Talk:Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow article.
Article policies
Good article Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow has been listed as one of the Arts good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
The contents of Homages in Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow‎ were merged into Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow on 21 January 2008 and they now redirect here. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history; for its talk page, see here

Contents

[edit] German

The German-language bits in this film are as silly as they are funny...I mean Dr Totenkopf? Dringlichkeitsfreigabe????

I was under the impression that silliness was the point. Willy Logan 02:40, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Have removed this line: "the fact that Germany operates zeppelin airline does not point to historical outcome" from the first paragraph of the "Synopsis" section. It makes no sense in the context of victors of world war 1, zeppelins where produced into the late 30's and did many transatlantic flights. Liamdavies 03:07 AM, 20th September, 2007 (+10 UTC)

[edit] Postmodernism

Postmodernism has manifestations in many modern academic and non-academic disciplines:...film.... A postmodern approach to art thus rejects the distinction between low and high art forms. It rejects rigid genre boundaries and favours eclecticism, the mixing of ideas and forms. Partly due to this rejection, it promotes parody, irony, and playfulness, commonly referred to as jouissance by postmodern theorists" - Postmodernism

I'm wondering if a section on postmodernism in this film would be interesting. --Viriditas 23:33, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Although Postmodernism is a dominant trend nowadays and somewhat prerequisite for retrofuturism, I don't think it's important enough to merit a section in this article. Also, I think the "see also" link to Postmodernism might be misleading, and I will remove it if nobody objects. I mean, Postmodernist philosophy isn't really ever expressed in the movie, and it might give readers the impression that the movie is about postmodernism or expresses postmoern ideology. michaelb Talk to this user 17:53, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey are we sure the movie is set in 1939? Doesn't the scientist at the beginning of the movie say "...before the first World War", implying that there has already been a SECOND World War? Just a thought.

This quote seems to be an error on the screenwriter's part. (Before WWII, WWI would have been referred to as "the Great War".) Everything else in the movie seems to hint pretty clearly to 1939, though. -- Syzygy 12:32, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Story of

Isn't there a very interesting story behind this movie? I read an article (in Wired?) about a couple of months before it launched. Apparently the guy behind it had been at work on it for almost a decade, all on his own, working at a software company in the day time and rendering the movie on a cluster of old Macs in his basement in the night. I don't know how exaggerated the article in question was, but surely there was some truth to it, and it's interesting enough to be part of this article.

I added a section on the production of the movie. Hope this helps. Count Ringworm 19:35, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image processing

Is there a name for the (horrible) color processing that the images suffered?

Yeah: Hollywood. *baddum ch* Thank you. Cybertooth85 06:32, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
I was under the impression that the washed-out look was deliberate.--65.113.254.254 21:44, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Genre

Is there a name for the genre of retro science-fiction inspired by the 1930s? As in Crimson Skies and The Gernsback Complex. You know, zeppelins, aerodinamics, death rays. Retropunk? Aeropunk?

Hey there. It's called "Ray-Gun Gothic"


[edit] SHIELD or SPECTRUM?

Personally, I liked the reference to the SHIELD Helicarrier better...

J.User_talk:Michael Reiter

jmr

I think it looks much more like Cloudbase. The Helicarrier was also influenced by Cloudbase, but is less of a direct copy. Check out this page, [1] follow the links, then see what you think.

Can anyone offer an opinion re: Luther Arkwright? I never heard of it before. Anyway, it has to be newer than Captain Scarlet, since graphic novels didn't exist in the 60s. SpaceCaptain 01:01, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I've found a picture of the craft in question. [2] I still say the one in Sky Captain looks most like Cloudbase. SpaceCaptain 01:09, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The craft on the cover of the Luther Arkwright comic is a Prussian ship, there are other types in the series, including British User:Sleaf 00:51, 07 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Well, I can't make the call unless I see the British ship for myself. All the other flying carriers I've seen are just versions of a basic concept; the one in Sky Captain is Cloudbase with a Union Jack and rotors instead of jets. If there's one in Luther Arkwright that looks the same, then it' also a copy of Cloudbase.SpaceCaptain 03:57, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Olivier dubbed?

Can anyone provide a source for the statement in the introduction that Oliver's voice was dubbed? My understanding is his dialogue was created from soundclips of the actor so his own voice could be used. 23skidoo 02:52, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Spectrum Cloudbase predated by SHIELD Helicarrier.

I believe the Spectrum Cloudbase is predated by Marvel Comics' SHIELD Helicarrier by at least three years... Given that Captain Scarlet came out in 1967, and that Strange Tales (Marvel Comics) came out in 1964.

