has anyone seen the new trailer for Iron Sky? All I have to say is WTH.
Heres the IMDB for it www.imdb.com/title/tt1034314/
How someone thought this was going to be a good movie should be shot. It even looks horrible ScyFy could make a better film than this.
I have been awaiting this movie on the edge of my seat. I see it as horribly awesome. I will put it in the same category as a Mars Attacks (one of my favs)
arkangl said:
has anyone seen the new trailer for Iron Sky? All I have to say is WTH.
Heres the IMDB for it www.imdb.com/title/tt1034314/
How someone thought this was going to be a good movie should be shot. It even looks horrible ScyFy could make a better film than this.
If you knew how much blood, sweat and tears have gone into making this movie you would not be saying that and no ScyFy could not have done a better job.
By the way your topic title is wrong. Clearly the sequel to WWII would be WWIII
Iron Sky is a dark comedic look at an alternate history fully funded through the internet. It would be rather difficult for it to have a Hollywood blockbuster budget set of special effects.
It's certainly better than the special effects for the original Star Trek or Dr Who. It's also gone far beyond most SyFy channel movies I've seen, including the few I've liked. Technology is making movie making much more viable for small studios.
I've also been looking forward to Iron Sky for some time. I was thrilled when I found out it was being released this year.
I don't expect it to win major accolades from Hollywood, but that's ok. Some of the best films I've seen have been panned by Hollywood.
I didn't know anything about it until my friend posted it on FB and movies like Mutant Chronicle thats a partial ScyFy movie has better graphics. Remeber I'm an animation major with minor in visual effects so I just say all the flaws in film not the greatness to it, and I am only talking about visuals story could actually be decent. Technically it's not WWIII if it's Humans vs Nazis on the moon, that would imply thats its a war only within the planet Earth's environment. This would be like Solar War I or something.
Also some things are worth pulling the plug a teacher at my school had been working on the animated movie Delgo for like 5-10 years and look how horrible that was. Then again look at this game and how long its been in the works and how amazing it is. It's is a tough call when you've developed it for so long.
There are SyFy Channel movies with good graphics, and SyFy Channel movies with atrocious graphics you don't need to be a film major to see.
Go beyond the special effects graphics, and you get to see the normal story graphics, where people obviously don't handle weapons properly, or do ludicrous things in combat anyone with marginal understanding of combat will find laughable, or forget continuity issues during editing. Add considerations of dialog delivery, and you have more issues some people will notice. Go to sound effects, and you get more issues. Film is a very diverse medium, and people with training and understanding of any particular aspect will notice problems within their purvue.
Some people read forum posts, and focus on grammar and spelling errors, while others will put up with a lot to try and find the other poster's meaning.
I watch movies for entertainment, and when I see graphics, action, music, or dialog delivered poorly, I can choose to focus on that, or accept it and move on. Everyone has that choice. Happily for me, I can accept a lot, and, if nothing else, consider it as humorous instead of destroying my enjoyment. Once I get through the movie, I can decide it's worth the MST treatment, or something I can continue to enjoy later on without needing peanut gallery silly comments. Even if I find too many problems with a movie to enjoy it, I don't expect others to share my opinion. I've walked away from movies others in my family enjoyed greatly, simply because it didn't fit my mood at the time. I certainly don't pay much attention to movie critics as other than laugh material when they miss significant points I understand and enjoy in movies.
I have enjoyed some really bad movies through the years, simply because I could ignore the poorly done parts, and focus on the parts I enjoyed.
Whether WW3 would be appropriate, though I don't know if the film uses that term, is dependent on how you want to define it. Some people would say the Earth and its moon are a single world. Others could argue that an invading force that requires all actual combat to occur on the Earth would only constitute a world war unless non-humans were involved. Most wars get their titles from the historians after the war is over, and those titles can vary from place to place.
WW2 was also The Great Patriotic War. WW1 was The Great War and The War to End All Wars (obvious mistake). The US Civil War was also The War Between the States and The War of Secession. The American Revolutionary War was also the American War for Independence and The War for America. Some consider the American Revolution simply part of a much larger conflict amongst European powers. Those are quick examples I can think of. The most popular names for wars tend to be written by the victors, and spread through their allies. Most wars are simply 'the war,' until they are over and armchair historian try to describe them.
Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow was not a great film, but it was groundbreaking as the first film done fully with green screen graphics for the sets. Iron Sky breaks different ground. Again, not as a major award winning movie, but as a nice simple movie people can enjoy.
I'd rather have a movie I can enjoy than some social commentary I could care less about, regardless of the level of the graphics or the social significance of the film. I'd rather watch Princess Bride than Falling Down any day of the week, year, or decade. With that example, I'd rather watch The Gamers, Dorkness Rising with all of its cheesy low budget wonderfulness.
I think Iron Sky will be a very enjoyable film. They are making a low budget movie for people to enjoy, and I can understand and accept that. I think the idea of being able to fund a movie through internet donations is a fascinating addition to what movie makers can do to try and realize their dreams in film.
I would love to see this film finished.
As for Syfy, they do not show Sci-Fi anymore. They show wrestling, ghost hunters and reality shows. They have SyFailed.
To be fair, SyFy does still show movies, but they do have a lot of sooooo exciting (yawn!) other programming to wade through.
I don't understand the appeal of shows with people spending an hour walking around 'finding proof' but never really finding anything that proves anything. I can only take so much Blair Witch Project style filming before I give up. Normally, I don't even try.
