In brief: An fun, action-filled, retro-style romp that everyone should enjoy.

Written and Directed by Kerry Conran

Running time: 1 hour, 36 minutes (not counting closing credits)

---CAST:
Jude Law Joe "Sky Captain" Sullivan
Gwyneth Paltrow Polly Perkins
Angelina Jolie Capt. Francesca “Franky” Cook
Giovanni Ribisi Dex Dearborn
Michael Gambon Editor Morris Paley
Bai Ling Totenkopf’s assassin
Omid Djalili Kaji
Laurence Olivier Dr. Totenkopf (archive footage)

Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow is a treat for all those fans of pulp action serial adventure films who still long for another Indiana Jones film. Reportedly filmed entirely against a blue screen with CGI backgrounds and effects, and photographed with a fuzzy, soft-focus lens that makes one think they’re watching an extended Barbara Walters interview, the film playfully evokes the feel of 30’s science fiction films, complete with handsome rogue heroes, beautiful damsels-in-distress, mad scientists, and of course, lots of robots.

The bold choice to film the movie against a CGI blue screen and a fuzzy filter may take some adjustment at first, but after some necessary exposition, the story takes off, and the viewer is along for a fun ride, and the film’s unique look is taken for granted. The plot, involving an investigation by ballsy reporter Polly Perkins (Paltrow) and her ace pilot-ex Joe “Sky Captain” Sullivan (Law) into a series of disappearances of prominent scientists coinciding with attacks on various worldwide cities by giant robots, is beside the point. It serves merely as a vehicle for them to get into trouble, trade barbs over their past failed relationship, and exude chemistry, which they do beautifully, successfully vacillating between rivalry and mistrust to mutual attraction, with plenty of well-delivered humor peppered throughout, including what must be the all time, hands down, funniest take on the “Morning After” scene ever in the history of cinema, not to mention the film’s closing shot, which caps a running gag perfectly. Gwyneth Paltrow shines in this role, with Jude Law acting as a nice counterpoint to her gutsy risk-taking, and Angelina Jolie providing some nice tension of the love-triangle variety. All three actors seemed like they genuinely had fun making this movie, and despite the fact that two of them are Oscar winners and one a two-time nominee, one never gets the sense that they were slumming.

The production design looks top-notch, and if I didn’t know that it was filmed against a blue screen with CGI backgrounds, I’d probably never have suspected it, as the computer effects, which I often find overused in today’s films, looked seemless, though this may be due in part to the fuzziness of the film. The art direction should get an Oscar nod for its originality, and to point out that the technology seen in the film doesn’t jive with the time period (airplane wings that flap, sophisticated robots) is to miss the point. This is not just an adventure film set in the 30’s, but a melding of that genre with the cheesy quirkiness of comic books, Max Fleischer cartoons, and pulp sci-fi, complete with all their implausible hardware. One wonders if writer/director Kerry Conran lifted material directly from such sources, as one prop near the end of the film looks eerily similar to a famous one from Star Wars EPISODE I, one creature looks like one of the thunderbirds of Attabar Teru from Alan Moore’s Tom Strong’s Terrific Tales, and a more prominent aspect of the film shares at least two similarities with elements from Nick Fury, Agent of Shield in a way that is so obvious that I wonder if Marvel Comics got a royalty. Granted, the hardware gets a tad bit too high-tech by the film’s last Act, with apparent anti-grav replacing rocket thrusters, and robots appearing to be as sophisticated as anything in the current Will-Smith flick, but by then, you’re so invested in the fantasy of the film and holding onto the roller coaster energy of the plot that your disbelief is practically lighter than air anyway.

First time feature writer/director Kerry Conran acquits himself well here, I suspect we’ll see great things from him in the future. The action is fun, the characters are attractive and engaging, the humor is dead-on without being forced, and the audience erupted in applause when it was over. Peter David has opined that the next Supermanmovie should be filmed against a blue screen just like Sky Captain in order to invoke that Max Fleischer feeling, and after seeing Sky Captain, it doesn’t sound like a bad idea.

