Sky Captain and The World of Tomorrow

skycapn.jpg

Sky Captain and The World of Tomorrow is just like most re­views you’ve read of it. 100% pulp. Granted, it has that fan­boy­ish nos­tal­gia for the gold­en age of sci­ence fic­tion, and it works in the retroart­de­co hip­ness that has been pop­ping up late­ly, so pulp should be ex­pect­ed. Jules Verne and Edgar Rice Burroughs don’t hold up so well in the 21st cen­tu­ry. Or more to the point, you can’t make a sci­ence fic­tion movie that hap­pens 70 years in the past.

At least pulp sci-fi mags were en­ter­tain­ing and had orig­i­nal ideas. Seriously, the on­ly thing this movie does is ref­er­ence oth­er movies and sci­ence fic­tion sto­ries and play on ex­as­per­at­ing “wit­ty” repar­tee. Even its CGI high-con­trast, over­ex­posed pret­ti­fied­ness bores the liv­ing shit out of you af­ter 10 min­utes or so. In a genre known for ro­bust cre­ativ­i­ty and imag­i­na­tion, Sky Captain lays a big egg-smelling cor­po­rate post-mod­ern fart.

3 thoughts on “Sky Captain and The World of Tomorrow

  1. Just make sure you watch ‘Serenity’ this fall. It comes to the­aters September 30th. Then you’ll see some re­al sci­ence-fic­tion with orig­i­nal ideas and an ac­tu­al plot.

  2. I won’t dis­agree that Sky Captain was dreck. I will, how­ev­er, quib­ble over ERB and Verne not hold­ing up over time. The char­ac­ters and the nar­ra­tive still cap­ture and en­gage. The John Carter of Mars pulps are still pure joys to read.

  3. I just reread Journey to the Center of the Earth a few weeks ago, and it was quite en­joy­able, but your av­er­age sci­ence fic­tion read­er is ex­pect­ing Michael Crichton [I think he is a mod­ern day JV], a bit more sci­ence with their fic­tion.

    But then again, steam­punk has nev­er re­al­ly done any­thing for me. I’d much rather pre­fer to read the ac­tu­al stuff. Of course, ERB and Verne were writ­ing “ad­ven­ture” nov­els. They on­ly got pi­geon­hold­ed as sci-fi ret­ro­spec­tive­ly.

Comments are closed.