Talk:Titan A.E./Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Wasn't there also a music video that used animation from Titan AE? Well I know there was one, but I cannot for the life of me remember the name of the song or the group that did the video.--Vercalos 08:39, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Nevermind. Found it myself.--Vercalos 08:05, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah its a version of "Higher" by Creed which was, coincidentally on the soundtrack =) --Darkling235 05:44, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually there was another music video by another band that used footage from the movie, inserting the band into it.. And I forgot it again.. I think it's "Over My Head" by Lit....--Vercalos 08:17, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not saying it should be added back in, but I must admit that it was humorous and creative, considering the fact that the two sets of characters do resemble eachother vaguely.--Vercalos 08:43, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

When you put the

Play the Movie!
DVD Main Menu
Online Game!

Anyone know how to play the online game? 76.16.188.239 (talk) 18:44, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

The link to the online game was http://www.afterearth.com , which I wish was still up because I want to play it. 76.16.188.239 (talk) 19:12, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Why would World of Warcraft be a influence on the movie when it wasn't even out yet? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.27.19.244 (talk) 04:06, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I assume you refer to "The hydrogen tree forest encountered by the main characters on the planet Sesharrim bears a very close resemblance both in looks and in nature to the spawning glen area of Zangarmarsh, in the World of Warcraft expansion set The Burning Crusade." and have to agree. That sentence is far from neutral and should be completly re-phrased. I would even say it's better to remove it than to leave it in like that. I asked several native english speakers and they all confirmed it sounds as if someone copied from WoW while in fact this is either coincidence or the WoW devs copied from the movie (which after all is years older than the WoW extension). 78.42.51.25 (talk) 21:43, 21 May 2009 (UTC)A.Nonymous

And besides, look at [this]. Doesn't look very much like the hydrogen trees, does it? 78.70.249.253 (talk) 13:25, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

...while clearly not an exact match, there is a resemblence68.186.249.174 (talk) 05:22, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Like this film, the Vogons destroy Earth to make way for a new hyperspace expressroute.

Notice that the idiot who said this didn't even sign his or her name. 24.91.43.225 15:03, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

What the f*** is he talking about...? --

Imladros

20:38, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I like it too,it was an ambitious undertaking,and with time,its failure to perform financially will be set aside to look to see it was a really good bit of storytelling by Joss Whedon, who knows he may have even taken elements from it to make Firefly. Sochwa

I just looked at the article on Firefly the timing is right for Joss Whedon to have grabbed some of the Dystopian Western/ Humanity abandoning Earth elements for it to be a simple coincidence. Sochwa

Um, you realize that Joss co-wrote the script with two others, right? I'm sure he had the idea for Firefly, contributed to Titan A.E., and then was given the chance to do Firefly. Rotten1 (talk) 18:03, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

the animation in the final scene of the movie is completly different, and much lower quality, compared to the rest of the film (the scene in which Planet Bob goes through rapid genisis, with the water apearing, and the land becoming green). Does anyone have any information that can be added to this, as why this is? Corhen (talk) 17:58, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

The movie

I hardly think that HHGTTG was based on a 2000 movie. See this excerpt from the first paragraph on The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy originated as a 1978 radio comedy series written by Douglas Adams. This was followed by a series of novels, a television series and a computer game. A film version is due in theatres in April 2005." HHGTTG has been around way longer than Titan A.E. Aidje 21:39, 2005 Mar 18 (UTC)

As a Doctor Who fan I find that suggestion to be outrageous and HHGTTHG would certainly not have existed without Doctor Who.--The Shadow Treasurer 00:28, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

NOTICE: The Hitchiker's Guide PREDATES the story for this movie and the movie itself by almost 15 years. Please check your sources before posting drivel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.26.18.156 (talk) 02:24, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Hitchhiker's was a radio series, books and TV series long before either film was made, along with the destruction of the Earth at the begining. I watched the TV show around 1980/82, when it was first shown. Didn't occure to me that Titan AE was anything like H2G2. Haven't seen the H2G2 film properly yet. However, how could be based on and inspired by anything other than the exsisting English versions. 81.105.78.77 (talk) 16:05, 29 May 2011 (UTC) Dannman (talk) 16:10, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it got moderately good reviews. I sure as hell think it's absolutely brilliant, so why did it do so badly? Then again, I think that Spirits Within is a great sci-fi flick, I'm probably the only one that does. I seem to have a nack for liking things others don't sci-fi wise, the Tank Girl film usually gets poor reviews but I think it's a hella cool film. - Ferretgames 17:50, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Heh. Tank Girl is more of a cult film, really. My sister loves it.--Vercalos 08:33, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I think it's still the case for animated flicks in the western market you have to aim for the young children (with their parents) market, aiming for an older demographic for now will only get cult appeal at best as animation is still generally considered to be for children by a large segment of the population (unless attached to existing older TV series such as South Park, etc.) Sfnhltb 20:15, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

