Has anyone noticed that this film LOOKS exactly like the video game Crimson Skies?

I have to believe that the visuals were somwhat inspired by this game.

At first I thought it looked like Fire Shark, all those old (and great) top scrolling flying games.

I'm not a big videogame guy no more... haven't played one since I was 17 or 18, but the whole thing looks like a videogame to me.  I mean, where is all the live action stuff?  I don't wanna see CG taking over my movies.  I hate it.

That's why movies, in a whole, suck today.  In the old days, they'd have that monster there, granted he was made from latex and rubber, he was still there.  Now, they just generate him on a computer and the actor has to act afraid of a man in a bluesuit covered in mo-cap balls.  I don't like it.

Case and point... I happened to catch Monster squad the other night on TNT or something.  I was actually floored by how incredible the FX were in the movie.  Why did they have to loose their way is what I wanna know.  If you can generate monsters that look that good on screen, live action, then why not continue with it?  Your craft is bound to get better and better as the years roll on.

I dunno... back on topic here, I don't like CG, not even a hint of it in my movies. the original Starwars series was worlds beyond these new pieces of shit.  They didn't have the aid of CG and hightech PS2 and xbox's and whatever else they use to make movies nowdays.

I dunno... Sky captain looks a little fake to me.  It seems like it was all shot on a stage and or generated on a computer.  I won't be seeing.

Sky Captain looks lame, I agree with Glass about the CG.

I do, however, also agree with Marla about Crimson Skies.

I am mistaken here. Apperently Sky Captain is based on a 50's pulp comic I am not familiar with.

So it appears that both the video game and the movie owe their pedigree to the comic.

I remember the ROCKETEER comics from like the 50's maybe even 40's... they were pretty sharp.  I even think the movie was pretty good, but of course it was well before all this CG stuff hit.  I would have liked to see a follow up to the Rocketeer myself.


Come to think of it, I actually think they had a Rocketeer tv series for awhile or like a radio show... I dunno... I'll have to check into that.

Anyway, back on topic... yeah, comics have been inspiring movies for the last 20 years easily, and maybe even longer.  Steven Speilberg recently went thru the movie transition period saying " in the 80's it was music that inspired movies " " in the 90's it was the 80's that inspired movies " " now, in the dawn of digital everything, it's gonna be videogames that inspire movies "

I couldn't agree more... of course it was Steven who said it, so... it is to be expected.

I don't even consider Sky Captain a movie, the entire thing was filmed on a Blue/Green Screen.

Oh geez, I thought we were just neglecting to mention that it's based on Sky Captain, since I am familiar with that and so it seemed obvious.  However, I do think that it looks a lot like Crimson Skies, which is a little different from the graphic novels.

I have to echo the sentiments of those who say the movie does look rather artificial, because indeed it does - I mean, special effects do not a movie make - but I'm curious to see the interaction between Jude Law and Gwenyth Paltrow's characters... so likely I'll be there on Friday.

From what I understand, the banter is going to be rapid fire in the style of such cinematic classics like "His Girl Friday", that genre termed "the screwball comedy" which has unfortunately died out.  I wonder if they can pull that off.  That's a really good one if you haven't seen it.  Highly recommend it.

well apparently the director didn't get his 100 million dollars for filming, so he had to rely on CGI.  but it has a more comic like feel and appeal to it.  
apparently that's what he was trying to do.

It didn't really remind me of a comic, from the trailer.  Frankly, it just made me mad because it's all CG.  But it's not a comic-like CG.  It's just..bad.

In the trailers everything looks real blurry and fuzzy, not sharp at all. It really makes the actors (real) stand out from everything else (CGI).

yeah yeah, that's what i meant.  but the uh...well hypaspace interview said it was supposed to be cartoonish or something.  i dunno.
i just noticed that it's really unrealistic looking...

And the blurry look is also what killed Van Helsing for me too, well, aside from the really bad script and acting and look of the monsters "Frankenstein" anyone?

I also didn't like all the high soaring heroics in it either.  I mean c'mon!  Frankenstein was swinging better than Spiderman ever did... it was lame, just really lame.  Also, for once, just once in my life time I'd like to see him as the bad guy and not the misunderstood monster abomination.

I dunno... I'm just really upset by movies nowdays... I really am.  They seem faker now than they did in the 50's.

Bono said something funny one time... he said "When a music group makes a crap album, your done with them, but when your favorite director makes a crap movie, you wait for the next one"

I love that...

See this movie. I'm just getting home after watching it. Trust me, I hate CG too... but see this movie.

People seem to forget that CG animation is an art--And after watching movies like Van Helsing and The Hulk, who can blame them?--But when it's done well, it's awesome. Sky Captain does it well.

Once again, see it.

There's my in depth review.

welll....i was hoping it would be better than expected.
looking at the commercials now, i can say i could probably be happily surprised by what i see.
gotta admire the director/producers creativity though..

Let's move this discussion to here which is AmPsycho's review.

Don