---NITS:
During the initial robot attack on New York City, Polly rips her skirt on the left side, which I took to mean that she was going to do something that required freer leg movement, like running or climbing or something. I figured perhaps, that she was going to climb one of the robots. But I didn’t see her do anything that required this. What was that for?

After encountering the female assassin, Polly makes a deduction that doesn’t seem borne out of any evidence presented to her in the story. She concludes that the assassin controls Totenkopf’s machines, and says, “She’s the one who took Dex.” How did she figure this out?

Putting aside the fact that Totenkopf’s planes flap their wings (to say nothing of Franky’s outpost), which is kind of a given as a nit, wouldn’t the manner in which some of the planes dive into the ocean destroy them? Why does this happen to Totenkopf’s planes, but not Sky Captain’s or Franky’s?

When Joe asks Kaji how his Tibetan is, Kaji rattles off a phrase that makes it clear that his Tibetan is quite poor. But later, when speaking to their Tibetan host, he speaks with him fluently.

When surveying the lush scenery of their Tibetan host’s home, Polly notices she has only two exposures left in her camera. Then, as she and Joe approach Franky’s outpost, he asks if she can keep it a secret, and she says yes, but snaps a shot of it. Then later, when encountering the large bird created by Totenkopf, she looks at her camera, and it still has two exposures. Shouldn’t it have only one?

Putting aside that a lot in this movie "can't happen," the zeppelin mooring at the Empire State Building in the opening scene of the film (which imdb states is in partial homage to King Kong) could not happen. Although the Building's spire was actually designed to dock airships, this proved to be impossible, as the dangerous updrafts from New York City's canyon-like streets would have torn the airships from their moorings and sent them crashing to the streets below.

The mention of Fleischer cartoons is quite apropos, as the tease trailers show at least two -- possibly three -- direct visual quotes from the "Superman" Flesicher cartoons.

This movie sounds vaguely like the ROCKETEER, although, certainly a bit more ambitious. Will 100% of the movie be in front of a blue screen? Digital compositing is so perfect today, filmgoers might not be even aware of all these effects. Not like the pre-digital age of the 70s and 80s, when blue-screen optical shots were very obvious (remember FLASH GORDON).

NGen, I believe it was filmed in that way, yes. It looked seemless to me.

Yeah! First Post (based on the date it came out in my area, that is...)

Great film. Can't wait to see it again. Can't count the number of times I found myself just grinning at the adventure of it all. I felt like I was 7 again, watching Flash Gordon or Commander Cody from the library.

Especialy loved the traveling "map" shots- taking the Indiana Jones red-line on the map to a whole new level.

"During the initial robot attack on New York City, Polly rips her skirt on the left side, which I took to mean that she was going to do something that required freer leg movement, like running or climbing or something. I figured perhaps, that she was going to climb one of the robots. But I didn’t see her do anything that required this. What was that for?" -Luigi Novi

Well, she did break into a run, even though it wasn't a very fast or impressive run. I assumed that was the purpose.


"When surveying the lush scenery of their Tibetan host’s home, Polly notices she has only two exposures left in her camera. Then, as she and Joe approach Franky’s outpost, he asks if she can keep it a secret, and she says yes, but snaps a shot of it. Then later, when encountering the large bird created by Totenkopf, she looks at her camera, and it still has two exposures. Shouldn’t it have only one?" -Luigi Novi


Actually, I never heard the shutter click. It looked to me like she raised the camera to take a picture, came within a hair of taking it, and then thought better of it. (Sky Captain's response after she takes the first of those photos may have been the best comic moment of the film. Or maybe not. See nomination below.)


