Welcome to Gaia! ::

hmm, steampunk as i beleive most of the guild sees it, has little to no punk, but steampunk the way people like Abney park sees it has a lot of punk (the hair, etc) it all depends on your field of view over the genre

Another major difference between the two, I'd say, is that while cyberpunk nearly always has some dystopian element to it, steampunk doesn't. That's really where that '-punk' suffix derives from in cyberpunk--the whole 'rebellion' thing.

I find both cyberpunk and steampunk interesting, though I do prefer the steampunk/Victorian æsthetic to the futuristic one.

Yea, as far as I can see steampunk has nothing to do with punk at all. I prefer steampunk also, but cyberpunk dose have its charms

Okay, I was on Spring Break and so absent for a time; forgive me for having to address so much so very late.


This was mentioned a lot, and really I think I agree. Where some books/stories might revolve around the "dystopian" element, I think most don't. But hey, it's NOT cyberpunk; there are no rules(as there never are) nor even guidelines.



Someone mentioned Repo(the Genetic Opera) as a cyber-punk film, and I'd argue that it's not entirely cyber-punk for various reasons(though the plot of society's constant, subversive efforts against a overbearing government might be a strong argument that it IS cyber-punk, I admit), but rather a nice mesh of steam and cyber; if only in fashion. "Cold" is a good word to describe cyber-punk, I'd use "utilitarian" but cold works just as well. The sub-culture of grave-robbers and scalpel-sluts is very cyber-punk, but the house in which Shilo lives and the extravagant flawless upper echelon are much more steampunk to me. The fact that the movie sucks is a separate topic entirely... >_>

Which brings me to my last point(oddly), and really my only opinion...


I'm not going to do the whole "we were here first" thing, but I think the main difference between the two DOES stem from their order of origin.

It is possible to argue that steampunk is older; after all Jules Verne is obviously older then William Gibson(those of you who don't feel Jules Verne is at all steampunk can kindly "stick it in your tailhole" as the furry mentioned; it's not the real topic here). But to that I'd argue that the style really didn't exist until relatively recently, the late 80's or early 90's. The Victorian style, and high technology had been combined, but never very extensively(the only "forecasts" from the period were not sci-fi but fantasy; they thought the reality impossible). It's only with advance technology that we can look back and "stylize" it to a more aesthetic product.

What I would say, and don't take offense, is that cyberpunk paved the way for steampunk. I think cyberpunk had a lot more experimental edges, more sub-genres, and even if it wasn't the "first"(and how could you measure that?) I feel it was the -punk genre that allowed others to emerge more fully. This has some highs and lows; it means there's less experimental aspects to steampunk, leaving you with a rather small, elitist(present company not included, of course) group of fans. It also means steampunk has a more refined feel; the sleek effects of testing without the scarring. I really don't think steampunk is feasible without some backtracking; we tend to simplify and minimize as we create new products, then are able to go back and make the finished products more appealing. So in a way, steampunk is the Harvard-educated child of the poor-immigrant cyber-punk.

/Huggles
I'm sorry!!! Is that better?

That's opinion, and not related to the topic, but...

WHY?! gonk

No, really, without any desperation in my voice; why? I mean, what aspects did you like?

I have yet to see it myself but it looks very cyberpunky

Ah, it's worth renting. Be sure and rent the original "Repo Man" too, just for variety(*cackles* "Everybody DEAD!!!"); I worry it's name will make it fall by the wayside unless fans promote it!

I didn't mind it too much, on the whole. Sarah Brightman's singing was amazing, as per normal. And Terrance Zdunich was the sexiest night-creature since Lestat(Yes, the movie sucked but yes, Lestat is still liquid sex... And of COURSE Tim Curry wins the all-time contest, but still. RECENT history), and Anthony Head had quite a man-rawr in him. But a few aspects REALLY bugged me.

First off; the singing to emotion ratio. In one scene Anthony Head is belting out a deep rawr and... Doubled over to sneak through a door? Not even in the crouched-with-emotion way. All I could think was, "His diaphragm would not let him sing that in his current position..."

Other music issue; the lyrics were painfully repetitive. I know, choruses, right? No. Just plain drawn-out. "Infected" made me want to take scissors to my ears. The only really good song was "Zydrate Anatomy", and it was also the only song worthy of being called a "rock opera". I remember Tommy and Jesus Christ Superstar; don't try to simplify!

Also, to rag on the music further, "Marnie"? SERIOUSLY!? You want an epic tragedy to discuss all the time, bring up over and over, a name to EMBODY pain and self-hatred... And you pick "Marnie"? WTF?

The gore was over-played. I'm a JTHM fan, I can take the blood and raw visceral energy of a kill. But some of the blood was so BORING. I got sick of seeing a scene where in a normal film they'd use the character to block the most graphic content ant thinking, "And here comes the camera shift to show us the knife going in... Yup." It was predictable, and pandering...

And that brings me to my last, possibly silly but most vividly repulsive, point. The pandering to the "goth" crowd. The producers(, directors, writers, and actors; hereafter referred to as "They") knew they were targeting a specific crowd; the semi-goth/punk/subculture and those interested in it. No hard-core Christians or hippies, on the whole. I was fine being "targeted" but the song "Seventeen" was literally the worst piece of music I'd ever heard. It was like watching an American-Idol dress-up doll playing at being Avril Lavigne. It was vapid, pointless, empty, emotionless, and UTTERLY predictable. It was made simply in order to attract the attention of a very specific audience, the chick-rocker wanabes who had no other real reason to "enjoy" this film. And because it made that SO painfully obvious, I felt insulted.