Which elements of Steampunk did you see in the film? Did it help you understand better what Steampunk is? If so, how?
We talked in class about how it is important when writing in any sci-fi/fantasy drama to be careful not to let all the cool technology/magic stuff distract you from telling a good story with strong characters and themes that matter. How do you feel Steamboy did with this? Was this a strong story with deep characters and themes or was it just cool because it had cool Steampunk stuff going on? Defend your opinion.
Also, this is pretty cool:
I didn't actually enjoy Steamboy very much personally because it dragged on so much! They could of gone in-depth with more background, especially with the father and grandpa roles. They stopped when when the the steam balls were created.... Okay, what about them being in the O'Hara Foundation?
ReplyDeleteWe discussed how not to lose sight with all the CGI pizzazz, and remember the story plot but it seems to be that this movie kinda lose sight. My best example would have to be the amusement park on top of steam tower. There is no reason for that to be there, unless it has to symbolize something.
I was also very bothered by the contrived and artificial camera movements they used. It was so forced, and stuck out like a sore thumb next to the traditional animation.
DeleteI believe that the amusement park was built for Miss Scarlet and the other children of the world.
DeleteFirst off, this is definitely a steam punk movie; it contains all the elements and aesthetics of a steampunk: alternative history, anti-establishment, gears and brass and steam, weird not-magic magic, etc...
ReplyDeleteThat being said, I thought it was a rather bland movie.
It was really really long, with a rather uninteresting storyline. Mind you, it had all the potential to be fascinating and clever and intellectual, but it rejected all those opportunities and instead focused on a trite and stale 'good vs evil' plot that throughout the story didn't really advance or gain intrigue in the way that it could've.
Let me reiterate: it was a long movie.
Very long. And though it built suspense well and had high stakes, I didn't really care about the characters. I hated some of them.
Miss Scarlet: Yes you're supposed to hate her at first, with her abuse of her tiny dog and her aloof mannerisms, but it seems to me that you're supposed to start to like her by the end. She didn't get better. She stayed terrible and it made any scene with her completely unbearable.
Grandpa Steam: Throughout you are slightly conflicted about whether you think that his motives are ethical, I didn't really see his point of view all the way through at any point in the movie. He wanted to protect people from technology by taking it away, by the end, at the cost of all the lives that would've been taken regardless. He was cool with his hair, but that was about it. He was flat. Very flat.
Dr Edward: His motives were at the beginning questionable, and then pronounced evil by the end. He was also flat and underwhelming; in ideals, actions, and personality.
Ray: Quite possibly the only likable character; his naivety was believable, and when matched against his intellect, was interesting and endearing.
That being said, they made him out to be such a clever and thoughtful boy, though he never once sat down to think about the actual nature of the fight they were in. Maybe he didn't have time, but alternatively, he didn't act in the way that his character was made out to be.
This movie was most definitely a character driven story, because the plot was so extremely simple that it couldn't be any other way. I think it fails because to have a character driven story, you need your characters to develop and change and have interesting self exploratory experiences and even quite possibly epiphanies.
It can't be a plot driven story because they don't explore the morals behind the events (or even really the events themselves), and it can't be a character driven story because every character is flat and unchanging.
The whole thing was a giant excuse to have the a giant carnival in the sky and animate a bunch of steam and smoke and gears. That's not good storytelling in my humble opinion.
Both Tyson and Sydney have made well articulated arguments backed up with facts about why the movie doesn't work so well (drags on, flat characters, dumb characters, and surface-level themes). Anyone care to throw out some equally well-articulated defenses of the film? More well-argued bashes on the film are great too.
ReplyDeleteI, personally, was indifferent. Though, the ending kind of bugged me because all of those people, and buildings, got damaged yet the kid wasn't punished! He might as well have died! Also, the science wasn't very sound, that was a bit of an issue with me but, eh, I can live with it. But, anyway, I give it 2/5.
ReplyDeleteOne point that is important to consider is that, by definition, the science of Steampunk is not sound. It's still OK to not like that though.
DeleteI completely agree. i mean all of those people seemed so relieved to have their homes crashed in the name of silence. and those children in the half of a house? half of their family probubly died but they just look confused, like where did the wall go?
DeleteScience not silence
DeleteI thought the movie was ok(ish) mostly because it had a somewhat decent plot, However that was over ridden by the mechanical features of the movie. The schematics in the movie looked very steampunk-like in design and I would have love to see what they looked like if they ever got finished
ReplyDeleteI, too, would have like to see it finished. But again, I was indifferent. I didn't hate it, but I didn't like it either. I think that the movie focused more on the aesthetics of it and not the story.
ReplyDeleteI would have enjoyed it more if it was dubbed in English.
DeleteThat Blonde girl, was so, annoying.
ReplyDeleteAnyhow. I actually did enjoy the movie, steam punk machinery really fascinates me.
I think it fits the steam punk genre perfectly. Alternate history, steam powered machinery, gears, brass color scheme, and one or more inventors.
As far as character depth goes, ya, not so much. I actually got pretty confused with the characters at times. Like Steam boys dad trying to destroy the entire city, then when he gets shot he ends up aiding his father to stop it, then like, just walks out of the movie all together. Whuh.
But hey ya cool steam punk machinery and flying through the air n stuff.
-Allen
SIMON
DeletePart of me wonders if some of the characters' confusing motivations make more sense if you are Japanese. I was once watching an anime with a friend of mine who used to live in Japan and he said that the choices characters were making lack context if you haven't spent time with Japanese people and understand what makes them tick. I have not idea if that is happening in this film but I thought I'd throw that out there. Anyone else know anything about this?
ReplyDeleteI actually thought that Steamboy was a cute movie.
