Rate Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow

[TheAuldGrump]

Back to Sky Captain, since it did not try to be hard SF I did not have a problem with the movie, as I said, it hit a lot of nostalgia buttons - many of them the same ones that Rocketeer, Raiders of the Lost Ark, and Star Wars hit for me. (Rocketeer being closest.)

It would be no work at all to adapt OGL Steampunk to run Sky Captain as a setting, simply borrowing the weapons from D20 Modern would suffice.

The soft focus was interesting, fitting well with the retro future look of the movie. Like I said, I enjoyed it, giving it a 7 or 8, in spite of some rather uninspired acting.

The Auld Grump - And in regards to Mr. Dyall's comments...

I didn't really, no, and it's been a long time since I've seen them. However, some things (noise in space? c'mon) are simply genre conventions that I don't even notice. Moontrap, I haven't seen in like 15 years.

I guess they didn't teach fission in your high school physics then? And no, there is no creation of energy in either case; that's shorthand for releasing energy. I thought that was self-explanatory.

What names? What little hoppy green things?

What mass? Ironically, that's a good question for 2010, which you call a good science hard SF. You do realize that in order to ignite nuclear fusion, a stellar mass needs to be 80 times the mass of Jupiter? I mean, sure, there were all those replicating monoliths, but like you said, where did the mass come from?

So Contact is good hard SF because it purposefully avoids the science by making you unsure what actually happened? I haven't see the movie, but that's not hard SF. And I'm no firearms engineer, but some basic high school chemistry would tell you that in order to ignite the gunpowder in the shells, you need to be in an environment that features some oxygen. Pretty sure a "hard SF" guy would catch the unrealisticness of firing a submachinegun in a vacuum.

Okay from the top - it was a chemical not a nuclear reaction - not fission. (Nuclear reactions pertain to the nucleus of the atom, chemical do not, only the valances.) Did they teach you anything in school? Guess not. There is a slight difference between the two. Plants turn CO2 into oxygen and carbon with the input of energy in the form of sunlight, requiring that input of energy to sustain the reaction. Animals alllow a controlled cumbustion of carbon to take place - releasing energy. Both require fuel, the carbon/oxygen reaction relaeasing a greater amount than the slower displacement of carbon from the CO2. The photosynthesis of plants is a more complicated and multi stage process compared to the relatively simple one of basically 'burning' the carbon in animals.

The little hoppy things were called Nematodes in the movie - guess what - they aren't nematodes, therefor 'little hoppy things', which is at least something they were. What mass? The 'nematodes' were breeding faster than they were consuming, Out massing what they ate. (something actually commented on by the characters in the movie.)They were obviously highly energetic creatures despite supposedly turning CO2 into oxygen and carbon (as I said a reaction that requires an input of energy to sustain.) Look up the word 'nematode' by the way, then watch the movie again, nematodes are round worms.

And guess what - guns can fire in a vacuum. Goddard (you remember him, the guy who also demonstrated liquid fueled rockets?) demonstrated that back in the 1920s, the whole point of gunpowder and its replacements is that they contain the oxygenating agent in the mix. in the case of blackpowder this is suplied by the saltpeter, which also acts as the 'kindling'..

And you admit not seeing the movie Contact, yep, 'nuf said.

Your one cogent comment was in regards to 2010, the assumption made was that the monoliths were transporting matter, not made clear in the movie, but made so in the book. 2010 was at least closer than either Red Planet or Mission To Mars, though matter transmission steps too close to magic for my tase.

Done. (with Apologies to Piratecat.)

*EDIT* Moved the portion pertaining to the subject to the top.

 

[VirgilCaine]

So, you've never seen the Street Fighter movie, then?

God help me.
Laser sights on top of the barrels!
Personal money printed before he has the country under his thumb!
Guile a main character!

 

[The_lurkeR]

Just saw it at the drive-in tonight.
It was visually inspired and ummm... that's it I guess. I don't have anything else nice to say, I gave it a 4.

 

[The Grackle]

It looks like his second movie will be Edgar Rice Burroughs, A Princess of Mars! I cannot wait!

Noooo!!! They're gonna let this director make A Princess of Mars? Man, does anyone know where he lives? I'm gonna go break his legs right now.

I mean, Sky Captain was alrightish, but it was like watching a really long trailer. There were robots and stuff, but it was a pretty lifeless film. This guy's a crap director, and those were crap actors. That guy who played Dax chewed gums pretty convincingly, but otherwise- yech.

Still, I had more fun than I thought I would. C+/B-
----
Did anyone else notice that when Sky Captain was shooting at the dinosaur with a semi-automatic, it gets knocked from his hands and in the next shot a revolver falls down the chasm.
"Oh crap, I dropped someone else's gun!"

 

[barsoomcore]

I gave it a 6, which is reasonably high for me. The big problem was the screenplay -- the story was so clonkily handled (and didn't need to be) and there was very little over-arcing tension. Other than the "Who's this Totenkopf cat and what's he up to?" the story largely consisted of "Encounter Dangerous/Puzzling Thing, Elude Danger/Solve Puzzle, Repeat." Which got a little tedious the third or fourth time. It needed a few tense issues that were carried along through the film, that didn't get eluded or solved on the first pass.

Big points for all three leads who did stellar jobs, the look and design of the entire production, and the sheer inventiveness of it all. I'll definitely see the next picture this guy makes -- he's good.

But stuff like, "So where is this Totenkopf anyway? And what's this staff?"

