Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Sci-Fi Media Movies

Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow! 232

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!!"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow!

Comments Filter:
  • Obligatory (Score:4, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14, 2004 @09:53PM (#8564954)
    Google link [nytimes.com]
  • by capz loc ( 752940 ) <capzloc@gma[ ]com ['il.' in gap]> on Sunday March 14, 2004 @09:58PM (#8564982)
    It's stories like these that make me regret taking apart my IIgs to use for wall decorations. Well, at least I still have my Equity II. [epson.com]
  • huh ? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14, 2004 @09:58PM (#8564983)
    Antisocial, shy people rejoice! Hide in your homes until you get discovered by a movie producer!!

    uh no, getting "discovered" is exactly what us antisocial folk want to avoid. Just for that I'm going to dig an even deeper borrow!
  • by Quasar1999 ( 520073 ) on Sunday March 14, 2004 @09:59PM (#8564985) Journal
    Hide in my home until a movie producer finds me? Dude, the only producer who will ever 'find' me is one who decided to deliver pizzas for a night... otherwise, no way in hell I'd be discovered...
  • The Trailer (Score:5, Informative)

    by AIX-Hood ( 682681 ) on Sunday March 14, 2004 @10:00PM (#8564995)
    • by NeepyNoo ( 619951 ) on Sunday March 14, 2004 @10:23PM (#8565102)
      A IIci, eh? Guess that dates him. Newbie.
  • May (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Kelz ( 611260 ) on Sunday March 14, 2004 @10:00PM (#8564998)
    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.
    • Nah! Re:May (Score:5, Insightful)

      by StefanJ ( 88986 ) on Sunday March 14, 2004 @10:14PM (#8565061) Homepage Journal
      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
      • Re:Nah! Re:May (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14, 2004 @10:23PM (#8565100)
        Lord of the Rings had a literary antecedent that people were bound to be interested in, and a preexisting fan following. This is basically coming out of nowhere.

        There have been plenty of other geek movies: Spiderman, Batman, Star Trek, but they all had a franchise. Only thing I can think of that came out of nowhere was Star Wars...

        It might make it, but I don't think the odds are that good. Too bad: it looks interesting.
        • Re:Nah! Re:May (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Jonathan ( 5011 ) on Sunday March 14, 2004 @10:29PM (#8565128) Homepage
          Lord of the Rings had a literary antecedent that people were bound to be interested in, and a preexisting fan following. This is basically coming out of nowhere.

          There have been plenty of other geek movies: Spiderman, Batman, Star Trek, but they all had a franchise. Only thing I can think of that came out of nowhere was Star Wars...


          How about Indiana Jones -- that seems like it is the closest equivalent, considering that both Indy and Sky Captain are inspired from 1930's pulps and serials.
          • Re:Nah! Re:May (Score:4, Insightful)

            by JudgeFurious ( 455868 ) on Monday March 15, 2004 @12:05AM (#8565586)
            Indiana Jones didn't "come out of nowhere" though to the average movie going slob. It came out of Lucas/Spielberg which said average movie going slob was very familiar with so in essence it came with a "Trusted Brand Label" on it.

            If it showed up today with Lucas name on it I wonder how much "Hey that should be good" sentiment it could count on?
          • Re:Nah! Re:May (Score:2, Insightful)

            by AndroidCat ( 229562 )
            How about The Rocketeer? That seemed to fizzle.
            • Fizzled yes... (Score:3, Informative)

              by Cyno01 ( 573917 )
              But still a great movie. Not entirley original, had the obvious old pulp stories inspiration. Not that i cared at the time, i was just a little kid, even went as the Rocketeer for halloween. Spray painted 2 litre bottles and all...
            • ... started as a comic before it became a movie. In the graphic novel I have, the Rocketeer's girlfriend is Betty Page, the 50s pinup icon who was at that time (mid to late 80s) thought dead.
        • Only thing I can think of that came out of nowhere was Star Wars...

          How about... the Matrix?

          Unless you predicted a sci-fi powerhouse coming out of the creators of Assassins and Bound...

    • Re:May (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Cylix ( 55374 ) *
      True, true...

      For me, I saw the trailor a while ago linked from some strange place on the web. First thing I did was download this and save it to my usb flash drive.

      I was happy with it and I want to see the movie. I like the premise and I don't care if its cheesy. It made me want to dig out crimson skies and pretend to be an ace pilot for 20 minutes.

