It was under-appreciated because it quite frankly was terrible. While it was nice to watch as a cinematic wank, as a movie it fails on just about every point, style over substance.

I wouldn't go as far as all that. Remember, it's a tribute to pulp sci-fi, and as such it focused on a lot of the old cliches found in the genre (the attack of the robots, the plucky female reporter, the retro special effects, the ridiculously grandiose schemes of the villain). It also pays a lot of homages to movies like Metropolis, The Forbidden Planet, Flash Gordon, and Buck Rogers. One scene is almost identical to the Fleischer Studios Superman short, "Mechanical Monsters."

If anything, it bears a lot of similarities to the Indiana Jones movies, except Indiana Jones plays on the adventure pulps and Sky Captain plays on the sci-fi pulps. If you're looking for a deep and immersive plot, you'll be hard pressed to find it in either movie. They're both essentially homages to these old styles of entertainment. (Granted Indiana Jones did it better, but Sky Captain did a respectable job as well.)

I will agree that the movie has its flaws, most notably Gweneth Paltrow's acting, though fortunately Jude Law makes up for this. However, the plot, music, stylistic elements, and visuals were, for the most part, spot-on, so I feel that it's not too much to say that it succeeded on most levels.

I guess the movie is most appreciated if you've seen some of the older works it's paying homage to. I spent a lot of my youth reading those older comics, listening to those older radio shows, and viewing a few of the movies/cartoons, so Sky Captain had a pretty big impact on me.

I still need to see this, (mmmm Angelina!)

Expired in Queue - 4 day limit.