Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow (Widescreen Edition)

Rating:
Summary: Major dissapointment!
Review: I am not impressed at all with this movie. I had high hopes for this film when it was released but when I watched it, I was utterly dissapointed.

The movie is dissapointing and the story line is utterly confusing and messy. The CGI effects are far from groundbreaking. They're blurry and make it hard to watch the movie.

A major dissapointment. Move on to something else instead. This one was DOA.

Rating:
Summary: Somewhere Over the Digital Rainbow
Review: For Saturday matinee movie pleasure this film would be hard to beat. Think "Buck Rogers" meets "Indiana Jones" with a healthy dollop of "The Wizard of Oz" thrown in. A plot by an evil genius has unleashed robots of every description, including ones that flap their metal wings like birds, upon the world's resources. Sky Captain Joseph Sullivan (played by Jude Law) tries to stop the invasions to no avail, with troublesome Polly Perkins (Gwyneth Paltrow) tagging along. Surmounting various trials and tribulations along the way the duo manages to reach the locus of this menace to the earth.

All the 1930s film types and colors are here: sepia tones and the almost cartoonish skyscrapers, but with 70 year old technology mated to fantastically advanced machines on both sides of the conflict. "Wild Wild West" comes to mind here with its anachronistic blend of high-tech and antique inventions. Other stereotypes are blended in too--surely the reporter's name "Polly Perkins" draws on Sweet Polly (the reporter) in the Underdog cartoon series.

You must suspend most of your logical faculties to best enjoy this show. Consider the absurdity of an industrial center big and sophisticated enough to create these huge flying robots (not to mention the other machines) just to steal generators. It'd be like sending an Abrams tank to grab a few tin cans. Or the side by side high and low technologies of prop aircraft that can do so much more than just fly. But it's all good fun to watch anyway.

One slightly jarring error in the movie is the reference to the Great War as WWI. Of course it didn't take on that name until after WWII, which is yet to happen.

This isn't a great movie, but it is an entertaining one. Sit back and let the thrills and chills wash over you. You may not like the slightly hazy look of the film (which is deliberate) but you've got to admire the computer graphics anyway. The rating is a rather clean PG, probably because of one strong scene in which someone gets thoroughly electrocuted. The show was not a big hit so don't wait for a sequel to enjoy a little Saturday afternoon magic.

Rating:
Summary: What little boys dreams are made of
Review: I saw this movie in its theatrical release and I just finished watching it again on DVD. It's as if writer/director Kerry Conran and his brother Kevin reached inside of every 12 year old boy living in the first half of the 20th century and projected their collective imaginations onto the screen. Fighter planes and dirigibles, robots and ray-guns, dashing heroes and dazzling heroines-this movie has it all. The movie is set in 1939 and the commentary indicates that this is an homage to the 1939 New York World's Fair "Building the World of Tomorrow" and its theme that technology was on the verge of bringing about a better world. This movie is also an attempt to pay homage to all the old science fiction and adventure books, comics, and serials of the 30's and 40's while breaking new ground in filmaking techniques. The movie received overwhelmingly positive reviews based on its look but the area that some critics found lacking was in the story. I feel like the film succeeds in both areas.

The film is beautiful to look at and, although not as awe-inspiring on the small screen as it was on the big screen, it remains a sight to behold. The Conran brothers and company crafted a movie that hearkens back to the early days of filmmaking while infusing it with rich color and depth that has to be seen to be believed. It is really unfair to attempt to describe this movie's look in words as it is in the viewing that one can truly appreciate what they've done. It only adds to the wonder knowing that this was Kerry Conran's first film.

The story is just what I expected it to be before I ever saw the film. It was written to honor classic science fiction and adventure stories and the characterization is dead on. The hero is herioc, the heroine is beautiful and resourceful, and the bad guys are bad guys. Simple? Yes, but exactly the right tone for the movie they set out to make. This movie has a good blend of action, humor, and romance that keeps the story progressing at a very entertaining pace. The producer really managed to hit it big with the casting of this movie as well. Jude Law, Gwyneth Paltrow, Angelina Jolie and Giovanni Ribisi are perfect in their respective roles and a posthumous performance by Sir Laurence Olivier is icing on the cake. Repeated viewings are enjoyable if only to attempt to identify all the little references to other films, etc. Fans of the genre will recognize the nod to Star Wars Phantom Menace as well as visual references to Atlantis, The Island of Dr. Moreau, At the Earth's Core, etc but the movie is chock full of harder to find items. The `making of' feature points out the silhouette of King Kong on the Empire State Building in one shot and my wife pointed out the silhouette of Godzilla in the Tokyo newspaper after the first robot attack.