ReplyDeleteIt definitely showcased the aesthetics of steampunk with altered history. It was actually fun to see the Crystal Palace in there, which I just learned about in my art class.
I don't feel that the characters were flat at all. They may not have been the most dynamic but they had more depth then you all give them credit for.
The plot however didn't have much depth to it. I do agree with Sydnie in the matter of the story being character driven. The added macguffen was cool too.
Elements: steam and steam powered things, the cloths and it was based in the 1800's in England.
ReplyDeleteI don't know steam-punk is weird. I do have to say that steam boy did help me. steam boy was the very stereo typical steam-punk movie. It had everything powered by steam and it was in the 1800's. it totally shows how England would be if we were smarter then we were.
it could go either way really, I think always showing the machines was not always needed. They kind of needed to tell the story between the father and grandfather a bit better because it was a bit confusing. Definitely in the end when the father was just a good guy and was helping his father to kill the machine.
I was okay with the movie. The story line kept my attention.
For some one who hates Anime, (me) i actually enjoyed this movie. It was cute and when i watch movies, i HAVE to have subtitles on or else i dont understand the movie and since this was in Japanese we had to watch it with subtitles, i actually understood it (: Plus Allen and i just laughed at the little stuck up blonde girl that kept screaming SIMON
ReplyDeleteYou bring up a good point, would you have of enjoyed it as much if you had to watch the movie individually?
DeleteI know a couple of people have already mentioned this issue but… The whole thing with the father and grandfather confused the living hell out of me! I think it would have made more sense had the character motivation been more defined, mostly with the father. Why did he want to deceive the grandfather into thinking he was suddenly good and wanted to help destroy the machine that he had worked so hard to create? Why did the grandfather allow the father to help when he had been willing to kill him moments before? That’s the one part of the movie that noticeably bothered me other than the little girl screaming for Simon every two minutes obviously...
ReplyDeleteOther than that, I didn’t really mind this movie. Although the plot is simple, they still managed to cram a lot of grand ideas into it and if you watch it without any expectations it’s a really fun film. Also, the animation in this movie is really cool in my opinion. At least the movie is fun to look at, if nothing else.
I feel like stating all of the steampunk elements in this movie would be redundant at this point… All of the machines and the place and time in which it takes place make it steampunk.
Overall, this film showed me what a pure steampunk movie could be and I enjoyed it quite a bit despite the fact it was really long…
I didn't like it. it was so boring. i didnt connect with any of the characters. the blonde girl was so annoying and the steam tower made no sense. why did they build it? to take over the world or just to build it?
ReplyDeleteThey made it so the movie would have a plot but it didn't work.
DeleteTONY MADRID - It was boring i am not at all a big fan of anime and i am disappointed that most steampunk isn't done live action. It would of made all the props and steam tower so much better. But other than that it gave me good ideas on different kid of props we could make and on what the steampunk world is like. Like all the different locations and steam tower really helped me broaden my ideas of what i could do for this genre.
ReplyDeleteThe steampunk part of this was pretty awesome I loved all the machines and everything but it never made sense why they would build half the stuff beside for war.
ReplyDeleteWELP! I guess I have to defend this movie.Even though it is WAY too late. First off: I may be biased, and may be looking too into it, seeing patterns that may not truly be there. Anyways.. Let me begin.
ReplyDeleteI believe it was a great movie. Do you remember the first chase scene? There was a train, and the other people, who cared about money, who had chased him. Ray was caught in between the two. That may be seen as private vs public stuff. (There IS a thought there, I just can't quite figure it out).
Sure, the Foundation may have been portrayed as evil, but there was nothing inherently evil about them. They were just showing how their innovations could be used for war. They were not the problem itself, they were just victims who had pretty much had their entire worldview shaped by it.
After all, if a car can get from point A to point B, surely it can also be used as an IED, that was built in one place, and sent to another? It is simply a matter of purpose. And what is purpose without a view of the world?
The Abe Lincoln lookalike believed that in order for there to be happiness, there had to be peace in which to enjoy it. There had to be power to enforce such peace, and thus Science could be used for it. Interestingly, Abe and Steam (The Steam Cyborg, not the Starved Prisoner) were rivals, yet had the same idea, albeit slightly different: Power creates prosperity. While that may be stupid, you need to remember this was originally a kids film. You are going to have to deal with extremes. The father was pragmatic, while the grandfather was idealistic.
At the end of the movie, when the secret was out, and the two kids looked out into the distance, Ray said "The age of science is just beginning" whilst a storm rolled in. You may believe that to be a result of the ice, as the heat and cold clashed to create a storm front, but usually means dark things are coming. During the credits, you see two things. War, and progress. (It was also setting itself up for a sequel, but sadly, we can't have everything, as much as we want it) Anyways! All of Rays relatives predictions came true. His mother (Mostly irrelevant) was correct, about how Ray would always be tinkiering. The grandfathers fears were comfirmed, as new, more powerful weaponry was created (LEading into an alternate history world war 1), which was the aforementioned war, but like how the father had said whilst piloting the steam castle (Yes, I watched it in english. It is right here if you want it: https://www.veoh.com/watch/v43848955FE6MNbMR) "And that chaos (War in this case) will change us for the better, and we will learn", well, the other pictures in the credits (Other then the war, and them setting up for the sequel that will nevercome:()is of change, and progress, as seen by the discovery of electricity, and a cool looking steam train. In other words, it is a great family movie that NEEDS a sequel (Maybe not needs, but I want it). Assuming ANYONE sees this, I apologize for the confusion as this is almost a DECADE since the last post (Sorry for interrupting your class, I guess) and also for the GIANT wall of text,as in the preview, all the paragraphs have seemingly disappeared