      However, I showed it to a few co-workers and my family. I didn't get quite the same reaction that I had experienced. Actually, it was a bit of a negative reac
      • I'm thinking to go see it, but when I saw the trailer, I was with a bunch of other people to see Return Of The King. (Now that I think about it, why haven't there been more Elvis-themed parodies?) I think I was the only one in our group of 7 (ok, so 5 of them were women) who had any desire to see it.

        Something I noticed in the trailer were the flying robots. I distinctly remember them flying around, then robbing banks, then flying away. The only thing was that this was in a very early color Superman cartoo
    • Besides, nobody wants to watch Jude Law, Gwyneth Paltrow, or Angelina Jolie.
    • Re:May (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Moofie ( 22272 )
      So what? The movie has been made, and if it appeals to me I'll buy a ticket. Why would I ever care if it "scored with the public"?
    • Same thing for "I, Robot". A bunch of people started laughing after the trailer. Pfft.
  • by hot_Karls_bad_cavern ( 759797 ) on Sunday March 14, 2004 @10:01PM (#8565000) Journal
    Will someone please take Michael out for a walk and change his water? i think they've chained him to the uber-secret slashdot console.
  • Waitaminute (Score:5, Funny)

    by Lane.exe ( 672783 ) on Sunday March 14, 2004 @10:03PM (#8565009) Homepage
    Since when do movie producers break into peoples' homes in hopes of finding the next big star hidden among racks of anime and video games?

  • by fembots ( 753724 ) on Sunday March 14, 2004 @10:04PM (#8565016) Homepage
    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.
    • Conran is a "he". Not a "she".
    • You're definitely right, half the time something like this comes out, its because someone had something small that had major potential to become big, and it was just a matter of showing people. This is why as an artist, you should be sure to publically display your work, and not just keep it for private viewing for you, family, and friends (or whatever). Remember, even though you might not think it, someone else might be interested, and in some cases, interested enough to fund further research/production/id
    • No, the moral is:

      if you promote your project enough, you may be able to work with a chick like Angolina Jolie and Gwyneth Paltrow 8-}
    • You must have read the article very fast. Mr. Conran is a man. His brother's friend's wife, Marsha Oglesby (a movie producer), came by. She had heard about his little piece and wanted to see it. Conran didn't want to show it because he thought it wasn't ready. She pressed him, and he finally showed it. He did not push it on her or self-promote (according to the story.) Marsha Oglesby showed it to Avnet. He was essentiall discovered against his will.

      p
  • by fireduck ( 197000 ) on Sunday March 14, 2004 @10:06PM (#8565023)
    there's a couple of interviews with the principles behind this (producer, director, etc.) here [chud.com] and here [chud.com]. this definitely sounds like one very interesting film from a technical and artistic perspective.
  • 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.
  • Totenkopf? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14, 2004 @10:10PM (#8565048)
    "...as they track down a mysterious mad scientist named Totenkopf..."

    Hmmm, I can see a lot of people out there might get a wee bit pissed off about the fact that his scientist is named after the infamous SS Totenkopf (Death's Head) Division [freewire.co.uk] that ran... concentration camps.

    Yes, I know it sounds cool, I know a lot of people might think I'm being picky and overtly PC, but Totenkopf isn't a German surname (Dr. Deaths Head!?), and I kinda wonder - given it's background - if the guy actually knows the history behind it.
    • Re:Totenkopf? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14, 2004 @10:35PM (#8565160)
      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.

    • Re:Totenkopf? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Jonathan ( 5011 )
      Yes, I know it sounds cool, I know a lot of people might think I'm being picky and overtly PC, but Totenkopf isn't a German surname (Dr. Deaths Head!?),

      Why couldn't it be? I know people named Himmelreich (Heavenly kingdom) and Fleishman (Meat man). German surnames generally actually mean something and are derivable from German words.
    • Re:Totenkopf? (Score:2, Interesting)

      by quantaq ( 643138 )
      Hey, I'm not sure if you noticed, but Totenkopf is THE BAD GUY. If you pull a name from history for a bad guy, it usually has negative conotations. I mean, what if the scientist was named "Dr. Rainbow." Not as convincing, is it? The kind of thing people would get pissed about would be having a hero named Himmler with blue eyes and blonde hair.