Technically the DVD is great. The sound and picture quality were very good, especially when utilizing a surround sound system. And speaking of sound, the music in this movie is appropriately heroic and the sound effects, from the machine gun fire to the old fashioned robot laser sounds, are just phenomenal. I had been hoping for some creative packaging given the unique creativity of the movie but it is your typical plastic package with nary a slip of paper inside. The 2-part making-of feature was very entertaining as was a gag real with real and computer generated bloopers. 2 deleted scenes were interesting only in that it showed alternate ways in these 2 incidents that the story could have been advanced. I listened to a portion of the producer's commentary and the writer/director's commentary. While they both sound like they would be interesting to listen to I was disappointed in that I had hoped they would go in and point out all the little inside jokes and references that are obviously littered throughout the movie. Ah well, maybe in a director's cut.

If you are a fan of this genre or if you just like fun, well-done escapist films then you owe it to yourself to check this out.



Rating:
Summary: Run away from the Resistance.
Review: I was actually looking forward to this film when it was released in the theaters. I originally thought that the premise was original and creative. Here, on my television, I was seeing images that I normally didn't associate with Hollywood. Yea, it was big budget, yea it had these larger stars headlining the film (even a dead one), but I thought that perhaps it was one of those under-the-radar hits. The critics hated it and it even fueled my desire to see it further. There had to be something redeemable about this film. Well, I finally had a chance to see it and I, sadly, will have to fence with the critics on this one. This was an irritating, uncontrollable mess of a film that attempted to be original in every way possible, but instead found itself just being nothing more than a lump of cheap Hollywood mess complete with jumbled characters, a sloppy story, and finally even some overly dull CGI. This was nothing that the advertisements promoted it would be.

The CGI was the immediate draw for me into this film. I was interested in seeing how director Kerry Conran would handle this feature with only the use of the blue/green screen. With Lucas completely blowing down the door with modern technology, and the world of Hollywood at your fingertips, I thought that Conran would blow me out of the water. Sadly, I found myself treading water for a couple of hours to follow. The CGI seemed messy and fuzzy, blurred around the edges, I found myself squinting at the television and continually wondering what the glow was around each of our characters. The darkened moments were too light, and the lighted moments were too dark. It was as if Conran presented to us the rough draft of his project, instead of giving us a final, crisper draft. I know that it was to represent an older generation and pay homage to that era that birthed the sci-fi genre, but in all honesty this was the black sheep of that generation and genre. The green/blue screen was my biggest issue with this film. It hurt my eyes to look at and took my appreciation away for any possibility of creativity and uniqueness. It was sloppy, for lack of a better word, and I think Conran knew that from the beginning.

I think that he knew that it wasn't going to be this crisp feature because he boasted some larger named stars to throttle this film even more. If he would have focused, yet even promoted, this film on the green/blue screen uniqueness alone, perhaps he would have done a bit better with the critics and box office, but instead we had to be guided through this mess by actors that just couldn't seem to carry their own simple characters. This was my second major issue for me with this film. Here you have Jude Law, Oscar-winning Gwyneth Paltrow, and even Oscar-winning Angelina Jolie headlining your film and yet they cannot seem to grasp the characters that they have to portray. These were simpleton characters that really didn't need to much to fuel them, just some good old fashioned acting, but sadly our friends who are being paid far more than me, just couldn't handle this task. This shoddy acting caused the chemistry between Law and Paltrow to be as dead as a doornail. I literally never felt as if these two cared in any way about each other. It was just another Hollywood pairing that backfired horribly in everyone's faces. I couldn't even tell if they liked each other as friends it was that poor. Is it bad when you think that the only actor who seemed to carry their part decently well was Sir Lawrence Olivier? I think it is bad when a dead actor upstages the best of Hollywood. There is definitely something wrong with this picture. This horrible, messy acting with apparent lack of chemistry drew my attention away from the green/blue screen long enough to completely sour my stomach again. Perhaps the story will lend a better hand ...

Wrong again friends. The story was a classic "Who cares" moment where you witness your characters going through the motions, building the plot to bring us to a conclusion, but you find yourself really just saying "Who cares" throughout all of it. The already poor use of actors and green/blue screen pushed too much pressure onto the story, which, like an employee on his first day of work, just crumbled under the stress. There was honestly nothing valuable to the entire story that I can put in this review. From the over-the-top introduction to the world and Sky Captain to the jumbled mess that was Angelina Jolie, to the final moments where I am sure PETA was up in arms. Even the ending line just forced that final breath of air out of you and made you more excited about returning this film. It was shameful.

Overall, nothing can be pulled and claimed as redeemable for this film. I will say that the thought was creative, but sadly it was the creation process that ultimately failed this film. From poor green/blue screen translation to stubble acting with a shoddy story, Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow is everything the critics claimed and more. I am not normally one that will take the critics sides, but this film just didn't work anywhere. I do not suggest it to anyone, and in fact if you see a friend with it in their hands, go ahead and burn their hands off. You would be doing them a favor and hopefully the infection will not spread.

Grade: * out of *****

Rating:
Summary: The Future as It Once Was
Review: Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow is the most enjoyable movie I've seen in many years. The premise is imaginative and stylish -- as though it were a Saturday morning serial made in the late '30s or early '40s and only recently discovered. It's regrettable that they did not execute the original plan of having the movie broken up into seven episodes with a cliffhanger at the end of each one. That would have made the conceit more fully realized; nevertheless, some of these cliffhangers are still recognizable in the film.

