I fell for this movie hard. I saw it at a Saturday afternoon matinee (what better time?) and had a grin pasted on my face the entire time. Johnny Angel’s review is spot-on.
My one disappointment is that the movie didn’t begin with a 1930’s-esque newsreel. C’mon, show us that the march of war goes on! [sub]Eat Snacky Smores[/sub]
Aw cheezit! I was hoping to be the first person to mention the “Wuthering Heights” marquee!
Anyway, I loved it. Yes, it was derivitive of many, many other pulp sources, but what is (or was) pulp fiction if not as derivitive as it was inventive? Yes, the plot was a bit thin, but at least it had a plot, which is a major improvement over SPFX crapfests like “Resident Evil.” I even liked Gwyneth Paltrow a lot (and normally I don’t particularly like her.) As far as smoking or drinking is concerned, I don’t recall seeing a particular amount of either in old serials (I’ve seen a few, but admittedly I’m not an expert on them.) The old serials were after all aimed primarily at kids, and therefore downplayed adult “past-times.”
I suppose nobody mentioned this reference because it seemed too obvious, but in the interest of completeness - the “cameo” by Sir Laurence Olivier was an homage to the Wizard of Oz, complete with a “man behind the curtain.”
Saw it and loved it.
Mangetout, if your kids can handle Harry Potter they should be fine in this movie. There are a couple of “BOO!” moments, but nothing too bad. There’s plenty of fun stuff to look at that I’m sure would capture a kid’s imagination.
What I saw a lot of in the killer set-pieces was the influence of the pulp SF mags of the 30s and 40s. The giant robots, the tentacle robots, the floating aerodrome, the rocket ship, the mini-animals, etc … all had direct precedent in pulp SF covers of the time.
Also, I thought the creatures on the island weren’t dinosaurs but moas, an extinct giant bird that is thought to have survived into the 1800s in New Zealand, and which might credibly have had a remnant population floating around somewhere back in the 30s (as far as people knew then).
What I saw a lot of in the killer set-pieces was the influence of the pulp SF mags of the 30s and 40s. The giant robots, the tentacle robots, the floating aerodrome, the rocket ship, the mini-animals, etc … all had direct precedent in pulp SF covers of the time.
Also, I thought the creatures on the island weren’t dinosaurs but moas, an extinct giant bird that is thought to have survived into the 1800s in New Zealand, and which might credibly have had a remnant population floating around somewhere back in the 30s (as far as people knew then).
Sky Captain came in number one at the box office at $16 million. Them’s good numbers, I hope the film proves to have some legs, and I think it will, but I’m sure we’re outta bomb territory here.
Come to Nashville and I’ll buy your Imax ticket cause we got it! I plan on seeing it there next.
How about someone list the references a little more clearly?
1)Suite 1138 - George Lucas staple
2)Godzilla in the Tokyo newspaper
3)The Venture - sunken ship from 1930’s King Kong (complete with cage)
4)To me it sounded like the robot eye beams were the same sound fx as the War of the Worlds death beams.
Please add…
I’m afraid $16 million is death, not “good numbers” for a film with a $70 million production budget and $35 million more in marketing expenses.
There are two ways to look at those numbers.
First, compare them to other September openings of about the same amount.
Over at boxofficemojo, the movies just above and below it are:
Stigmata - total gross $50 million; production budget $29 million; marketing $20 million
Don’t Say A Word - $55 million; $50 million; $25 million
Zoolander - $45 million; $28 million; $20 million
The Tuxedo - $50 million; $60 million; $25 million
Sky Captain cost much more and had higher marketing costs than any of these.
It might hope to replicate Seven’s $100 million gross off a $14 million opening weekend. But Seven only cost $33 million and was released in 1995, when it was the highest grossing September opener in history.
Second, compare Sky Captain to other movies from this year with similar production and marketing budgets.
Back to boxofficemojo current weekend:
Bourne Supremacy - production budget $75 million; marketing budget $35 million; opening weekend $52 million; total gross $170 million
Collateral - $65 million; $40 million; $25 million; $96 million
Manchurian Candidate - $80 million; $35 million; $20 million; $64 million
Alien v. Predator - $60 million; $35 million; $38 million; $79 million
On average, therefore, movies will make in the U.S. a total gross of about three times the opening weekend. Sky Captain is extremely unlikely to gross its own production budget. It may barely gross its marketing budget.
Sky Captain may have legs as people find it through word of mouth. It may become a cult classic. It may sell millions of DVDs.
Unless it does any of these things, however, it will be written off as a bomb, a failed experiment.