User_Talk:Michael_Reiter

Okay, SHIELD and the Helicarrier predate Cloudbase. But there are many fictional incarnations of the hovering aircraft carrier, and hs latest one most closely resembles Cloudbase in its overall configuration. (The Helicarrier, in most depictions, is much thicker and has a more curved design.) SpaceCaptain 00:28, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The Improvements section

"Casper van Dien would have played a much better Sky Captain. His appearance is both simliar to that of a CG character which might have blended better with the substantial amount of CGI effects the movie makes use of. His acting talents, similar to those used in his role as Johnny Rico in Starship Troopers could have helped build the character of Sky Captain into something more memorable." - How is this NPOV? Salmon

[edit] On the border of madness and greatness... maddeningly hard to capture

Interesting filmfor several reasons beyond technical landmark status. I enjoyed it, but I was constantly confused regarding what it wanted to be. Was it an all out comic-book romp? The line about "World War I" would then almost be justified in this alternate 1930s (almost). But there is more substance to it than just an elongated art-deco daydream, and its damn near impossible to nail it down exactly. This article has a way to go, but I'm afraid I don't have the answer if there is one. Definetely room to expand. Agreed?

[edit] contains a major anachronism

People don't call a World War I in any timeline until WW II has already started, particularly a timeline in which there's no obvious lead up to a second major war. "The Great War" or "The World War" would have been much better choices.Joncnunn 20:56, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] narrowing down the timeframe

Also note that the year can be pinned down much more than just 1930s; Towards the beginning there is a clip from our 1939 movie "Wizard of Oz", which can probably be assumed to have been come out at the same time in this timeline, especally with so many other details seeming to fit perfectly with that as the year. Joncnunn 20:56, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

I removed the "steampunk" and "dieselpunk" rubbish because this is best classified as pulp fiction. It's absurd to label things like this as "dieselpunk" or Jules Vernes' writings as "steampunk." It's not even a real literary label.

[edit] endspoiler

Template:Endspoiler I hate when I don't know where should I read, the next section, perhaps? I believe it should have an spoiler end anyway, right? Dunno. 200.230.213.152 03:49, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Submersible v. amphibious

The craft piloted in this film aren't really amphibious so much as aerial/submersible. Should the text actually point to an article that compares them to aircraft like the Spruce Goose? Geeman 01:04, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] merging references q

I'm not 100% sure about this, but is it considered okay to cite multiple websites with different titles in the same entry, when they are clearly consecutive parts? (The ref in question is Edwards, "The Making of Sky Captain - Parts 1-3".) --Pentasyllabic 00:54, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] World War One

They keep refrencing "world war one" in the film, but if the film is setup before WW2 then why the hell do they call the Great War "World War ONE"? Major goof in the film.

-G 23:07, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Probably because if they'd have called it "the Great War" most people wouldn't have know what they were talking about. Most people don't know that was was it was called before it was renamed after World War II. Val42 17:00, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "worked both period" quote

I can't find the quote in the article cited. Should it be periods intead of period? --Gbleem 18:56, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'Principal Photography' section contradicts itself

Two quotes from that section:

"Conran and Avnet were able to cut costs considerably by shooting the entire movie in 26 days [...] on high-definition video using a Sony HDW-F900 [...]" (N.B. These cameras record digital video.)
"After each day of shooting, footage was edited and sent overnight to editors in L.A. who digitized it and sent it back."

What did they have to digitize? Maybe what these editors in L.A. really did was something along the lines of removing the bluescreen background and tracking camera movements from markers in the background? I have no clue, but obviously the statements quoted above can't both be right. 86.59.11.23 00:29, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. Thanks for spotting this. --J.D. 01:41, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Animated Actors?

I have deleted the following from the Cast section as an unsourced statement (which was also breaking the structure of the section):

An interesting aspect of the film was the extreme high-tech animation.
All actors in the movie were completely animated using motion trackers on the actors while they acted then transferring them into a computer where they were animated into the film. This lead to a breakthrough in animated films.

I have no proof on hand but I'm pretty sure that it's wrong - they were not animated, just filmed against a blue screen. If I'm wrong about this, the text can be put back into the article with an appropriate source. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:19, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

You are correct. On the DVD there are some of the scenes that they filmed before the special effects were applied. I was surprised that even in the scenes in the office, most of the frame wasn't of physical objects. — Val42 (talk) 16:01, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] About the writer?

I really liked to the movie and came to wikipedia to find out more at him/them and if they have any new projects planed, there's virtually no info on this. Could someone please find some? 209.74.19.157 (talk) 03:50, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Crimson Skies

Shouldn't there be some kind of ref to the fact that the film has some similarities to Crimson Skies? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.61.11.54 (talk) 03:53, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GA Review

There are 7 things that must pass before an article reaches GA status. I have reviewed it and the result is as follows:

  1. Well-written: Pass
  2. Factually accurate: Pass
  3. Broad: Pass
  4. Neutrally written: Pass
  5. Stable: Pass
  6. Well-referenced: Pass
  7. Images: Pass

Well done, the GA has passed successfully Bob talk 23:45, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Additional comment The article does meet the GA criteria, though could use a few more reference citations. There are also some external links in the body of the article that need to be removed, per the manual of style (only internal wikilinks belong in the body of articles; external links only go into the 'external links' section at the end). Dr. Cash (talk) 16:12, 21 April 2008 (UTC)