How wrestling became science fiction, I'll never understand. Fantasy, perhaps, though I do recall having to break up quarrels about whether wrestling was real or not before they came to blows.
I wish they showed more movies, including some of their real stinkers, but the other shows are cheaper, and still draw a crowd.
SyFy killed the Tremors franchise, what more is there to say.
lol I only watch 3 things on ScyFy, being human, faceoff, and scyfy movies that look decent for well ScyFy. But come one they funniest show they had ever was a reality show tell me you didn't laugh your ass off at "Stan Lee's Who Wants to Be a Superhero?" that was the funniest thing I ever saw ScyFy put on thier air time.
Simply reading 'Reality Show' in a show's description makes most of my brain cells threaten to leave if I actually watch it.
Reality Shows are popular with the networks because they're ridiculously cheap, but enough people love to watch other people make fools of themselves that they are profitable to make. I find them the most insipid options out there for entertainment, so I opt out. Rock on for those who like them, but I don't.
I prefer even reruns of some of the worst SyFy has offered in movies to the idea of watching reality shows.
FlorisH said:
SyFy killed the Tremors franchise, what more is there to say.
So true, loved those movies. TV show came and went so fast.
I remember "Who Wants to Be a Super Hero" always thought there was supposed to be a season two of that show. I remember watching it because one of the girls was kind of hot.
I hate SyFy now, they cancel all the good shows.
Face off is a good SyFy channel show.
Gimp said:
There are SyFy Channel movies with good graphics, and SyFy Channel movies with atrocious graphics you don't need to be a film major to see.
Go beyond the special effects graphics, and you get to see the normal story graphics, where people obviously don't handle weapons properly, or do ludicrous things in combat anyone with marginal understanding of combat will find laughable, or forget continuity issues during editing. Add considerations of dialog delivery, and you have more issues some people will notice. Go to sound effects, and you get more issues. Film is a very diverse medium, and people with training and understanding of any particular aspect will notice problems within their purvue.
Some people read forum posts, and focus on grammar and spelling errors, while others will put up with a lot to try and find the other poster's meaning.
I watch movies for entertainment, and when I see graphics, action, music, or dialog delivered poorly, I can choose to focus on that, or accept it and move on. Everyone has that choice. Happily for me, I can accept a lot, and, if nothing else, consider it as humorous instead of destroying my enjoyment. Once I get through the movie, I can decide it's worth the MST treatment, or something I can continue to enjoy later on without needing peanut gallery silly comments. Even if I find too many problems with a movie to enjoy it, I don't expect others to share my opinion. I've walked away from movies others in my family enjoyed greatly, simply because it didn't fit my mood at the time. I certainly don't pay much attention to movie critics as other than laugh material when they miss significant points I understand and enjoy in movies.
I have enjoyed some really bad movies through the years, simply because I could ignore the poorly done parts, and focus on the parts I enjoyed.
Whether WW3 would be appropriate, though I don't know if the film uses that term, is dependent on how you want to define it. Some people would say the Earth and its moon are a single world. Others could argue that an invading force that requires all actual combat to occur on the Earth would only constitute a world war unless non-humans were involved. Most wars get their titles from the historians after the war is over, and those titles can vary from place to place.
WW2 was also The Great Patriotic War. WW1 was The Great War and The War to End All Wars (obvious mistake). The US Civil War was also The War Between the States and The War of Secession. The American Revolutionary War was also the American War for Independence and The War for America. Some consider the American Revolution simply part of a much larger conflict amongst European powers. Those are quick examples I can think of. The most popular names for wars tend to be written by the victors, and spread through their allies. Most wars are simply 'the war,' until they are over and armchair historian try to describe them.
Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow was not a great film, but it was groundbreaking as the first film done fully with green screen graphics for the sets. Iron Sky breaks different ground. Again, not as a major award winning movie, but as a nice simple movie people can enjoy.
I'd rather have a movie I can enjoy than some social commentary I could care less about, regardless of the level of the graphics or the social significance of the film. I'd rather watch Princess Bride than Falling Down any day of the week, year, or decade. With that example, I'd rather watch The Gamers, Dorkness Rising with all of its cheesy low budget wonderfulness.
I think Iron Sky will be a very enjoyable film. They are making a low budget movie for people to enjoy, and I can understand and accept that. I think the idea of being able to fund a movie through internet donations is a fascinating addition to what movie makers can do to try and realize their dreams in film.
So is that a Yes or a No?
mgentile7 said:
Gimp said:
I think Iron Sky will be a very enjoyable film.
So is that a Yes or a No?
I think it's a yes. I'm retired, so I tend to take my time saying things.
Gimp said:
mgentile7 said:
Gimp said:
I think Iron Sky will be a very enjoyable film.
So is that a Yes or a No?
I think it's a yes. I'm retired, so I tend to take my time saying things.
Roger that.
Hey I watched the trailer. This will be a very cool campy movie. I thought the trailer looked awesome....
Jiltedtoo said:
I would love to see this film finished.
As for Syfy, they do not show Sci-Fi anymore. They show wrestling, ghost hunters and reality shows. They have SyFailed.
Kind of like the History Channel not showing much History anymore.
Psykostevo said:
Kind of like the History Channel not showing much History anymore.
Yeah, Discovery channel not showing anything other than reality trucking and gun shows.
Sad times.
History channel shows a lot of ancient aliens programs, which I guess could fit into the dust world.
Aliens were at the first Thanksgiving dinner!