      According to your view, lots of people should be pissed about Rowling having an antagonist named Voldemort (Winged Death, I think is the translation) with a lot o
      • I like the evil Dr. Sunshine Lollipops. Talk about filling one with terror at the mention of his name!
    • Re:Totenkopf? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Valdrax ( 32670 ) on Sunday March 14, 2004 @11:01PM (#8565276)
      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.
    • Re:Totenkopf? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Wyatt Earp ( 1029 ) on Sunday March 14, 2004 @11:01PM (#8565277)
      3.SS-Pz.Div. "Totenkopf" was a Waffen SS Division, they didn't run the camps.

      http://www.feldgrau.com/3ss.html

      They were a combat Armor division on the Western and Eastern front.

      "Although after a shaky start they gained a fearsome fighting reputation they will always be associated with the concentration camp system and the running of the camps. This is due to the fact that the origins for this division can be traced back to the Totenkopfverbande which consisted of five pre-war standarten (regiments) who along with a few members of the SS-VT were responsible for guarding the concentration camps in Germany such as Dachau. This situation still persisted when the war started with guards being interchanged from frontline to concentration camp guard duties, however this practice was stopped when the invasion of Russia took place and manpower was needed at the front. Then the practice of interchanging men was almost identical as with any other Waffen SS unit."

      At the time they were guarding the Camps, they were Concentration Camps in the role of, Concentration peoples togeather, the murder for which the camps will be famous for wasn't spelled out until 1942.

      I'm not defending the Waffen-SS or anyother SS, but the 3.SS-Panzer was a combat Panzer unit and not a bunch of thugs shooting or gasing folks in a camp. They were a bunch of thugs shooting folks and burning villiages with tanks.
  • Darn (Score:3, Funny)

    by screwballicus ( 313964 ) on Sunday March 14, 2004 @10:18PM (#8565079)
    I looked at this headline regarding the "world of tomorrow" and opened this story expecting specious futurism. Where is my specious futurism! There hasn't been a single story making dubious claims about technological revolutions right around the corner on slashdot all day.
  • ah the Mac IIci... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by dylan.ucd ( 612417 ) on Sunday March 14, 2004 @10:22PM (#8565090)
    my first computer wasn't a IIci, it was a 286. even so, the IIci was certainly my first love. i can remember those romantic hours that i would spend with my IIci, waiting for POVRAY to finish rendering...

    of course those days are over, but i don't think that I could ever remove the IIci from its place in the corner of my room.
    • I can't understand why it is necessary to mention that he used to use an Apple in the ./ posting. I mean, is the implication that only Apple users are creative? That this somehow demonstrates how awesome Apple is? Surely there were other bits of information more relevant to the story that could have been placed in the summary.

      The Apple conspiracy continues...
      • Of course that is the implication. It's all part of the Apple marketing culture. Creative design work is done with an Apple. People know that and expect it: after all, what kind of a 3d Animator/Designer doesn't use a Mac? Anyone who does that must not be a professional.

        And after all, this is Slashdot. You should expect to be modded down for questioning the Apple Gods, just as I expect to be modded down for explaining these obvious facts. There are many an Apple zealot lurking with mod points, and ra
        • Wow. Knee-jerk!

          The point was that he used a machine introduced in 1989. A machine that (as a poster points out below) runs at 25MHz using '030 processor. An old, old, old machine. Reading the article, I didn't see any mention of the new machines he is using.

          But congrats on extrapolating a line in an article to an entire cultural rant.

      • can't understand why it is necessary to mention that he used to use an Apple in the ./ posting

        Could it be that it is mentioned because the IIci is a really old, slow relic and that mentioning it's use underlines the fact that this guy was A) ahead of his time and B) doing amazing things with limited resources. I had always understood those two things to be almost the definition of Geekiness and part of the whole point of site devoted to "news for nerds".

        Come on, don't you think it is cool, or at least
  • No use. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Bull999999 ( 652264 ) on Sunday March 14, 2004 @10:23PM (#8565098) Journal
    I've been hiding at home all this time and no one has yet to discover me for my one handed web surfing skills.
  • by 1iar_parad0x ( 676662 ) on Sunday March 14, 2004 @10:42PM (#8565196)
    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.
  • Stolen Music? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by General Sherman ( 614373 ) on Sunday March 14, 2004 @10:44PM (#8565213) Journal
    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.

