Slashdot Mirror
Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow!
ph43thon writes "The New York Times Magazine has a neat story about the sci-fi nerd, Kerry Conran, behind 'Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow.' It's an interesting look at his creative journey starting with a Macintosh IIci. It took him twelve hours just to render individual robot legs. Antisocial, shy people rejoice! Hide in your homes until you get discovered by a movie producer!!"
score for geeks and simpsons characters, but theres no way that movie will ever score with the public.
When I saw the preview in the theater nearly everyone looked at each other in shock and amusement. Some things just don't make good movies.
According to the article, Conran wasn't really hiding, she did show it to her boss, Jon Avnet, who decided to fund the production until they can find some bigger investors. And they did find Jude Law, and later signed Gwyneth Paltrow and eventually Angelina Jolie.
So the moral of the story is, if you really want to do something like that, make sure you don't just sit there and wait to be discovered, it will never happen until someone see your work.
And as a side note, there are many similar productions with no initial sponsors and low budget, yet able to pull it through at a much faster pace than 10 years - like Blair Witch Project.
Rock that crushes, Paper & Scissors that don't matter.
I mean, it's a World War 1/2 Fighter Pilot Flying around against super-advanced aliens, all the while with the soundtrack as the Stargate SG-1 theme. The writer is a genius.
I can picture someone saying this about The Lord of the Rings:
"Magic rings? Little guys with hairy feet? Twisted little trolls with multiple personality disorder. Please! Nyahhhh, gimme a babe with guns and big tits, yeah, that's adventure, HAWWW!"
If it's good, Sky Captain might be a moderately succussful popcorn movie. If not, it will be out of theaters in a week. But not because it's for geeks.
Stefan
Sheesh, that's the friggin Point!
The villian is an evil genius, and who in the 1930's were the most evil techno types? The Germans. And who do we now know were not just militarily aggressive, but truly, wholly, cut-you-open-to see-how-you-tick insanely evil? The Nazis.
First, don't compare this to Stargate (I know the music doesn't help) or Independence Day. Compare this to the Shadow, Hudsucker Proxy, or the Rocketeer. Second, remember this is one step away from indie. Yeah, I question the mainstream appeal. However, the story behind the movie will probably make me go see it.
I've seen bare stage interpretations of Shakespeare. This isn't that type of flick. However, seeing as how the last movie I've seen is the Segal-like Payback (sorry, Afflick's bravado reminds me of Under Siege), I don't know if this will be so bad. Yes, I know that we get caught up in CGI valhalla. However, this does speak a lot for effort.
Plus, remember the goal is to make money. Not necessarily rake in $300 million at the US box office.
What do you mean my sig is repetitive? What do you mean my sig is repetitive? What do you mean....
Mod me down for being incorrect, but the music used in the trailer is EXACTLY the same music used for the opening of Stargate SG-1. Exactly.
I even went to my TiVo to confirm this, and yes they're the same. I can't believe that they would rip it so shamelessly.
- Sherman
It looks good and all, but I just can't help but think it looks like Crimson Skies with giant robots :s
Moo!
I kinda wonder - given it's background - if the guy actually knows the history behind it.
I'm sure that he does. Nazis were staple villains of 40s pulp fiction, which is the reason that they're recurring bad guys in the Indiana Jones movies, the Rocketeer, and the classic Doc Savage serials. Mad Nazi scientists, the Nazi quest for religious relics, and the Nazis invading Anarctica, the Hollow Earth, and other cryptogeographical locations are all staples of the pulp fiction era.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
its my geek obligation to say this:
antisocial doesn't mean what everyone mean shy or withdrawn. antisocial is, say, if you went out and decided to throw molotov cocktails at your local high school band as they practice marching. if someone is shy they are withdrawn, antisocial is exactly what it means, against society. ie burning looting raping and maiming, anything to disrupt society.
The budget for this film is apparently $70M. I looked at the trailer - it looked like a cheesy rough sketch of Metropolis. Compare this budget to the $50M for Iron Giant or $15M for Spirited Away. I'm scratching my head wondering how this approach is either viable for independent productions or a demonstration of any new ground breaking CGI techniques.
But the failures to quite ring the bell can be listed endlessly. .
Many, many have tried, but somehow. . . Even those black & white episodes of 'Voyager' were kinda dull despite all the clever and hard work put into them.
If "Sky Captain" can make the grade, it'll be interesting to see how.
I think it has something to do with replicating an old, albeit loved idea, versus taking a timeless formula and doing something with it which makes it vital to contemporary culture. Luke, Leia, Han and Indiana Jones and their worlds were all honest, first generation approaches to old and tired carbon copy ideas.
The difference will be if "Sky Captain's" director is a fan or a visionary.
Fans are stuck in idolizing yesterday. Visionaries are into the creation of the moment. Their beginnings may be the same, but their directions on the path of life are diametrically opposed.
Never work backwards. It's the same as falling asleep.
-FL
Interestingly enough, the music from the trailer is the main theme for the Stargate SG-1 television show, not the movie.
END OF LINE
The film, in other words, is one long special effect with Jude-Law-size holes in it.
Kinda like Attack of the Clones or (don't blame me, I didn't ask to watch this) Spy Kids 3-D were? Yeah, I remember those monuments to modern filmmaking -- bluescreens and greenscreens! Practically no sets! Let your actors imagine everything they're supposed to be interacting with and they'll be much more compelling that way!
Didn't anybody listen when we complained that the acting in the new Star Wars films was painfully wooden, and the actors complained that it was because they were working on virtual sets and couldn't place themselves in the roles?
Look, would-be blockbuster-makers: this isn't the way to make a compelling movie. It may be pretty, but it doesn't work well. Go watch the behind-the-scenes stuff for The Lord of the Rings and look at how much trouble they went through to build sets and miniatures whenever possible, and then count the Oscar nominations and wins they got for their trouble. Spend the money on at least some kind of physical set and your actors will thank you for it.