Excuse me for a new thread, but the last dedicated one I could find in a search was back in April, and that seemed long enough to not resurrect. But I watched Sky Captain last night, thought it was great, and now I’m curious.
What was it about this movie that got it panned as violently as it did? Sure, Gwyneth Paltrow’s acting was Gwyneth Paltrow, she and Jude Law had zero chemistry, and Angelina Jolie’s character was disappointingly underused. Jude Law was in every second movie last year, and sorta phoned in bits of this one.
But what about the good? It looked gorgeous, like a slick modern interpretation of old pulp, down to the art deco font used in the credits. Knowing that it was all but completely CG makes things even more impressive. It never looked “real” but it was easy to lose yourself in the scenery. The story was FUN. Yeah, gaping logic holes, predictable, vastly unrealistic, but c’mon, same could be said for the pulps the movie derives inspiration from. The cheap one-liners (“Lenscap”) are so suitable to the style that they had far more life than they probably should have. It’s a disconnect sort of movie, a chance to revel in the fantastic adventures of bigger-than-life heroes and villians, with unlimited operational budgets and awesome toys.
So why does the down seem to outweigh the up for so many people?