The other part of the problem was that it was hard to tell who the target audience was. Of the two men primarily involved in the development of the story and the movie, one was known for producing material for children, the other was known for producing material for mature audiences. One wrote Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and Firefly, the other was famous for The Secret of NIMH.--Vercalos 20:49, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

"One of the reasons most commonly given for the financial failure of Titan A.E. is its poorly identified target audience. People were unsure, having seen trailers for the film, if it was intended for the older sci-fi fan crowd or whether it was pitched more at children."

Good grief. I think what those people really meant was, is this a film for "children", or is it a film for "adults". Did it ever occur to those people that, in either case, maybe it was aimed at both? Some people say that not everything is black and white. What situations this applies to depends on the person usually, but I think that in this case, it applies to this one. Simply put, it's a family film, but I guess those people couldn't see that...

The friendly, lovable Gune (I thought there was an h in there?) gets a fist to the head for not immediately following orders. Preed gets his neck broken on screen. The Gul(?) get variously shot or exploded trying to save Cale. The Cook is shot (dead, presumably) by the Drej. That's pretty screwed up for a PG film. 203.184.25.142 04:04, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

My two cents on the matter is more on why I didn't like the movie, though I think this article gives pretty good reasons why many people didn't initially invest intrest in the movie anyway. I totally agree with the audience confusion sentence. This movie seemed like it was ment for kids, but early on an alien comically, yet violently explodes. I bet there was some of the same confusion with

Sa-Matra, that could go into the energy-aliens space and wipe them out. I think that in addition to the poorly defined audience, people who watched this probably gave it bad word of mouth. I cirtainly wouldn't recommend this movie after I've seen it. Kevin

13:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

WARNING-MAJOR SPOILER: When the they booted up the Titan, the Drej mothership, and their queen was wiped out.. Since the Dreg are primarily hive minded, I would think that would destroy any cohesiveness within their race...--Vercalos 04:53, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I, for one, loved it. I agree though, maybe confusion about the target audience was a problem. - Anonymous user who isn't sure how to use the timestamp function when not logged in...

I enjoyed watching it, but on rewatching -- and not being so dazzled by the special effects -- the movie seems like one implausible event after another. If the Valkyrie was in such a huge hurry, what was Cale doing joy riding around with the angels? Why didn't the Drej immediately kill Akima when they had her? How Cale could escape from prison with his bare hands? Then learn how to fly an alien ship in a few minutes? How were Akima and Cale able to rebuild an ultra-fast ship quickly enough to catch Korso's ship? Even isolated scenes are unbelievable comic book stuff, on examination. A speed boat is able to keep its distance from several agile aircraft? Hardly. At one point Cale jumps from one vehicle to another going the opposite direction at speed: instant death. Even without getting too far into original research, the logical inconsistencies make this a heavily flawed film. Piano non troppo (talk) 21:02, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

bad dialog, poor and inconsistent animation, and lack of originality. I don't think it was just a marketing problem. It was people who know how to make kids films, trying to make one for adults and kids. This article suggests it's animation is good. it certainly isn't cutting edge, even by 2000 standards. 71.194.44.209 (talk) 21:37, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

20th Century Fox announced that film will have a 3-D Re-release on September 21, 2012, a Blu-Ray on November 9, 2012 and IMAX Re-release on January 11, 2013. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.45.161.145 (talk) 22:52, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

everyone wants a 3D Re-release of Titan A.E.

i critic Titan AE about 3D Re-release of "Titan AE"

It’s Official! Titan A.E. is going to be released in 3D in 2012!!!!

Titan A.E. is getting a 3D rerelease in 2012. EDIT: Since this post has gotten quite a few reblogs, and since the Wiki page has been edited since I posted this, here’s the IMDb link, down at the bottom, September 21st 2012. Prepare your bodies.

Despite its many flaws I love this movie, so YESSSSS.