I saw SC&TWOT in a special preview presented by our Science Fiction Museum. They told us ahead of time that the film would be followed by a Q&A session with Seattle filmmaker Kris Kristensen, a friend of Kerry Conran’s. I was surprised when Kristensen introduced Conran himself. It was a great film, and an informative follow-up.
During his introduction, Kris talked about going to film school with Kerry, and about how he wasn’t like all other film students, in that he wasn’t trying to make a dark film filled with angst (which every other film student was doing as his student film). Then, years later, when Kerry told Kris he was working on a film that he was doing in his own living room, Kerry assumed that he was working on an ‘angst film.’ After all, what other kind of movie could be filmed in a living room. Then he went to Kerry’s apartment and saw the blue screen in the corner, and the 6-minute Sky Captain sequence he’d made over the course of 4 years. It was this 6-minute test film that got Jude Law interested, and it was Law who drove the film into the big time.
The funniest thing that happened was when Kerry’s wireless microphone wasn’t working right, Kris said, “Try shaking it.” And that fixed the problem! (Giovanni Ribisi said the same thing when the ray gun failed in the movie.)
Conran told us that the movie, while it took a lot of work by a lot of artists, cost a lot less than most special effects films. This is because there was so little live filming, followed by an excessive amount of post-production. He often didn’t even know exactly what the ‘sets’ would look like when the actors laid down their scenes.
He told us that he only had a total of 26 days with Paltrow and Law, and that Jolie was only on set for 3 days.
I didn’t have a problem with it, but other’s perception of lack in Gwynneth’s portrayal may come from her not being as good as the others at the tight schedule and acting to an empty blue screen.
He also said that it was Jude Law’s idea to use Olivier. He guessed that Jude had always wanted to work with Lawrence (what actor doesn’t have this fantasy) and had realized that this movie would allow him to do so. It was only after they’d done it that they realized that there might be some weird ethical issues raised by it. Of course, the Olivier estate was okay with it.
He also said that before they filmed the live action with the big actors, they’d made a full-length animated version of the film, and another with some of Kerry’s friends in the live parts. These were used to show the actors what they’d need to react to against the blue screen. We told him that we expect all of this to appear on the DVD special edition. He didn’t commit to anything, but said he thinks at least the original 6-minute teaser will be there.
Kerry Conran’s next project is going to be “A Princess of Mars,” based on the classic Edgar Rice Burroughs John Carter books. I think he’ll do it well.
The Empire State building was originally designed to serve as a zeppelin dock. Due to strong wind and the Hindenberg disaster, the docking mast was only used once. For more information:
http://www.esbnyc.com/tourism/tourism_facts_esbnews_july2000.cfm?CFID=7557355&CFTOKEN=24185595
Waaaahh! 
Guess I’d better go see it again real soon, then, before it disappears.
Don’t forget about the international markets. I think this film will play great in Japan and pretty good in most European markets.
That will add a few drops to the bucket.
Saw it Friday, and I’d give it a great big “meh”.
I never, ever thought I’d say this, but Angelina Jolie was the best thing about the movie. She was easily the most interesting character and played it with panache. Giovanni Ribisi came in second, his character was believable and likable. Jude Law dialed in his performance and Paltrow was cursed with a character that no one could like even if they tried.
Also, I didn’t realize Darth whatshisname was going to appear (as a female “ninja” coughsithcough) as well as the Attack of the Clones whoops I mean robots.
Focus was so soft it was distracting. Effects were great, but that was to be expected. I HATED the scene with Paltrow running through the giant robots’ legs. It sucked. It completely sucked and was totally boring and predictable. I also hated how at the end the bad guy is already dead! They’ve been chasing a ghost the entire time! The actual “bad guy” is the automated system carrying out his plans! And why would ninja-chick stick around? STUPID STUPID!
I did love the references, nods and winks to old films, however. And the ending was perfect, which is very important to me when I decide if I like a movie. Unfortunately, it didn’t save this one.
Grade: C-
I liked the movie. I liked Paltrow’s performance. She was supposed to be a plucky tough-girl, not a damsel in distress. I thought she handled it really well, balancing feminism with the old-style, wooden line delivery. I don’t know why anyone would think she needed to gain weight. She was obviously dressed to conceal her pregnancy in the movie.
I am left scratching my head over Law’s accent though. He had a British accent, but it seemed really flattened out. My wife speculated that his accent is normally that way, but I saw him talking on T.V. yesterday and his accent was noticeably stronger. so what was going on in the movie? That wasn’t supposed to be an American accent was it?
