Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×

Star Wreck Creators Announce Iron Sky 98

Posted by Zonk from the more-from-those-guys dept.
An anonymous reader writes "The makers of the Star Trek and Babylon 5 cross-over spoof Star Wreck: In the Pirkinning have announced their upcoming movie Iron Sky. It's apparently another sci-fi comedy with its own universe. Says Director Timo Vuorensola: 'It is still an open question whether it will be distributed also for free. We would very much like it, but it will depend a lot on the financiers.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Star Wreck Creators Announce Iron Sky More

Star Wreck Creators Announce Iron Sky

Comments Filter:

  • The first one was great (Score:3, Informative)

    by Ricken ( 797341 ) on Saturday May 13, 2006 @06:42PM (#15326761)
    I saw the first one, it was really good, even though you need subs because of the finnish.
    Amazing what some students can do with some computer skills and amateur acting.

  • Finns Can't do Parody (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 13, 2006 @06:48PM (#15326787)
    It's a shame that they're doing comedy again. In the Pirkinning suffered from one clear drawback: Finns can't do parody. We suck at it - sorry.

    ItP had really good special effects and decent everything else for an amateur movie - unfortunately the script was the weakest part. I hope they'd either try to make a serious movie or get someone else to try to write the funny parts, since there is potential in the other aspects of the earlier movie.
    • "It's a shame that they're doing comedy again. In the Pirkinning suffered from one clear drawback: Finns can't do parody. We suck at it - sorry."

      Oh, I dunno about that. On a sci-fi forum I'm an active member of, we found quite a bit to laugh at. I'm wondering, though, if the humor was a little too niche'y. My parents would have gotten a huge laugh out of Galaxy Quest, but ItP, even if it were in English, would have missed many moments with them. I don't think it's that the Finns cannot do parody, I thin

    • I have to disagree (Score:3, Insightful)

      by phorm ( 591458 )
      There was some definate cheese in there, but...

      "Scream my rank"

      That had myself and all my buddies watching at the time in stitches.

    • "It's a shame that they're doing comedy again. In the Pirkinning suffered from one clear drawback: Finns can't do parody. We suck at it - sorry."

      What? SW:ItP was funnier than any Mel Brooks movie I've ever seen.

      The difference is that Brooks needs to make sure everyone gets the jokes, whereas the SW team was free to base them on references maybe 0,5 % of the population will recognize. If you don't get them, of course you're not going to like it.

    • Re:Finns Can't do Parody (Score:4, Interesting)

      by MemoryDragon ( 544441 ) on Sunday May 14, 2006 @04:32AM (#15328646)
      Maybe if you are a Fin it is not funny, but believe me, the combination of the northern language together with the really funny script made me roll on the floor. This movie was way funnier than spaceballs.

  • Effects where great, but... (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I hope they spend more time on the script this time.
    In the pirkening looked quite good, but the acting and script were just terrible.
    They also spent 8 years on the project, something that is quite unheard of when making a movie in Finland commercially. Production phase is usually around 1-2months (excluding preproduction and post).
    Will be interesting to see if they manage to make a good movie now that they have to work with financing and so on..
    Hope they succeed tho, the industry could use some fresh young

    • I hope they spend more time on the script this time.

      Johanna Sinisalo, author of "Not Before Sundown" [peterowen.com] is apparently helping out with the script.

      I find it rather strange that you complain about the script and acting of "In the Pirkinning". Remember: these guys were amateurs. Of course if you compare their performance to "real" actors, their skills will fall short, period. That said, the movie was still very, very good and funny.

      • I can accept the fact that they're amateur actors, but that is still no excuse for the script.
        Even if they hired professional actors, the movie would have sucked because it simply wasn't funny.
        The general opinion seems to be that the movie was either crap, because the script sucked, or great, because it was pretty good for a bunch of amateurs.
        Considering EVERY writer starts out as an amateur, I think this is no excuse.
        If they charged anything for their next movie, I wouldn't watch it.

        • I can accept the fact that they're amateur actors, but that is still no excuse for the script.

          I think the script was actually better than alot of the stuff Hollywood is pushing these days.

