either way I don't think people would have called it "WW1." Minor but distracting... If anyone knows me to be mistaken, please let me know.




Well, not minor, I think because I went into this movie thinking it was supposed to be as if a futuristic movie had been made in the 1930's. Otherwise, what does the title mean?



So one of the things I was trying to figure out was the year it was supposed to take place in. The first newspaper shown went by so quickly, that I thought it said 1999. The initial references to World War I immediately made me think that it had been 'filmed' after 1941 at least.



The flight to Nepal via China, without mentioning a war, made me think it must have been 'filmed' after the war.



Then I was totally thrown by the Wizard of Oz scene which clearly set the movie in 1939 (later validated by a newspaper banner)



From the research I have since done, it appears the World War I/II moniker might have started in summer of 1941 when the Russians joined the war, and certainly by the time the US joined, unless Canada was in it by 1939?





I found it extremely off-putting and think the movie should have been set in 1999.



Misha
 

Lewis Besze

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 28, 1999
Messages
3,134
quote:And no, the ppl walking out weren't the WalMart crowd, they were affluent college students, meaning the most educated demographic in America.
Well I think this movie would appeal to college students more then to the Wal-Mart crowd as you so eloquently put it.One should certainly know something about old movies to apprecaite the style of this film.
quote: I had fun watching it and even that quirky last line of the movie had me leaving with a smile on my face
I missed the last line,it was just not inteligable at my screening.Can someone post it here?
 

Andy Sheets

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2000
Messages
2,377
quote:I just assumed that they were using ca. 1938 physics where it was popularly believed that an atomic explosion could, perhaps, start a fusion chain reaction that incinerated the entire atmosphere. Wasn't this considered possible, if exceedingly unlikely, even by some Manhattan Project scietnists?




I believe so, and that was my interpretation of the scene, too.



I really liked the movie. I love the old pulp sci-fi/fantasy and this was like the Kill Bill of that particular kind of fiction with nearly everything stuffed into one exhuberant movie. Looking forward now to seeing what Conran can do with the Princess of Mars movie.
 

CaseyL

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jan 29, 2002
Messages
806
I saw it and I really enjoyed it. Is it flawless? No, it's not really special in any way than it was fun. I Loved the art style a lot, and enjoyed the action and the cheesy plot. It was like every serial I have ever seen, squished into one. I couldn't help but smile. Sure the acting was a little flat, but I must admit that Jolie (one of my loathed actors) was not only bearable, but enjoyable. I liked the Frankie character. I actually liked something that AJ did! Amazing! There were definatley moments that I forgot that everything was CG. Overall, I did enjoy the theme and the style of this film, and ultimatley the film itself. And really,in the end, isn't that what truly counts?
 

Stephen_L

Supporting Actor
Joined
Mar 1, 2001
Messages
534
This is a film I'd probably classify as a guilty pleasure, i.e. a film with numerous serious flaws, but one that I enjoyed nonetheless. I wouldn't claim its a great film; it felt more like art direction in search of a story. The director seemed determined to cram every thirties and forties movie reference into the picture without considering its contribution to a coherent story. Gwenneth Paltrow was miscast, the Paltrow-Law chemistry was weak. Yet I still enjoyed it because it resonated so strongly with many of the classic films I loved as a kid. The robots harkened back to the old Max Fleisher Superman cartoons, the dogfights to old war pictures, the dinosaur island to King Kong, the shiny spaceship to dozens of fifties sci fi epics (Especially "When Worlds Collide") Without the old movie resonances I probably would pan the flick, but the movie made me feel like a kid at the movies again, and that's good enough for me.
 

DustinPizarro

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Aug 23, 2004
Messages
93
Saw this movie last night and I LOVED it! Definetely felt like a Saturday matinee. Stunning visuals and good performances made up for some of its flaws. Can't wait for the DVD!!!

On the down side, I think I saw SC in the wrong aspect ratio!?! I saw it in a THX audutorium and expected a wider screen. But the screen looked very squarish and the picture filled the whole screen. On the audio side, the dialogue was difficult to hear with all the sonic effects and soundtrack playing. Did anyone go through this?
 

Jim Barg

Second Unit
Joined
Apr 7, 2004
Messages
395
Real Name
Jim Barg
quote:On the down side, I think I saw SC in the wrong aspect ratio!?! I saw it in a THX audutorium and expected a wider screen. But the screen looked very squarish and the picture filled the whole screen.




I know the film is 1.85:1 (being that I've seen the film twice at work), plus the squarish screen is probably intentional, as to emulate the OAR of those vintage films. So it probably was the right one. Having a THX-certified auditorium doesn't guarantee that the film will always be in a scope ratio.
 

Malcolm R

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2002
Messages
25,141
Real Name
Malcolm
Saw this today and really liked it. I was pleasantly surprised that the entire film wasn't just "robots in the city" as the trailers seemed to indicate. I thought the casting was pretty good. Gwyneth has never really impressed me, and I didn't really like her in the opening scenes, but by the end I think she owned the character and I'd be happy to see her in a sequel.

Loved the homages. Others have already mentioned the "Venture" and "Titanic" while underwater. The first encounter with the creatures on the island seemed to be very Jurassic Park/The Lost World. Shangri-La looked just like Rivendell in LOTR. There was also a human body all wrapped up in the spider web just as they're first hacking through the jungle, too. Nod to Shelob?

Thankfully, never being impressed by any Star Wars flick, and still perplexed by their popularity, I was able to watch the film totally free from SW comparisons.
biggrin.gif


Really loved this film, right down to the final line which was just perfect, "Polly, the lens cap." After whining during the entire adventure that she only had two shots left, she ended up with none.
laugh.gif
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,814
Messages
5,123,769
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top