Things I noticed: (I'll refrain from discussing all of the touches that I loved, like the Amphibious squad transformation, because that could take all week)

I think the famous "Wilhelm Scream" was inserted during the first attack of the robots, just a shot or two before the police officer is talking into the phone box. Can't be sure. They deffinetly had the "War of the Worlds" laser sound in there.

One of the headlines reads to the effect of "Mechanical Monsters Attack New York."
"Mechanical Monsters" is the name of a Max Fleischer Superman cartoon that featured flying robots which were extremely similar to the robots shown here, especially the arm/wing configuration.

Were the sculptures/structures visible during the Amphibious squadron battle designed by Totenkopf? Or were they supposed to be remnants of an old "Atlantis" type civillization?


Unless they have some sort of dirigible-style helium tanks, does anyone believe that the mobile platforms, like the one Frankie commands, could carry enough fuel to stay aloft for more than 5 minutes?


Unanswered Questions: What happened to all of the mini animals? Did the Elephant in Doctor (whatshisname)'s lab get rescued? What happened to all of the robots and dinosaur-ish creatures on Totenkopf's island?


Nomination for the movie's best comic line/moment: (one of many) There you are! Why did you lock the door?

A second batch that occurred to me last night:


Is it just me, or does Polly get a really wierd expresion on her face when they're flying upside down? She manages to look exstatic and sick at the same time. Maybe it was intentional, but it looked rather goofy to me.

A common mistake, but people in the film kept refering to "World War 1." Before World War 2, it would have been called "The Great War" or "The War to End All Wars."

Those maintenance robots loading the rocket ships must have been made out of aluminum foil or something, because they nearly blow up with one punch! (Not that it wasn't extremely satisfying for them to do so...)


More Unanswered Questions: Did Sky Captain actually kill the uranium mutant? He promised, but it didn't seem like a very heroic thing to do.

Was that Michael Cain (sp.) as the newspaper editor? (I wasn't sure... despite the fact I love "Without a Clue" and "Miss Congeniality," thanks to "Secondhand Lions," I can't recognize him without a southern twang.)

Okay, I'm an idiot. I just looked at the cast list at the top of the page. Please ignore that last question.

In conclusion... am I the only one that saw this movie besides Luigi? Is there another board for this movie somewhere? Or does my three-in-a-row posting simply indicate a caffine level highly above normal?

1. I hope not.
2. I don't think so.
3. Quite possibly.

Zarm ... I just saw this movie. It was fun.

Before World War 2, it would have been called "The Great War" or "The War to End All Wars."

I noticed this too. A bit annoying!

Anyone else notice a marquee in New York that had Wuthering Heights on it? Homage to Olivier perhaps? Also, in one of the early shots of the newspapers talking about the robots, there was a name of a reporter that I remembered for some odd reason: Marsha Oglesby. In the end credits, it said she was a producer.

When Joe asks Kaji how his Tibetan is, Kaji rattles off a phrase that makes it clear that his Tibetan is quite poor. But later, when speaking to their Tibetan host, he speaks with him fluently.

I took his comment to be an inside joke between he and Joe, just to alienate Polly.

I forgot my favorite line! How could I do that??