          Even if they hired professional actors, the movie would have sucked because it simply wasn't funny.

          I thought it was very funny. Maybe being a Finn helps me appreciate the Finnish humor more. And I think it was a lot funnier (again) than a lot of the stuff Hollywood pushes these days.

          Considering EVERY writer starts out as a

  • Fan film to original (Score:5, Interesting)

    by angryflute ( 206793 ) on Saturday May 13, 2006 @07:01PM (#15326839) Homepage
    I think it's great that these fan-filmmakers are moving on to doing their own original work. But why do comedy? Science fiction and comedy don't go together well -- okay, maybe nobody has done it right. Or maybe it's just damned hard. Doing either comedy or science fiction well by itself is already hard to pull off. At best, maybe these guys will produce something of the brilliance of Red Dwarf or even the Hitchhiker's Guide. Or, worse, it will be (an unfunnier) Spaceballs.

    • Re:Fan film to original (Score:4, Informative)

      by pimpimpim ( 811140 ) on Saturday May 13, 2006 @07:12PM (#15326875)
      I think space balls was a pretty nice movie! Maybe it's not hot shot intelligent kind of humor, but I laughed my ass off!

      Qalaxy Quest with Tim Allen is much less known than the other ones you mentioned, but also pretty nice: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0177789/ [imdb.com] Especially because of the many references to Sci-Fi fans and their peculiarities. Or am I insulting people here now :)

    • Re:Fan film to original (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Wow...I really liked Spaceballs....and futurama...and tripping the rift...and Lexx....and Red Dwarf....I think science fiction and comedy do go really well together....because the supposed advancement of the future is set in stark contrast to the constancy of human frailty.....our collective intellect racing ahead of our collective wisdom....it makes one take oneself...and others...less seriously...and makes life more cheerful when you can accept the existenstial absurdity of the human condition

    • Re:Fan film to original (Score:2, Interesting)

      by aevan ( 903814 )
      Firstly, comedy is really subjective...I've seen people fall down laughing at things I found dull, and other times I was the one laughing in a silent room. Good example is Spaceballs..plenty thought it was hillarious (during its time).

      Secondly, sci-fi shows tend to rely on their gimmicks, focusing the special effects to let us know 'this is sci-fi'. Add in the suspension of disbelief necessary, it's hard to bridge that little gap to 'be funny' to the viewer. Generally the jokes would either just be 's
    • I think sci-fi and comedy go together perfectly. Have you ever seen Star Wars?

      OK, that was a joke. But see how that joke and Star Wars went together so well, thus proving my point? :-)

      The only problem is that fans of sci-fi tend to be nitpicky geeks would wouldn't know humour unless it bit them on their ever growing butts.

    • Star Trek linked to pedophilia? (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      This has very little to do with the article, but the L.A. Times recently published an article regarding the Toronto Sex Crimes Unit [torontopolice.on.ca] that focused on their fight against child pornography ("Sifting Clues to an Unsmiling Girl" [pqarchiver.com]). They are the law enforcement organization that photoshopped the victims out of child porn photos in order to get the public's assistance in identifying the backgrounds (it worked). In any case, the article had this amazing claim:

      On one wall is a "Star Trek" poster with investigators'

      • Nevertheless, Det. Lamond does confirm that a majority of those arrested show "at least a passing interest in Star Trek, if not a strong interest." They've arrested well over one hundred people over the past four years and they can gauge this interest in Star Trek by the arrestees' "paraphenalia, books, videotapes and DVDs."

        That's not an indicator of a trend.

        Since 65% of the general population of America consider themselves fans of one Star Trek series or another, and men tend to like Star Trek more than wo
    • Please someone tell me I did not just see a diss against Spaceballs on Slashdot. What's next, people ranting about how the killer rabbit scene from Monty Python and the Holy Grail was corny? Writing off Douglas Adams as a hopeless Steve Jobs fanboy just because Marvin happened to look a little bit like a Macintosh in the movie? Or maybe even a relativistic analysis of Star Wars based on camera angles proving once and for all that Han and Greedo shot at the same time but Han's blast arrived sooner from the v
      • Marvin had a brain that was practically the size of a planet and he was gloomy.

