I assume you've gotten used to miscalculation. I read your pre-prints. Both of 'em. And I'm convinced there wasn't one seminal or innovative idea in either one of them... Enjoy your punch.
- A Beatufiul Mind
(sums up my research, don't it)
I just wanted to say something about innovation, in relation to the movie last night. It was quite innovative. But anyways, I thought I'd post my review of Sky Captain and The World of Tomorrow. Bear in mind this is written with gamers in mind. It isn't Ebert. It's a low brow but passionate review.
Posted last night
Alright, I just got back from the movie, and time for the review. The title of my review is:
Why I Love Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow and Why You Will Not.
(note: review will probably contain minor stylistic spoilers, but nothing major involving the plot)
To begin, I am the market for this movie. I am the target audience. The reason I loved this movie is because it took two of my favorite things and smashed them together in a wonderful mix (and no, I'm not talking about Angelina Jolie and....well, Angelina Jolie). I shall follow my format of previous reviews.
The good:
1. The style. As I said, the movie combines two things that I love. One is what I call Gernsback Style. This is the "future of tomorrow" as it was dreamed of in the 1920's. The best example of this is Buck Rogers. Styles that use Ray Guns and chrome space ships and robots are clockwork instead of computerized zeppelins are a common method of transportation. Right, this is a style that captured the enthusiasm of the Lost Generation. They eagerly looked toward the future, they just didn't have much creativity, so their future was just like their present, just to the nth degree. I hope you get what I'm talking about, because it's difficult to tell, it's easier to show. Two is the serial. The film serial. The serial is also hard to define. Serials were back in the day, they were episodic in nature and usually involved the hero getting into seriously deep shit, then the serial would end there for the week, on that cliffhanger. The next episode would begin with the hero miraculously getting out of that deep shit and into deeper shit. Other than that they are very difficult to describe, it's most a feel. And here is where I'm going to bring up Sky Captains closest neighbor: Indiana Jones. Now, it's definately not as good as Indiana Jones, but a lot of people say they are similar. Well, that is because they are both shot as serials (intentionally). They are similar in shooting style and in music. You will be able to recognize how Sky Captains music is so similar to Indiana Jones. Well, that is because they both are homages to serials and use the same style of serial music. Anyways, I love Gernsback style and I love serials, and seeing them both together makes my pants wet.
2. The visual look of the film. Outside of the serial look of the film, which is noticable in things like the map of the world when flying (once again, like in Indiana Jones) and in fades and letters being overlaid and other tiny visual tricks, the movie itself has a definite visual style. The lighting of the film is very soft. Everything is a little blurry, a little out of focus. This serves two thematic purposes. One, it creates a dream-like feel. Right, this movie is not meant to be realistic. They are in no way trying to be realistic. This isn't reality, this is the future as it is dreamed of in someone's head. So the soft visual look makes it a little fantastical, and it works well with the overall purpose of the picture. Two, it makes the visuals almost comic-book like. Seriously, you can look at certain frames and it will look like a comic book. And this is purposeful. For one, much of the inspiration for serials comes from the old comic books. Hell, the best way to describe a serial (I guess) is that it is a live action comic book. So the soft lighting really enhances this effect.
3. The CGI. Yeah, yeah CGI is fantastic. Really, the only thing I have to mention about the CGI is that my friend and I stayed through the credits to see some of the new terms they are using for CGI workers (like model wrangler) and of the fucking thousands of CGI studios used for the film (seriously, there has to be at least 15 of them), one was named Pixel Liberator Front. I have to mention them.
4. Angelina Jolie. This isn't her sexiest, but she is still damn sexy. In that black uniform with her hair all tight, she's got this sort of dominatrix thing working. Something about a woman in uniform, grrrrrrowl. Even the eye patch doesn't detract too much, this being Talk Like a Pirate Day and all. The only thing that bothers me is her lips. They look like they have had at least three gallons of collagen injected in them. But still, I can make love to a suckerfish if it has a body like Angelina Jolie.