Haven't had a chance to see the film yet, but I want to. Having said that:
Polly's deduction: She could have seen something that ended up on the cutting room floor. After you've seen the film, check the novelization for this.
Planes destroyed by diving into the ocean: It depends. A book I had as a kid had an item about a type of missile which, after flying some distance through air, dove into the water and then traveling some distance underwater in order to attack submarines. Since diving into the water did NOT prevent this type of missile from doing its job, it should be possible to design and construct piloted aircraft to do the same thing. As for why diving into the water destroys some planes but not others, this is nothing new: Check out the 1960's James Bond films "Goldfinger
and "Thunderball". Goldfinger's Learjet explodes on hitting the water, but the Vulcan bomber hijacked in "Thunderball" seems to still be in good enough condition that one need only hoist it out of the water and dry it off in order to get it flying again.
Kaji's Tibetan: Maybe he was faking it when he seemed to not speak it very well?
Polly's camera: Maybe she took one snapshot without advancing the film? This would result in a double exposure, but some development experts might be able to sort the two images out somehow - even though one probably shouldn't try this very often.
Diribible mooring mast atop the Empire State Building: Lots of things could be done, IF enough people work long enough and hard enough at it. In the real world, people gave up on the idea. In the film world, they decided that it was worth continuing to work at it until they could do it. By the way: If somebody wanted to go up into the real dirigible mooring mast, TODAY, couldn't they find a way to do it? Maybe somebody is using it as a small secret hideout?
Helium tanks and/or fuel for the flying platforms:
Zarm, one could ask the same question about Captain Scarlet's "Cloudbase". Do we really have to know how everything works?
Before World War 2, people also referred to World War 1 as "the World War". As in, "So-and-so got his leg blown off in The World War.".

Speaking of caffeine, can anyone tell me where I can still buy Jolt?

Kaji's line didn't seem like a joke to me, nor can I see how what he said would alienate Polly, but...whatever.

Sorry, Luigi, I'm weird. That's just how it seemed to me. Have you seen Four Weddings and a Funeral? If so, do you remember when Hugh Grant's character is "talking" to his deaf brother while Andy MacDowell's character looks on? The brother says Andy has "beautiful breasts." Hugh translates this to her as "Scotland. Very hilly." I don't know why, but it struck me as a similar situation. Then again, as I just said, I'm weird!

"Polly's camera: Maybe she took one snapshot without advancing the film? This would result in a double exposure, but some development experts might be able to sort the two images out somehow - even though one probably shouldn't try this very often." - Spaceopsfanguy

I'm telling you, she didn't click the shutter! There was no picture! THERE ARE FOUR LIGHTS! :-)


As for the water crash, maybe it had something to do with aerodynamics or watertightness? (Yeah, okay that sounds pretty flimsy. It probably happened just because it looked cool.)


"Kaji's line didn't seem like a joke to me, nor can I see how what he said would alienate Polly, but...whatever." -Luigi Novi

I doubt it could alienate Polly unless she spoke Tibetan, but the line seemed like intentional humor to me as well... but seeing as we never saw a translation for the conversation in Shangrila (sp.), how do we know that he spoke fluently anyway? It could have been barely comprehensible for all we know, and he's only fluent in his understanding.

Not having seen this one yet, I don't know if they referred to them as such. But the proper term for the "airplanes with flapping wings" would be ornithopter. Though they are quite pulpy, ornithopters are the primary form of air transport in the SF classic Dune.

Saw the film last night, very beautiful, very stylish. The comparison to the old Fleischer Superman cartoons is very appropriate, since the entire first half of the film looks like those cartoons taken to the ultimate extreme. :-)

Another question just occurred to me. Though I may have just forgotten something, was it ever established WHY transmissions were coming from Shangrila? Was the mining station the origin of the transmissions?

I saw this film yesterday. I had rather mixed reactions about it. Going into it, I was rather wary of what critics Roeper (Ebert& Roeper) and Siegel (Good Morning America) said about it. They thought the visual style of the film became rather tiring after a while. A few minutes into the film, I thought I agreed. The beginning starts out almost like a video: endless brief dissolves and quick edits. The soft focus style of the effects was rather annoying. 1930's New York had a very beautiful skyline of Art-Deco skyscrapers: I would have prefered seeing New York in sharp detail. Maybe, this style was a convenient cover-up for the fact that the CGI wasn't as detailed as it should have been? The Rocketeer and Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade also featured scenes with a zeppelin, but shown in greater detail (and sharper focus). I was aware that most everything in the film was CGI. Not everything worked. The automobiles looked very cartoonish.