        What part of 'brain the size of a planet' confuses people? Are there any other examples of Marvin exaggerating? Or using metaphor? Or expressing itself as anything other than a perfectly logical (although depressed) machine?

        When Marvin says it has the brain the size of a planet, it means somewhere in the galaxy is a planet-sized object which serves the functions of Marvin's brain. There's no 'practically' about it. The s

    • I think not. Spaceballs movie was hilarious.
    • First of all, you brought up Red Dwarf which is a perfect example of how to do sci-fi comedy. The sci-fi elements were cheesy as hell (like a shape-shifting emotion-sucking genetically-engineered lifeform that turns into a beachball to travel around), but that's what made them work.

      Other good examples: Sleeper [imdb.com], the Woody Allen take on those 1984-style dystopias. Galaxy Quest [imdb.com], I hate Tim Allen, but this movie's pretty damned funny. The Back to the Future [imdb.com] movies were successful by anybody's standards. He
    • I may have my Slashdot membership permanently revoked for this, but... I thought Galaxy Quest was about a hundred times funnier than Spaceballs.
      • I may have my Slashdot membership permanently revoked for this, but... I thought Galaxy Quest was about a hundred times funnier than Spaceballs.

        I'm completely with you there. "Can you fashion some sort of rudimentary lathe?"

        And Tony Shalhoub was just genius as Stoned Scotty.

    • Science fiction and comedy don't go together well -- okay, maybe nobody has done it right
      Two words: Douglas Adams.
  • Will it be funny?
    • No, but it will look really good and you'll be able to download it for free - just like the last one. Seriously ... not ... funny.
  • It is still an open question whether it will be distributed also for free.

    He's kidding, right? If they charge for it, someone will put it up for "free" within one day.

    Sad, but true.
    • More to the point, do they really think anyone would pay to see it, even if it wasn't pirated? I saw their previous one, and while it was a creditable effort as these things go, I'd rather watch reruns of DS9 than *pay* to see it. In fact I kind of felt I was doing them a favour by spending the time to watch it.
      • If you have to pay for the movie, they'd get a better economy to hire better actors and possibly get an overall more professional touch to it though.

        Voila, the point of movie production companies. :-)
        • By the way, just to pre-empt some silly remarks, I am not directly talking about *this* movie (then you'd obviously have to pay in advance), but about securing their future a bit better as a group who don't just keep pumping out overly amateur content.
    • If they charge for it, someone will put it up for "free" within one day.

      Star Wreck was "free" from day 1. Yet I tried very hard (and very unsuccessfully) to get a DVD. If it weren't for their decision that it was legally too risky to sell DVDs to the US market, they would be ~$20 richer today, and I would have a DVD in my possession.

      Being able to download a movie isn't everything.

    • Not sad at all (Score:3, Insightful)

      by CrystalFalcon ( 233559 ) *
      No, it's not sad at all that somebody will put up a copy within hours. Copyright as we know it is ending - it's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when and how.

      The reason is simple; you can't charge for non-work in the long run. Making an additional copy of something digital is nonwork today; it wasn't when you had to produce an additional physical copy; there were tangible costs associated with that.

      Yet, some people are stuck in yesterday's copyright-based business model and are trying to adapt it to a w
      • What does it matter whetever the act of copying is (effectively) non-work? It is not work you are paying for when you buy something. The amount of work that goes into making something, or making a copy of something, is not the metric accordinding to which the price of things are measured - or really, have ever been measured.

      • If copyright ends, there goes the enforceability of GNU GPL too (among other licenses). The copyright system is the framework in which it lives. If there's no copyright system, for example the Linux kernel would become another cadaver for corporations to scavenge upon, taking advantage of something they had no part in creating in the first place.

        So no, it is not a good thing if copyright ends.

        Also, I don't see the reason why people download movies anyway, as most movies are crap and it's just a waste of tim

      • Copyright is ending, it's just a matter of how. And it's a good thing.

        Are you sure? My impression is that all forms of copying will be outlawed - even the ctrl-c key combo!