The Bad:
1. The plot. In a movie like this, the plot almost becomes negligable. It's not really about plot, it's about feel. But still, the plot plays an important role in keeping people interested. Think about the Indiana Jones plots. Not exactly stellar there, but they were definately interesting enough to keep you paying attention. Here, not so much. The plot is, well, it's sort of creative. I give them credit for trying. But it's just not that interesting. The opening and closing are decent, but it really bogs down in the middle. I would have liked them spend a little more time on the plot, make it a little more interesting. So if an intriguing story is your cup of tea, you've come to the wrong place for it. The best I can call the plot here is servicable.
2. The acting. First off, I don't like Gwenneth Paltrow. She annoys the shit out of me. Even 1940's hair and dress style can't help her. And though they tried their damn best to make Jude Law look less feminine, that can only work so well. But even beyond that, the acting of these two main characters was sub-par. It had no depth, none. There was supposed to be a connection between the two characters. Well I didn't feel, I doubt anyone else does either. And, what's even worse, they didn't provide a sense of tension. The whole point of a serial is to make it feel like the protagonist is about to die at any second. Look at the Indiana Jones films, look how Indy looks scared sometimes. In those films, you get the sense of tension from Harrison Ford, like he really was about to die. Here, Jude Law at least tries (though fails), but Gwenneth Paltrow looks mildly BORED throughout the film. The best she can muster is looking about as interested in the situation as if she had just broken a nail. No tension. None. And tension is necessarily. YOUR LIFE IS ON THE LINE, BITCH, AT LEAST LOOK INTERESTED.
Overall:
If you are looking for a movie with a good story and compelling action, the best you can get out of this is a meh. If you are looking for a film with an interesting visual style, this is a good place to start. If you are like me and get excited by going LOOK THAT GUY'S GOT A RAY GUN THAT SHOOTS CIRCLES OF LIGHT AT THE GIANT ROBOT THAT SHOOTS A LASER FROM ITS EYE AND MAKES NOISES LIKE GORT FROM THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL AND AND AND THAT SHIP IS MADE OF CHROME AND ALL SMOOTH AND CURVY AND AND AND AND AND AND PEOPLE PUT BUBBLES ON THEIR HEAD TO GO UNDERWATER AND HAVE JETPACKS AND AND AND AND AND then you will wet your pants with reckless joy. Like I have.
Why I Love Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow and Why You Will Not.
(note: review will probably contain minor stylistic spoilers, but nothing major involving the plot)
To begin, I am the market for this movie. I am the target audience. The reason I loved this movie is because it took two of my favorite things and smashed them together in a wonderful mix (and no, I'm not talking about Angelina Jolie and....well, Angelina Jolie). I shall follow my format of previous reviews.
The good:
1. The style. As I said, the movie combines two things that I love. One is what I call Gernsback Style. This is the "future of tomorrow" as it was dreamed of in the 1920's. The best example of this is Buck Rogers. Styles that use Ray Guns and chrome space ships and robots are clockwork instead of computerized zeppelins are a common method of transportation. Right, this is a style that captured the enthusiasm of the Lost Generation. They eagerly looked toward the future, they just didn't have much creativity, so their future was just like their present, just to the nth degree. I hope you get what I'm talking about, because it's difficult to tell, it's easier to show. Two is the serial. The film serial. The serial is also hard to define. Serials were back in the day, they were episodic in nature and usually involved the hero getting into seriously deep shit, then the serial would end there for the week, on that cliffhanger. The next episode would begin with the hero miraculously getting out of that deep shit and into deeper shit. Other than that they are very difficult to describe, it's most a feel. And here is where I'm going to bring up Sky Captains closest neighbor: Indiana Jones. Now, it's definately not as good as Indiana Jones, but a lot of people say they are similar. Well, that is because they are both shot as serials (intentionally). They are similar in shooting style and in music. You will be able to recognize how Sky Captains music is so similar to Indiana Jones. Well, that is because they both are homages to serials and use the same style of serial music. Anyways, I love Gernsback style and I love serials, and seeing them both together makes my pants wet.