"Hm, this staff appears to somehow (never mind the details) lead us directly to Totenkopf. Phew!"

Just makes me wish the writers had worked a little harder.

 

[ssampier]

You have got to be pulling our legs! Flash Gordon is an icon of sci-fi adventure and a mainstay of the comic pages for 50+ years. How can you remember Buck Rogers and not Flash Gordon, even with that deliciously hoeky and intentionally bad (I'd like to think so) Topol/Sam Jones/Max Von Sydow movie from 1980 with the Queen soundtrack. I command, no DEMAND, that you go out and ask your local comic shop to gt you some non-DC Flash Gordon comics. Awesome stuff.

Sky Captain was the most fun I had at a movie in a long time. It met and exceeded my expectations and was well worth the 4 bucks admission (and not a matinee). Definite must see.

Jason

Nope I'm serious! I'm a young adult (23), so I was very little when Buck Rogers was popular. My family didn't like sci-fi much (except my father who's a Star Trek nut), so I don't remember watching it much. I've heard of Flash Gordon. I just don't know who he/she/it is and what the big deal is/was.

I should point out I'm more of a fantasy fan than sci fi buff.

Anyway, regardless, I enjoyed Sky Captain.

 

[John Crichton]

That was a damn good time. Pulpy, pulpy, pulpy.

Transparent story with a "twist"? Check.

Plucky female reporter in love with the lead? Check.

Aw, shucks leading man who always comes through in the clutch? Check.

Awesome visuals? Check.

10 out of 10.

 

[Gomez]

Nope I'm serious! I'm a young adult (23), so I was very little when Buck Rogers was popular. My family didn't like sci-fi much (except my father who's a Star Trek nut), so I don't remember watching it much. I've heard of Flash Gordon. I just don't know who he/she/it is and what the big deal is/was.

I should point out I'm more of a fantasy fan than sci fi buff.

Anyway, regardless, I enjoyed Sky Captain.

You weren't even alive when Buck Rogers was popular. Your father and grandfather enjoyed it though!



Buck Rogers


Buck Rogers first appeared as Anthony Rogers in a short space opera, "Armageddon-2419 A.D." by Philip Francis Nowlan, published in the August 1928 issue of Amazing Stories. A sequel, "The Airlords of Han," appeared in the March 1929 issue (the warlike Hans were later changed to Mongols).

Following is the introduction to the reprint of "Armageddon-2419 A.D." from the 35th anniversary issue of Amazing Stories.

The August, 1928, issue of Amazing Stories was beyond question one of the most important not only in its history but in the history of science fiction. That would have been the case if it had only presented to the science fiction public a new author named Edward Elmer Smith with the first installment of "The Skylark of Space." But its immortality was assured by introducing Anthony "Buck" Rogers to the world in a 25,000 word novelette titled "Armageddon-2419," by Philip Francis Nowlan.

Few people, either in or out of science fiction, know that "Buck" Rogers was born in Amazing Stories. Fewer still are aware that the first artist to cartoon the famous future Americans and soldiers of Han was Frank R. Paul. Breaking its policy Amazing Stories ran, in addition to two full-size illustrations, three cartoon panels which may even have given Nowlan the idea of submitting the entire package to a comic strip syndicate.

When Buck Rogers in the Twenty Fifth Century appeared as a Comic strip in the daily newspapers in 1929 it created a sensation and added a new phrase to the language. Phil Nowlan wrote the continuity about the famous characters of Buck Rogers, Wilma Deering, Dr. Huer, and Killer Kane, along with their disintegrators, jumping belts, inertron, and paralysis rays, and made them familiar to millions of people in this country and abroad. The daily adventures on radio thrilled many more. The popularity of the strip began to decline in the late thirties under the competitions of Flash Gordon, Brick Bradford and other imitators. When Phil Nowlan severed his connection with the strip there was a steady loss of readership. Today, though the strip still appears in some papers, few people are aware it still exists. When Nowlan left the strip in l939 he resumed his writing of magazine science fiction; but he died in early 1940.

"Buck Rogers" is for the world of tomorrow, future invention and the spirit of science fiction. In past years the phrase "that Buck Rogers stuff" had a derisive ring to it, but more recently atom bombs and earth satellites have changed all that.

The strangest part about this entire story is that the original Buck Rogers' stories in Amazing Stories were in no sense juveniles. They were serious, adult works based on the most plausible science of the time. They have an aura of accurate prophecy about them that cannot be erased. "Armageddon-2419" precisely described the bazooka, the jet plane, walkie-talkie for warfare, the infra-red ray gun for fighting at night, as well as dozens of other advances that are not here yet but are on their way.

The perceptive Hugo Gernsback, then editor and publisher of Amazing Stories called his shots as accurately on the quality of his stories as he did on future invention. Of "Armageddon-2419" he said: "We have rarely printed a story in this magazine that for scientific interest as well as suspense could hold its own with this particular story. We prophesy that this story will become more valuable as the years go by. It certainly holds a number of interesting prophecies, many of which, no doubt, will come true. For wealth of science it will be hard to beat for some time to come. It is one of those rare stories that will bear reading and re-reading many times."

Comic Strip 1928-1967
Radio Serial 1932-1947
Film Serial 1939
TV Series 1950-1951
Second TV Series 1979-1981

 

[Knightfall]

A solid 8.

 

[Ghostwind]

Just saw it tonight. I enjoyed it thoroughly. It made me think of the old serials I grew up with. Just a popcorn movie that lets you check your brains at the door and enjoy it for what it is supposed to be.