Sky Captain and the world of tomorrow

[cinemabon]

Art Deco meets Film Noir

There is a new art in cinema that has arrived in the form of “Sky Captain and the world of tomorrow.” It has taken on the look of art versus commercialism in the form of a new film whose plot is more like a comic book than literature. However thin the plot may be, it does not diminish the importance of the art in this film.

In fact at one point, the protagonist bends down in the height of battle and finds the plot of the film inside some comic books sprawled on the floor. At first, one must puzzle through a series of striking images that are so stylistic, they bring back memories of such great works of art like “The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari” or even Welles’ great masterpiece, “Citizen Kane.” I don’t believe I have seen such a finely crafted group of artistic images in a film that is really very shallow and pointless, which is the rather sad aspect of this otherwise splendid experience.

So what is the point to the new film, “Sky Captain and the world of tomorrow?” In addition to being a tribute to an era that is gone forever, there is also a tip of the hat to a style that is also lost and rather forgotten, that of art deco.

I am not an art historian, but I do remember back in “art appreciation” in college the movement known as art deco, which began as evolvement from the Art Nouveau movement at the turn of the 20th Century. Art Deco began in the 1920's and continued on through the 1930's and somewhat in the 1940's until World War II. One of the great movers of that period was graphic artist Cassandre (France). Through the graphic work of Mouron (his real name), architect Raymond Hood, and many others, a “political” and social message was introduced into “decorative art”, expressing views like “how machines oppress mankind,” and so forth. Their work was bold and expressive. Their vision awoke a trend in art that later culminated in the film noir style of the 1940's onward. Architecturally, the Chrysler building in New York and places like the Rockefeller Center and Radio City Music Hall still carry on that visual style. At one moment in the film, the heroine rushes into the Radio City lobby and we actually see this stylistic setting as it still exists today, demonstrating the epitome of that style. The entire film has multiple examples and tributes.

Like the frame of the hats around faces, or the slanting light that cuts through rooms diagonally, for the pure sake of art, this film will go down in history as an homage to the art deco style and also told with a twist of film noir thrown in for good measure. Artistically speaking, nothing in recent memory can even compete with its bold and striking images.

The puzzling problem then becomes one of plot. While the pace of the film’s editing makes the visual imagery exciting to watch, the story itself is rather muddled. We sit in awe looking at great art deco images of giant robots oppressing scurrying tiny people, but for what purpose? Oh, yes, it’s the old mad scientist on the loose ploy again. Sounds more like a plot to a Pink Panther movie than part of this beautiful series of artistic and carefully crafted scenes.

I must admit I sat in wonder gazing at all the incredible beauty and fine work film-maker and director Kerry Conran created for us common plebeians to enjoy; only to have my hopes dashed by a rather silly plot and corny ending. I tip my fedora to Mr. Conran and to all who would dare to build such wonderful dream castles to loose ourselves in for a couple of hours. So, by all means, go and enjoy the eye candy that is such a joy to spend time with, but come away knowing you’ve just eaten popcorn and not the gourmet meal promised.

Ebert gave this four stars. For art’s sake, I would concur. Art for art’s sake. Sounds like the slogan of a major studio, doesn’t it? (Tongue firmly in cheek!)

[bix171]

Kerry Conran may think his reference points are the film serials of the thirties and comic books of the forties but there are more homages to Steven Spielberg (particularly "Raiders Of The Lost Ark" and "Jurassic Park") and George Lucas to negate whatever Conran's original intentions were to begin with. Conran gets his CGI-generated deco period details exquisitely right, the story is pleasant and easy to follow, the dialogue has a fair amount of wit in it and it all moves well, but you're constantly distracted by the egregiously bad performances (particularly Gwyneth Paltrow's, who can't channel Jean Arthur's comic timing to save her life) and Sabrina Plisco's scattershot editing. Conlan seems to want to draw unnecessary, yet troubling, parallels between World War II and today's conflict--it's as if he's taken it upon himself to provide us with a superhero to soothe our rattled nerves. There's a "cameo" by Sir Laurence Olivier; his voice and appearance are used to portray him as the Nazi (though the term is never used) villain; "The Boys From Brazil" and "Marathon Man" notwithstanding, it's a shameful way to manipulate a hallowed career.

[cinemabon]

I'm rather curious why you took three years to respond to my rather terse review (in retrospect, my work has improved since)?

[bix171]

I just watched it Friday night.

[cinemabon]

As I stated in my previous post, the film seems more an homage to art and Conran's obsession with old movies than actually telling a story. If you can describe the plot, I'll buy you a steak dinner! Otherwise, the visual are striking, different, and often haunting in their composition. As to Speilberg, the reason you see parallels between the films is that Steven is also paying tribute to the old serial pictures (actually Lucas, since this was his brainchild). As a youth, I used to watch Jungle Jim and other such films on television. The two things missing from Indiana Jones are the corny dialogue and wooden performances, such as Johnny Weissmuller, who incidentally, wore jungle clothes and not a loincloth as he did in the Tarzan pictures:

"What must we do?"
"I don't know. I'll figure something out."
"You'd better hurry up!"
"Ok, give me a minute..."

and so on...