The scenes of the giant robots attacking New York were also strangely not suspenseful. The robots reminded me too much of that giant robot in the kid's film from a few years back (The Iron Giant, I think it was called?). Gwyneth Paltrow also delivered her lines in a rather flat manner. Shouldn't a film evocative of 30's pulp feature livelier performances? The attack on Sky Captain's base by winged robots was disappointing too. The flying robots simply looked too cartoonish. Further more, when his plane plunged into the ocean, shouldn't it have been destoyed by the impact? Hitting the ocean at 250 miles an hour is like hitting a brick wall (at least the sub-car in The Spy Who Loved Me seemed more plausible). Needless to say, there was too much high-tech stuff for 1939 (I presume, since The Wizard of Oz was playing at Radio City Music Hall).

For the scenes set in Shangri-La, the soft focus style was not only appropriate, but it added atmosphere. The interaction between Captain Sky and Polly became more relaxed and natural too. The rocket very much resembled a V-2 rocket from WWII (and fifties movies). Was this intentional to suggest Nazi type scientists built it? The Noah's Ark premise for the rocket also was a bit heavy-handed, and suggested a throw-back to a fifties George Pal movie (such as When Worlds Collide or War of the Worlds). If I hadn't read that the likeness of the deceased Olivier was used for TotenKopf (which reminded me of Tron), I wouldn't even have noticed it. That issue raises some troubling questions. Will someone digitally use Hitler footage in the future?

Despite some disappointing parts, overall this was a very fun film. It was surely impressive for the shear amount of CGI used.

Zarm asked - Was that Michael Caine as the newspaper editor?
That was Michael Gambon as Paley, editor of the Chronicle. (Named for CBS founder William Paley, maybe?).
The dirigible that docks at the Empire State Building is the "Hindenburg III." So, what happened to "Hindenburg II."

The Jolly Green Giant inhaled the contents of the Hindenburg II after hearing that helium gives you a wicked head rush.

Too bad the Hindenburg was filled with Hydrogen which didnt give him a head rush but did give him a really bad case of tater tots.

Thanks, Adam. Actually, I saw that a minute after I posted, which is why I called myself a moron.


After having just seen the movie a second time, I noticed 2 things:

The door to Dr. Jennings' office is #1138, a reference to the film THX 1138. It also appears in many of George Lucas' movies.


Also, I'd need to someone to check this for me, but... At the beginning, when the newspaper shows Polly's article on the scientists, about a third of the way down, it seems to read something like "This is the third dissapearence..." I didn't get anything after that.
But several moments later, the editor refers to "Six missing scientists," which seems to be a well known fact.
Is it possible that the article read something like "The third dissappearence on American soil" or something like that?

Update: I saw the movie again (Boy, do I love that soundtrack!)

The text in the article reads to the effect of "This marks the third dissapearence in as many months." While it would, at face value, seem to suggest only three, it's quite possible that the first three scientists took longer to find, and there was a longer interval between their kidnappings.

This is one of the most visually delightful films of this year. I can't wait for it to come out on DVD.

Not having read the comments above, I'd like to offer my first impressions...

I loved, loved, LOVED this movie. This is a very rare statement from me, but I state it wholeheartedly.

Let me say that I am a movie fan from way back. Lo, about 20 years ago, I used to see at least two movies a week in the theater. Now, I rarely go out to one. I have had this in my DVD library for a little while, just waiting for the right mood and time to watch it. I had no idea it would impress me so.

What is plainly obvious to me is the numerous homages to many classic movies of cinematic history. I'm sure there is a list somewhere of where nearly every scene recalls another one of historical context. I wasn't sure at first that I'd like it, with the "washed out" colors, and the backgrounds that are on a par with the current Myst IV video game.

But wow, I have rarely seen such a jaw-droppingly entertaining movie with not rip-offs, but an obvious love of all the stuff I have enjoyed over the years. I don't know if I would have enjoyed it as much if everyone had said "OH! You GOTTA see this movie!!" rather than finding that I loved it on my own. I'm rather surprised that there isn't more buzz about it.