  • with it's own universe
    That would be a universe where if something belongs to a woman, you write "her's", and if it belongs to a man, you put "hi's"?
    • "It's own universe": A universe of its [the movie's] own [creation]. No persons, male or female indicated, just the movie.
      • Wow are you dense.

        Ladies and gentleman, this man is so dense, he cannot be x-rayed.

      • Grammar Nazi is saying you have, in effect, three genders: Male, female, and sexless. Here is how the apostrophes are supposed to work:

        George's
        Mary's
        The computer's

        His
        Hers
        Its

        "It's" (for those of you who are either non-English speakers) is the contraction for "it is"

        Please mod me down as offtopic. Thanks.
  • Any torrents? Lets keep the smoking servers to a minimum please.
  • Could it be related to the Iron Sky in Pushing Ice [wikipedia.org]? 'Cause that's the only place I've heard the term before.

  • Break the model (Score:5, Insightful)

    by suv4x4 ( 956391 ) on Saturday May 13, 2006 @07:34PM (#15326959)
    Releasing the first movie for free was refreshing and bold. It did what they wanted, and gained them popularity.

    Now it's time to plant feet firmly in reality and have some business model. If they release it for 2 bucks via PayPal or credit card, most people will be able to afford it and still enjoy the product.

    Another thing they can do is release a free copy with some ad blocks.
  • Yeah, I thought that one of the main pulls for the flick was its free distribution. The effects were awesome too for a student flick...acting..ehhhh. Does anyone know other movies offered online for free in the same way? So far I have found two, one at www.cactusesmovie.com and one at www.nobodyneedstoknow.com.
    • Sure, if you're into star wars at all (cmon, you're on slashdot :), of course you are) you might wanna check out:

      www.impstherelentless.com

      Pretty good special effects and what not, acting is ok.. ish. It's not a full movie yet, as it's being released in chapters, but still worth a look!

  • To the creators (Score:2, Informative)

    by sabit666 ( 457634 )
    Sorry, your effort was commendable, however the movie wasn't that funny.

  • Perspective (Score:4, Insightful)

    by cephalien ( 529516 ) <benjaminlungerNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Saturday May 13, 2006 @08:52PM (#15327296)
    I watched Pirkinning some time ago.

    The biggest problem I see is that the more advanced computers get, the easier it is to get _good_ Trek-style special effects.

    No computer in the world can help you write a better script, though. I certainly hope more emphasis is put on the writing this time around -- don't get me wrong, I thought the premise in Pirkinning was certainly interesting -- but calling it a Star Trek/B5 crossover is somewhat unrealistic, given what happened in the movie.

    That doesn't mean I have any major issues to complain about overall. These people are doing this because they want to, and we really don't have the right to argue against a labor of love.

    As for charging a fee to view this new movie: If it's reasonable, I'll pay without question. There's a difference in charging because you need to recoup operating costs: despite the (relative) ease in creating special effects, you need computers, props, makeup, time, effort, catering (pizza), film equipment, and so on, as opposed to churning out Star Trek: XI (thanks again, Paramount. After that last one, the idea makes me sick), to continue milking the cash cow for profits, damn your viewers to hell.

  • I love Star Wreck, it is an awesome movie. It took them something like six years to make it. That is a long time away to start telling me about a new movie now. Jeesh, I thought it was hard waiting the six or so months in between BSG seasons.
    • Next movie won't take that long. Hewlett-Packard delivered them new, powerful computers and they estimated it would take under a year to make it.
  • I quite liked the last Star Wreck. Sure, it wasn't perfect. But it was enjoyable, and the effort that went into it was commendable!

    Actually, I was hoping for a sequel. I'm still wondering what's to happen next after the last zoom-out from "In The Prickening".

  • With the brunette, their movie may be watchable. (Score:3, Informative)

    by slashdotmsiriv ( 922939 ) on Saturday May 13, 2006 @10:26PM (#15327670)
    The only thing that saved their last totally unfunny movie was the special effects and the smoking hot brunette (what's her name anyone?).
  • It doesn't matter if they have to charge for it - slashdotters will just pirate it anyway, because um... information wants to be free.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Look! There! Evil!.. pure and simple, total evil from the Eighth Dimension!" -- Buckaroo Banzai

Close