I think you’re reading “vulnerable heroine” as “damsel in distress.” Yes, Polly is intrepid and capable, but her vulnerability is the dominant note of her character. It’s not a vulnerability to eight-story-high marauding robots or anything trivial like that-- it’s her feelings for Joe.
The character, as written, is from the same template as Margot (or Lois) Lane, Dale Arden, Tess Trueheart, etc. Not only can she take care of herself, but she’s the only one who’s allowed to save the hero. Still, her overriding concern is whether or not she’ll be able to secure Joe’s affection, and compete with Adventure and Intrigue for his attention. Gwyneth Paltrow is pretty much the antithesis of the physical type that has been uniformly associated with these characters-- she’s too thin, too blonde, and her features are too fine.
George Lucas cast exactly the right sort for the archetype in 1976. (Unfortunately all that good cocaine robbed her of the proper look for the other films.)
I don’t think that’s an issue. Apart from the accident of inappropriate physiognomy, she just didn’t act the part. I don’t think this can be blamed on direction, either-- everyone else matched perfectly, and I don’t think it’s because they all arrived at it independantly. I think it’s more likely that she wouldn’t take direction. “Gwyneth, you’ve got to open your eyes wider. Remember, we’re aping films that rarely used tight shots, so actors had to register effectively from medium shots-- that means heavy exaggeration.” “But that would make me look cheesy!” “You’ve got to do it in order to look right.” “Uh, I can’t get my eyebrows up any further. It’s, uh, Botox. Yeah. Let’s just shoot this thing and get out of here, okay?”
Her performance is as glaringly anachronistic as a liquid crystal digital display on the rocket controls would have been.
“At the end?” It wasn’t exactly a surprise.Hmmm… “Totenkopf” – nobody’s seen him for decades – character is played by a famous dead guy… Heh.
Uhhh… read those two sentences in reverse order and you’ve answered your own question. 
Watch a few adventure reels from the 30s, and compare. Or just look at this. That’s “the look.”
It gets a bit meta. That’s a typical “English” (or even “European”) accent as commonly voiced by Californian talent back in the day. Not quite right. (But perfect in the context of the movie, of course.)
Oh yeah, I forgot about that…my bad, sorry. “Why won’t you die?” Um. Duh. Stupid stupid! :smack:
And its funny, I laughed about “deadhead” early on in the movie but I guess I just didn’t think they would be that blatant…I also didn’t know about the dead actor playing the part of the bad guy so it wasn’t obvious to me. So yes, it was “at the end” for me, anyway.
Thanks for your comment and link, but I did know about that already. By “off-kilter” I meant specifically that the dirigible was called the “Hindenburg III” and that the mast, in the film, was being used regularly as an airship dock.
On another subject, add me to the list that thought Paltrow was fine in the context of the film. Lauren Bacall was fairly skinny in To Have and Have Not (hell, Bogart’s character called her ‘Slim’ all the way though the movie) and nobody complained about that.
I guess some maybe expected more demonstrative line readings to go with the over-the-top action, but I thought that Paltrow’s more subtle approach worked well enough for me to believe she was actually thinking of what she was going to say and do rather than just spitting out lines of dialogue and running. Also, given that the movie provided next to no background information about the characters beyond their costumes and hair, I would tend to blame most of the sketchiness of her role on the writer-director. Frankly, none of the characters were very well-drawn; Jolie looked pretty cool in her eyepatch and leathers, and Ribisi is indeed a fine actor, but so much more could have been done with both of them, much less the leads.
Anyway, lest we forget, this was a first film by a neophyte writer/director. It will be interesting to see whether he can better integrate the humans with his wild visions of machinery and landscapes on his next effort.
Well, that’s awesome. Normally I wouldn’t want them to make a PoM movie at all, because I shudder to think what a modern movie would do to it, but after seeing Sky Captain, I can rest easy.
I am ridiculously envious. I’m going to have to take a road trip to see it or something, especially given the gloomy financial outlook.
Wasn’t the release date for this picture pushed back? Does anyone think it might have done better earlier in the summer, or would it simply have been eclipsed by Spider-Man 2 and I, Robot? I have no idea, just curious.
My dad has a big fat book that was written before WW2 and it called World War 1 The World War. Of course this is hardly a good citation for the SDMB, and even if it was, that’s just one book calling it The World War.
I totally agree!
I loved the concept of the film, loved the technical wizardry, loved Jude Law, Angelina Jolie and Giovanni Ribisi, but Gwynnie was a bust!