2. The visual look of the film. Outside of the serial look of the film, which is noticable in things like the map of the world when flying (once again, like in Indiana Jones) and in fades and letters being overlaid and other tiny visual tricks, the movie itself has a definite visual style. The lighting of the film is very soft. Everything is a little blurry, a little out of focus. This serves two thematic purposes. One, it creates a dream-like feel. Right, this movie is not meant to be realistic. They are in no way trying to be realistic. This isn't reality, this is the future as it is dreamed of in someone's head. So the soft visual look makes it a little fantastical, and it works well with the overall purpose of the picture. Two, it makes the visuals almost comic-book like. Seriously, you can look at certain frames and it will look like a comic book. And this is purposeful. For one, much of the inspiration for serials comes from the old comic books. Hell, the best way to describe a serial (I guess) is that it is a live action comic book. So the soft lighting really enhances this effect.
3. The CGI. Yeah, yeah CGI is fantastic. Really, the only thing I have to mention about the CGI is that my friend and I stayed through the credits to see some of the new terms they are using for CGI workers (like model wrangler) and of the fucking thousands of CGI studios used for the film (seriously, there has to be at least 15 of them), one was named Pixel Liberator Front. I have to mention them.
4. Angelina Jolie. This isn't her sexiest, but she is still damn sexy. In that black uniform with her hair all tight, she's got this sort of dominatrix thing working. Something about a woman in uniform, grrrrrrowl. Even the eye patch doesn't detract too much, this being Talk Like a Pirate Day and all. The only thing that bothers me is her lips. They look like they have had at least three gallons of collagen injected in them. But still, I can make love to a suckerfish if it has a body like Angelina Jolie.
The Bad:
1. The plot. In a movie like this, the plot almost becomes negligable. It's not really about plot, it's about feel. But still, the plot plays an important role in keeping people interested. Think about the Indiana Jones plots. Not exactly stellar there, but they were definately interesting enough to keep you paying attention. Here, not so much. The plot is, well, it's sort of creative. I give them credit for trying. But it's just not that interesting. The opening and closing are decent, but it really bogs down in the middle. I would have liked them spend a little more time on the plot, make it a little more interesting. So if an intriguing story is your cup of tea, you've come to the wrong place for it. The best I can call the plot here is servicable.
2. The acting. First off, I don't like Gwenneth Paltrow. She annoys the shit out of me. Even 1940's hair and dress style can't help her. And though they tried their damn best to make Jude Law look less feminine, that can only work so well. But even beyond that, the acting of these two main characters was sub-par. It had no depth, none. There was supposed to be a connection between the two characters. Well I didn't feel, I doubt anyone else does either. And, what's even worse, they didn't provide a sense of tension. The whole point of a serial is to make it feel like the protagonist is about to die at any second. Look at the Indiana Jones films, look how Indy looks scared sometimes. In those films, you get the sense of tension from Harrison Ford, like he really was about to die. Here, Jude Law at least tries (though fails), but Gwenneth Paltrow looks mildly BORED throughout the film. The best she can muster is looking about as interested in the situation as if she had just broken a nail. No tension. None. And tension is necessarily. YOUR LIFE IS ON THE LINE, BITCH, AT LEAST LOOK INTERESTED.
Overall:
If you are looking for a movie with a good story and compelling action, the best you can get out of this is a meh. If you are looking for a film with an interesting visual style, this is a good place to start. If you are like me and get excited by going LOOK THAT GUY'S GOT A RAY GUN THAT SHOOTS CIRCLES OF LIGHT AT THE GIANT ROBOT THAT SHOOTS A LASER FROM ITS EYE AND MAKES NOISES LIKE GORT FROM THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL AND AND AND THAT SHIP IS MADE OF CHROME AND ALL SMOOTH AND CURVY AND AND AND AND AND AND PEOPLE PUT BUBBLES ON THEIR HEAD TO GO UNDERWATER AND HAVE JETPACKS AND AND AND AND AND then you will wet your pants with reckless joy. Like I have.
No comments:
Post a Comment