    • Somehow I doubt it's stolen--I suspect they've paid the applicable parties for the rights, unless for some reason you know differently.
    • Re:Stolen Music? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14, 2004 @11:03PM (#8565283)
      Often, when movie trailers are released, the composer hasn't finished composing and recording the soundtrack, so the movie company uses "needle drops". They often use music that the director has envisioned the final soundtrack to sound like. A good example of this is the music to Waterworld as it is used on so many trailers that it is almost a standard. Many directors get their needle drops so engrained in their heads that they often chuck the whole score some poor sod has written in favor of the temp music.
      • Many directors get their needle drops so engrained in their heads that they often chuck the whole score some poor sod has written in favor of the temp music.

        The definitive example, of course, being 2001.

      • There's one modern (orchestral) piece called "Tikal" (or something like that) which has been used in at least 12 trailers, including the one for Pirates of the Carribean. It sounds a lot like Orff's Carmina Burana, which has also been used many times (as well as ripped off by many film score "composers"). It's sort of generic epic thriller music, with loud choral accompaniment, but it doesn't sound very thrilling after about the third hearing.

        The problem with this reuse is that people will notice it afte
      • And how many times has a Hans Zimmer soundtrack been used in trailers? It seems like every new action or suspense movie trailer has "Crimson Tide" or "Gladiator" going through it. I actually get a kick out of identifying the score... it's a little geek trait of mine. But I will only use this power for good, never for evil.
    • the music used in the trailer is EXACTLY the same music used for the opening of Stargate SG-1. Exactly.
      And the trailer for LOTR:TT used the theme from Requiem for a Dream. It's just music, and it's often not exclusively licenced, so it's no big deal.

      Although anyone who's watched Requiem for a Dream will find its use in LOTR .. disturbing.
      • Indeed. I have the Requiem soundtrack and I was rather surprised to hear it in the trailer... definitely an... interesting tie between such unrelated movies.
  • Crimson Skies? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Moocowsia ( 589092 ) on Sunday March 14, 2004 @11:01PM (#8565275)
    It looks good and all, but I just can't help but think it looks like Crimson Skies with giant robots :s
    • Re:Crimson Skies? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by DesScorp ( 410532 ) on Sunday March 14, 2004 @11:40PM (#8565440) Journal
      Crimson Skies is one of the few video game-to movies I'd go see. I've always been in love with the same period of history as this director, and I can relate to his passion for the period, and the wild optimism and imagination that flourished. In so many ways, we've gone either backwards, or just settled for less. The depression and WWII came, and smashed those dreams for good. And I think we've suffered the consequences in spirit ever since.
    • I just can't help but think it looks like Crimson Skies with giant robots

      Crimson Skies with giant robots is... Crimson Skies: High Road to Revenge.

      [Minor Spoiler] A couple of times in the game you take on a giant 8-legged robot: once among the canyons of Atrixo, and once in stormy Chicago.
  • As soon as I saw the trailer for this last year during Return of the King, I immediately called up Howard Waldrop and told him "Howard, they finally made a film just for you!" It's got that 1940s, retro-futurist vibe to it that Howard has in a lot of his stories (like "30 Minutes Over Broadway!"). If it's half as good as Howard's work, I'll be impressed.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 14, 2004 @11:29PM (#8565395)
    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.
  • the short (Score:3, Interesting)

    by tono ( 38883 ) on Sunday March 14, 2004 @11:31PM (#8565399) Homepage
    I'd be very interested in seeing the short that he first made. My best friend from high school would spend days rendering movies in Infini-D on his LCIII that were very entertaining and choreographed space battles. Anybody got a link to it?
  • 3D on a Mac IIci... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ktakki ( 64573 ) on Sunday March 14, 2004 @11:43PM (#8565456) Homepage Journal
    Wow, that had to be an excruciatingly tedious experience. The IIci had a 25Mhz 68030 and maxed out at 128MB RAM (though all that RAM would have cost nearly as much as the IIci back then, and the standard IIci was 1 or 4 MB out of the box). They used something like 320K of system RAM for video, though 3rd party NuBus video cards were readily available (still, with only something like 2MB or 4MB of VRAM).

    There's no mention of which software he used, but I recall that in '94 the big Mac 3D package was ElectricImage, with Strata 3D and Infini-D at the low end of the scale (~$500 or so). Photoshop was at around version 2 or 2.5; it wasn't until 3.0 when layers were implemented.