I will add more later after I peruse the comments above.

Wow. I loved this movie.

Now that I've sobered up a bit...

(I still loved the movie!!!)

Man, I can't wait to watch this with a friend to see who can pick out the most references to other movies.

After reading the comments above, I see some were recognized. I thought I'd also mention a possible homage to 1941 (Belushi's plane ride down Wilshire Boulevard), and Heavy Metal, the Taarna sequence where she changes into her costume in front of the giant sword-wielding statue. The view angle of the statue was nearly identical.

A couple personal notes -- not nits but I had to say there were a couple things I would have liked to see different.

It bugged me that they kept referring to Dex as a "kid", "boy", etc. Giovanni Ribisi is not all that young -- it seemed like they were referencing someone much younger. And except for his bit part in Lost in Translation, I've never really liked his acting at any time, he just takes me out of the movie. Not too bad here, though, I guess.

It actually irked me that they used a very slow version of "Over the Rainbow" during the closing credits. That song is already permanently attached to another classic movie -- I didn't see a reason for using it here, and would have preferred a continuation of the "adventure" music.

I did not know that was Olivier in the archival footage. Perhaps if I'd been a little more coherent I would have recognized him.

Can't wait to watch this one again!

It actually irked me that they used a very slow version of "Over the Rainbow" during the closing credits. That song is already permanently attached to another classic movie -- I didn't see a reason for using it here, and would have preferred a continuation of the "adventure" music.

An earlier scene in the movie takes place in a theater showing the classic movie the song is attached to. That's plenty of reason to use it, well, maybe not plenty, but some.

I know they used that scene.

Then how do you not see a reason for using the song?

I gave you the reason.

And I gave you the reason that refuted your reason and all you said was "I know" which makes it seem as if you are just being picky.

Which is fine, this being nitPICKers.

But that being the case instead of "I didn't see a reason for using it" maybe you should have just said "I didn't like that they used it, despite use of the classic movie earlier in the film."

Never mind. I'm not going to argue with Anon-entity.

I didn't like it either... as I said, I loved the 'adventure music.'
If they were going to use "Somewhere Over the Rainbow" (which, to me, really didn't fit thematically with the movie, and seemed to be one of those 'let's get at least one song with lyrics on the soundtrack album so we can advertise it with a "including something-or-ther sung by so-and-so" sticker on the front' kind of things), they could have at least used a GOOD version. Thatwouldn't have been as bad.

The joke in Tibetan was about Polly's nipples.... It is present on the DVD with subtitles on.

I can see how she would not be amused!
He says "When cold, nipples hard."

>>>It bugged me that they kept referring to Dex as a "kid", "boy", etc. Giovanni Ribisi is not all that young -- it seemed like they were referencing someone much younger.<<<

Joe did say "Good boy, Dex," a couple of times, but I took it as friendly nickname along the lines of "buddy", "pal", "guy", etc., not necessarily condescending or patronizing.

A couple of nits from the end of the film:

Joe and Polly escape from the rocket at an altitude of 100 km. At that altitude, they should be weightless, but they seem to have no trouble getting up and walking to the escape pod.

Dex and the scientists see the rocket explode. From their POV, the explosion appears to be only a few thousand feet above them, but it's already been established that the rocket has reached 100 km.

Polly uses her last shot to take a picture of Joe. In her viewfinder, she able to frame his entire face, but in actuality, she's only about 6 inches away from him; at that distance, all she'll get is a closeup of his nose.

After Polly photographs him, Joe says, "Polly... lens cap!" But if you look closely, you'll see the lens is uncovered; in fact, this camera never had a lens cap. (Possible anti-nit: Joe just wanted one last chance to tease her.)