I’m hoping this rereleasing 2D films in 3D is a continuing trend. Haters to the left, I loved seeing The Lion King in 3D, plus it’s always great to see a movie you love on the big screen.

go to [1] and [2]

it will be Real and Official

Everyone wants it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.217.155 (talk) 07:07, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

• A 3-D re-release of a 12-year-old box office bomb doesn't make any sense. Besides, there's no other source except that one IMDb page; I think someone submitted it to the IMDb as a joke (or wishful thinking). Trivialist (talk) 05:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

I guess it should be noted that Akima is notably younger then Cale as she has no memory of earth.Cale was 5 and has at least some memories of earth. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.44.206.103 (talk) 04:10, August 21, 2007 (UTC)

Cale was 4, and just because Akima doesn't remember doesn't mean she was 'notably younger' 125.236.185.171 (talk) 11:46, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

He says that he's older than four in the prologue. That makes me think that he was five, and was 20 during the events of the film. I don't know about you, but I remember things from when I was five, but not when I was four. So maybe Akima is a year or so younger. Rotten1 (talk) 17:40, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

I had thought about this, also. I question that Cale was 5. A five year old boy will say, "I'm five!" when he wants to do something a big person will do (like drive). I think it's more likely Cale was four-and-a-half, or older than 4, but younger than 5. If you listen to kids talk at that age, it's very important to them that they are older than the year just below them. Cale does not actually say he's 5, but he does say he's "older than four." I think young Cale is trying to maximize his age, although he can't quite say that he's five. Then there's the question of Akima's age. Akima did not say she doesn't remember Earth, what she said was she hardly remembers Earth. I think that could be a difference of a minimum of a year below Cale. You have to ask yourself how much of your world did you remember when you were four? And Cale, by the way, never says what he does or doesn't remember, although he certainly remembers his father, and seems to remember "watching his planet blow up." Conclusion: Cale was 4, going on 5 when he left Earth. Akima: Probably 3-4.--Gregory.george.lewis (talk) 02:47, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

I've just watch it again, PAL Region 2 (UK?) version DVD. I didn't spot anything to say Akima remembers less than Cale. Nor that she is younger. It appears Cale remembers seeing the Titan (Akima: "Have you ever seen anything like it?"; Cale: "Yea, once!"), his invention & it being broken and Earth getting blown up (well you would). He doesn't remember Korso (he's the one Cale says "I'm older than 4" to). We don't know he remembers anything more. Akima does say something like she hardly remembers Earth. I don't see that as meaning less than Cale.

Cale's age: in the DVD comentary by the producers, near the beginning they say Cale is 4 or 5. I think the comment about saying he was 5 if he was is a good point. The producers/writers may not have had a more specific age in mind. Dannman (talk) 15:01, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Columbia Pictures and Sony Pictures Animation plan to make and produce a traditional hand-drawn animated Sequel to "Titan AE" released on 2013 directed by Scott Steward, not Don Bluth and not Gary Goldman. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.26.54 (talk) 08:50, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Can you provide a link, please?DavidChipman (talk) 16:15, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

At the top of the page, they list how bad the movie did, but whoever gave us those numbers didn't give a budget to compare it to. What I mean is, 22 million dollars can be a smashing success for a move made with a budget that's 1/4 of that, whereas a movie with a budget of 500 million would be seen as a gigantic flop with a total revenue like that. So, could someone please dig up the budget somewhere so we have something to compare the earnings to? --EthanSoll 19:37, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

The cost was estimated at $75 million, the gross revenue at $36 million. I read that to break even, a film has to earn twice its cost in gross revenue. The film didn't get 1/4 of that. Small wonder Fox Animation Studios was shut down after. Piano non troppo (talk) 21:11, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

It states they lost $100 million. But, with the math given, that's not even close to correct math. If you spend $75 million and it makes $36 million in the theaters, you lost $39 million.....basic math.

Budget numbers usually don't include marketing costs, and a significant part of a gross stays in theatres.--Carniolus (talk) 20:25, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

This film actually started development in spring 1997 was originally going to be directed by Art Vitello. http://archive.li/JJhpE --Evope (talk) 03:02, 7 April 2017 (UTC)Evan Kalani Opedal

The statement about instantly freezing to death in space is blatanlty false. First, space isn't 'cold' in any sense of the word. Water boils almost instantly in a vaccum, it doesn't freeze. In actuality, the human body can survive for a very very short time (ostensibly less than the time it took them to get picked up) in a vaccum before the blood boils, the eyes explode, and death by asphyxiation occurs. However, just as free divers exhale upon rising, exhaling in a vaccum would extend the time one could survive by a few seconds, in that the pressure in the lungs wouldn't cause the torso to explode.