The number of allusions to other movies, both obvious and subtle, is numerous: King Kong, Commander Cody, Lost Horizon, The Wizard of Oz, Superman, War of the Worlds, The Phantom, Metropolis, The Day the Earth Stood Still, Forbidden Planet, and many others are represented.

There are, of course, some goofs. The main one being the plane's "h11od" letters reflecting in the water to spell "polly" (it would have to be rotated as well as reflected to work). It seems impossible that this would have gone unnoticed by such a detailed group of filmmakers, so I assume it was on purpose.

This movie was made by young people who could not know what it was like to view those old serials when they were originally released, nor to have experienced the impact they then had on an impressionable, callow mind; nevertheless, their appreciation and understanding of the art, architecture and climate of those times is obvious.

The performances are all satisfying and believable, certainly in the context of the film. Convincing Lawrence Olivier to come out of "retirement" was a real masterstroke.

Although the highly stylized mood of the opening scenes is not always fully maintained throughout the picture, it is still a work of art -- and just plain fun.


Rating:
Summary: good,but it had flaws
Review: The movie was okay,but when I first saw the trailer I was blown away.But I noticed the scenes in the movie were far different than that of the trailer.The storyline about the Mystery Woman confused me.The special effects were good,but the storyline need some work.However I would compare the movie to a 1930's version of Star Wars,but as I had just mentioned,the storyline needs some work.

Rating:
Summary: Style over substance...
Review: This is a love-it-or-hate-it movie if there ever was one. OK, I don't think anybody out there will call it "great," but it is definitely unique. The type of person who will hate it, I think, is the one who has know love (or knowledge) of the pop-culture of yesteryear. Let me put it this way - if you've never seen the original King Kong, you're not going to like this film.

I was reminded of King Kong all the way through Sky Captain. The film tries to capture the sense of wonder from depression-era sci-fi. It takes place in an alternate history where the Hindenburg III blimp docks at the Empire State Building. Everything is art deco - huge open spaces are the norm.

It's true, the story should have been better - there is little dramatic tension because everything is so tongue-in-cheek, you don't really take anything on screen seriously. But, in the end, this film is all about look - and it looks great.


Rating:
Summary: If you liked this movie then you must be a Dork
Review: This is truly the most boring movie of 2004. The acting is extremely bad. All of the characters lacked any type of emotion. I still remember the last lines of this movie, "Lens Caps". Oh boy, I felt like shooting myself in the head.

Rating:
Summary: Visually stunning with 1930s serial feel
Review: This movie combines the 1930s Flash Gordon serials with 1950s pulp sci-fi with a touch of film noir to create a uniquely timeless movie. The plot moves breathlessly from one cliffhanger situation to another, filled with gee-whiz gizmos such as laser-shooting robots, flying aircraft carriers, submarine planes and anything else you can think of. The characters are classic over-the-top heroes and villains. I loved the look of the film (I think the fuzziness, dim lighting and halos criticized by some reviewers here is part of the homage to the old serials) and thought it was great fun. I ordinarily despise CGI, but this film uses it wisely and to its advantage.

Rating:
Summary: A great throwback to the 1930s/40s!
Review: When massive robots descend upon the world, stealing important equipment for unknown reasons, to whom does the world turn? Why to Joseph "Sky Captain" Sullivan (played by Jude Law)! But, there is a deep mystery here, and if the Sky Captain is going to get to the bottom of it, he's going to need a lot of help. So, with ace reporter Polly Perkins (Gwyneth Paltrow) and the brainy Dex (Giovanni Ribisi) in tow, Sky Captain is off to save the world, and stop whatever horrors are going on.

OK, where do I start? First of all, this is not a big-budget Hollywood extravaganza. Instead, this is an independent film that is the product of the creators' imagination and computer-enhanced elbow grease. The inspiration for this film is obviously the comics and adventure yarns of the 1930s and 40s, and any fan of those will recognize a lot of themes and standards - mad scientists, giant robots, art deco architecture, pilot heroes, and much more. Indeed, the movie seems to me to be the dream of one of those old illustrators from then.

Now, the fact that the main character is British (Jude Law), while another major character affects a British accent (Franky - Angelina Jolie) breaks off the feeling of 1930s-40s America, and gives the movie more of an international flavor, which in this day and age is probably for the best. But, if you are a fan of the old adventure yarns (as I am), this movie will seem like coming home! (Polly Perkins is so much like early Lois Lane - tough and letting nothing stand between her and her story.)

So, if you are a fan of the old adventure stories of the 1930s and 40s, then this is a movie that you simply MUST see. If you are a fan of computer generated action, then this movie will show you just where the future may lie. Oh, and by the way, except for one somewhat horrifying death scene, this is a great movie for the whole family.

My family and I loved this movie, and highly recommend it to you!