Dr. Totenkopf's lip movements don't match his dialogue :-P

NANJAO: This movie presumes a non-Nazi Germany in the 1930s. The Hindenburg III has no swastika insignia. And the fact that the Hindenburg III even exists in the first place also supports this. After the original Hindenburg exploded, the German government planned to build two more passenger zeppelins, inflated with helium purchased from the US, but after the Anschluss in 1938, the US cancelled the deal, and the new zeppelins and the old Graf Zeppelin were scrapped.

When the ornithopters attack Joe's base, the zeppelins moored there explode as soon as they are shot, as if they were inflated with hydrogen, when they should be helium filled. (Possible anti-nit: the ornithopters hit the zeppelins' diesel fuel tanks, not their gas bags.)

Joe and Polly escape from the rocket at an altitude of 100 km. At that altitude, they should be weightless, but they seem to have no trouble getting up and walking to the escape pod.

What if the rocket is still accelerating, causing artificial gravity to the tune of something near 1g?

Speaking of caffeine, can anyone tell me where I can still buy Jolt?

Bartell Drugs and McLendon Hardware.

Totenkopf had a very negative view of humanity. He apparently formed this view before or in the early days of the Great War (he died about a month before the Armistice, and by that time had made amazing progress on his project). I would understand his attitude more if he had at least seen the end of the War; the period that influenced him in retrospect seems like one of the more hopeful and good times of the twentieth century (I would't expect someone who was not a soldier to have a despairing view of the War until it was at least over).

Then again, despite hearing that Totenkopf was out to destroy the world, it seemed like world devastation might only be a unavoidable side-effect of launching the ark.

The odd thing about Polly's camera is that it was in a uranium mine with enough radioactivity to make a giger counter go crazy. One would assume that so much radioactivity would have ruined all the film in the camera (and that she had brought with her). In fact, the whole business of a radioactive mine seemed set up especially for that revalation. Joe never mentioned the possibility, though.

I found it interesting that Joe's plane could successfully turn into a submersible and go underwater---a few minutes after the enemy had shot holes in it.

Why did the irradiated mine worker have a staff that gave directions to Totenkopf's secret island?

During the initial robot attack on New York City, Polly rips her skirt on the left side, which I took to mean that she was going to do something that required freer leg movement, like running or climbing or something. I figured perhaps, that she was going to climb one of the robots. But I didn’t see her do anything that required this. What was that for?

When she tried to run shortly before tearing her skirt, she was noticeably hobbled by its tightness. But her ability to run after the tearing was not shown to be much greater, especially in light of the emphasis the film placed upon the tearing.

When confronting the robots at his base and when facing the dinosaur-like creatures on Totenkopf's island, Joe appears to wield a revolver. In the uranium mine, though, he clearly carries a semi-automatic. He could certainly carry both at different times, but one would expect him to pick one model of gun and stick with it (especially since he's a good enough shot that he must spend a lot of time practicing with his revolver).

Dr. Totenkopf, a German, very courteously arranged for the countdown to rocket launch, various audio/visual recorded messages, and his dying note to be in English.

The two robot guards outside Totenkopf's office initially attacked Joe with somekinda death beams from their eyes. After Joe's ray gun malfuctioned, however, the remaining guard quite considerately forgot about the death beams and just moved (slowly) toward Joe while the latter stood still and conferred with Dex about how to fix his ray gun.

Polly struck down Totenkopf's assassin on a narrow catwalk which led directly and only to a small door on the rocket. That door was closing as Polly and Joe entered, and finished closing while they stood just inside. Then the rocket took off. How did the assassin get inside, and why didn't Polly or Joe notice her getting up or approaching the rocket?

Early on, we are told that the militaries of the world are stretched thin---hence the need for Sky Captain and his merceneries to save the day. Given that, one assumes that the mobile airstrips would likewise be spread out. They must move fast, though, since Frankie managed to assemble eight together by the time the survivors from the rocket landed. That's a lot. By comparison, I believe that only ten aircraft carriers saw service in the Royal Navy during the whole of WWII.