Second, given 15 some odd years, and the fact that the titan was presumably at about 90 million miles from the nearby sun (such a distance would be necessary for an earth like planet to sustain life), it is entirely possible that some of the ice could be melted by the star and then recondense on the Titan's hull. Again, the problem is pressure, but with a ship that size, ice crystals are not unreasonable. I'm removing both of these 'errors' ~Necoras

Space isn't "cold"? wtf dude... space is -273 degrees C, that would be 273 degrees below the point that water freezes. Being a vacuum is irrelevant, if human flesh encounters something -273 degrees C, it will instantly freeze. 65.210.107.101 17:08, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Havn't you heard of a vacuum flask used to keep things hot or cold? In a vacuum, where would the heat go? The vacuum would insulate it. 80.2.208.51 (talk) 02:31, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Water boils in a vacuum because of the lack of pressure, not because of heat. If you follow the ideal gas law, you'll see that volume is inversely proportional to pressure.

In space the following do NOT occur: boiling blood, exploding eyes, random asphyxiation. Asphyxiation is one person killing another by means of suffocation.

Survival time would increase by more than a few seconds were the air in the lungs exhaled.

In the vacuum of space where there's little pressure, water transitions from the solid state to the gaseous state without going through the liquid state, otherwise known as sublimation. The ice on the titan was put there to hide it. For the record, the nearby star wouldn't cause any ice to melt but simply cause it to sublime into gas, if anything.

Brad 16:48, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't think the "ice moons" should be taken literally. The moons were probably named for their "icy" textures and properties. Basically they were named "ice" because they looked like ice. Water only exists in space in its gas form (It does not freeze, it's chemical properties causes it to turn to gas in a low pressure environment. You blood and body fluids WILL boil, as it is a liquid (liquids CAN NOT exist in vacuums. You have either gas or solid, it's that simple.) Anything that is already a liquid will most likely boil due to the DECREASE in pressure as well as the pressure being near zero. Because the pressure is very close to zero, the temperature will not be be much of a factor in determining if something will freeze or evaporate, instead, it would be more likely to be the chemical properties of the substance that determines if it will remain a solid or turn to gas. If something is a liquid at 1 ATM room temperature, it would be almost definite that it will turn to gas in a vacuum, use that as a rule of thumb.

And as for the temperature of space, the -273 C is only the average temperature. In space, the temperature can be very high or very cold, it depends on where you are, and what you got around you. obviously, the temperature 1 kilometre from the Sun is much higher than being 1 million kilometre from the sun. Liu Tao (talk) 23:46, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Comets are an example of ice in the vacuum of space: "They are composed of rock, dust, ice and frozen gases such as carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, methane, and ammonia. Sometimes called dirty snowballs, recent studies have shown that the ice of a comet is covered by a crust." What Are Comets Made Of? Explain if I'm wrong.giggle (talk) 05:48, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

For the record: Survival in Space Unprotected Is Possible--Briefly --Tometheus (talk) 15:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Thought I'd add my two cents - in a hard vacuum it's not the vacuum that would kill you, it's the radiation. In our solar system, it's direct exposure to solar radiation, while in deep space, it's direct exposure to cosmic radiation. You might be rescued from the vacuum, but you will die from the dramatic radiation exposure. Probably even before you're rescued.Theroguex (talk) 12:10, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

I personally think it' the vacuum that would kill you first. You're going from 1 ATM to 0 within a second. The rate at which the gas inside your body expands would cause you to explode (or rupture, as some would call it). But then, they were only in the vacuum for a few seconds, plus the fact that they EXHALED before ejecting would decrease the amount of gas expanding at the same time. Basically, compare it to blowing into a balloon full of air and a balloon with only a quarter full of air. It would take more time for the quarter full balloon to pop than for the full balloon to pop. As for the radiation, there will only be a high amount of cosmic radiation if there was a star nearby, or some kind of cosmic wave passed through that area. They were in some kind of space junkyard with guys working outside in suits. Obviously, the place was safe enough for guys to be working outside like that with minimal protection from the radiation. The amount of cosmic radiation must have been minimal and the same for solar radiation. Added with the fact that they were only in space for a few seconds, the radiation shouldn't have done too much damage to their bodies. Liu Tao (talk) 23:46, 25 October 2009 (UTC)