    I remember trying to model and animate on an Amiga 500 with Turbo Silver back in 1989: anything with reflection or refraction would take about 24 hours per frame. Five years later, I was using Autodesk 3D Studio (R3 for DOS) on a 486 and had a room full of PCs for doing network rendering. Watching that red "Rendering" bar creep across the screen became a thing of the past (well, except for previews and such). Those five years were an interesting time, seeing the price point for a computer powerful enough for doing productive animation work (and digital video and audio) fall to where an independent artist could afford one.

    Gotta hand it to Kerry Conran: if he had the patience to model and animate on a IIci, he surely paid his dues.

    k.
    • Wow, that had to be an excruciatingly tedious experience.

      Oh yeah. I did some POVRAY command-line 3D on a Mac LC with a math coprocessor card, and it was a dog. The tiny animation I set up (stupidly complex - a transparent bubble rising in front of two mirrors that reflected into one another) was about 200px square and took about 10 minutes to render a frame. I remember one Friday horror film where I used to head back upstairs in each ad break, comment back the last line of code, uncomment the next line,
    • Hopefully they'll put the 6 minutes of IIci produced work on the DVD so we can all see it.
  • Bravo (Score:3, Interesting)

    by elmos_dog ( 649192 ) on Monday March 15, 2004 @12:36AM (#8565722)
    All I can say is bravo for the dude. If the movie does well hurray if not atleast he got to fulfill his dream. Im sure we are all a little envious. I'm goin to see it just to support a guy who pushed hard for the perfection of his dream. Also nay-sayers remember Blade Runner wasn't that much a success either when it first came out but its one of the pivotial points in Sci-Fi movies. I think this will be of similar importance.
    • Re:Blade Runner (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Chordonblue ( 585047 ) on Monday March 15, 2004 @05:12AM (#8566711) Journal
      Yeah, ditto Tron. The 20th anniversary DVD of that was simply amazing in scope. It also serves to remind you that sometimes a movie can be ahead of it's time.

      For instance, can you believe that Tron did not win any special effects academy awards because their 'overuse' of computer generated effects disqualified them??!

      If you get a copy of this, check out how painstakingly the movie was done and then realize how badly the Tron artists were ripped off!

      Considering how many special effects there are in even non-science fiction movies nowadays, I don't think this will be too much of a stretch for people who get the concept of this kind of pulp fiction.

      • For instance, can you believe that Tron did not win any special effects academy awards because their 'overuse' of computer generated effects disqualified them??!

        Uh, yes. That movie was horrible, special effects or no.
      • For instance, can you believe that Tron did not win any special effects academy awards because their 'overuse' of computer generated effects disqualified them??!

        Arrgh, that stinks. Fortunately, at least one animator who worked on Tron (Chris Wedge) went on to win an Academy Award for his computer animation work (Best Animated Short for "Bunny") :)

  • by Fantastic Lad ( 198284 ) on Monday March 15, 2004 @01:27AM (#8565962)
    Indiana Jones and Star Wars. Both blew the roof off.

    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

  • So what exactly is this type of genre/setting called? I'm always fascinated by it, but never know where to look for more information. Its kind of an alternate history too....Fascinating stuff, right up there with Crimson Skies, Talespin, and Porco Rosso

    • Well, considering steam engine type Sci-Fi is called "Steamerpunk", and this is based more on the 1920s-40sish retro theme, there isn't apparently an official label.

      I guess the most appropriate genre/setting would be either "Vacuumpunk", "Electrodepunk", "Cathodepunk", "Streampunk" (eg; the streamline trend of the 20's-40's), or as the tendacy with retrotech was heavy use of neon (almost 50 years before Miami Vice even), how about "Neonpunk"?

      Heh, or one could combine all of the above and call it "Frankenp
    • Re:Setting (Score:5, Informative)

      by Erik K. Veland ( 574016 ) on Monday March 15, 2004 @06:54AM (#8566979) Homepage
      It's called steampunk [geocities.com], neo-pulp [blackmaskmagazine.com] and retro-futuristm [207.6.141.68].
  • by mblase ( 200735 ) on Monday March 15, 2004 @12:28PM (#8568959)
    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.
  • by cherokee158 ( 701472 ) on Monday March 15, 2004 @12:36PM (#8569032)
    It looks like good fun, although I believe the effectiveness of a few fifty caliber machine guns against alien giant robot spaceship alloys may have been wildly overrated in the movie...

1 + 1 = 3, for large values of 1.

Working...