Haven’t seen the movie, but that would be appropriate if they’re drawing from Bram Stoker’s novel Dracula, in which the title fiend could walk by day (although without his supernatural abilities). I’m not sure where the idea that sunlight is fatal to vampires came from, although it does show up at least as early as the silent Nosferatu.
Duke, thanks for reminding me. Never read Stoker’s novel, but I had heard of that before. The screenwriter, then, was fairly choosy about what he was and was not (mostly was not) faithful in terms of literary sources. The screenplay was so idiotic and senseless that such high-minded discussions seem irrelevant.
That was probably their intention at first.
But then, the worst thing that could ever possibly happen to a movie happened to this movie. The Studio’s Top Brass liked it. So, they green-lighted an enormous budget for it. But by doing so, they had to ensure that they would recoup the money they were spending on the movie. How do you increase the amount of money a movie earns? By ordering your producers and scriptwriters to make it more “accessable” to a “mainstream” audience. You know, throw in some titillating sex scenes, a few car chases, and some more explosions – and above all, dumb down the script enough so that people who know nothing about the source material can still follow the story.
Movies that don’t screw with the source material usually fall into one of 3 categories:
- Low-budget flicks, or movies produced outside of Hollywood (such as Nineteen Eighty-Four);
- Moves where the source material was intended for easy transfer to the big screen (such as some later Stephen King novels); and
- That rare one-in-a-million jewel where the scriptwriters are so super-talented that they can put car chases and accessibility into the film and still keep it true to the original (such as, in my not-so-humble opinion, the first X-Men movie).
I just got back from seeing it and this is ex-fucking*-actly right.
- the fuck is for emphasis
I was debating whether I should go see LXG this weekend. After reading the reviews, I think I’ll be going to Pirates of the Caribbean instead.
Fucking definitely adds emphasis.
I haven’t seen the movie and, given the reviews, I probably won’t see it until it’s on cable and I have a couple hours to kill. Anyway, several years ago I stumbled across this web site (click “The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen” on the menu on the left) which had some interesting ideas on how they should’ve done this. Of course, it’s now obsolete since they’ve gone ahead and made the movie (and because one of the actors they suggested is now dead) but it does provide an interesting comparison.
Not quite as bad as I expected. The American character is only called “Agent Sawyer”; I don’t remember if he’s actually identified as Tom Sawyer. If so, he should be 64 years old in 1899, although he looks to be in his twenties. This is puzzling, since the only people who wouldn’t find it odd to have Tom Sawyer born after the Civil War would be the same people who have never fucking (for emphasis) heard of Tom Sawyer.
The part in Venice was completely ridiculous, with the enormous Nautilus somehow navigating a canal. (And we’re also supposed to believe that you can get from Paris to Venice faster by submarine than by train.) For that matter, will there ever be a cinematic Nautilus that looks like the version in Verne’s novel? The ship was cigar-shaped – just like an actual modern sub.
I don’t know why they didn’t just film the graphic novel. They probably weren’t comfortable with the rather antisocial nature of many of the protagonists – Quartermain as a broken-down opium addict, Griffin as an invisible schoolgirl-raping homicidal maniac, etc.
By the way, I noticed that Quartermain was spelled “Quatermain” in the end credits. A joking reference, I guess, to the fact that (as somebody on the SDMB pointed out to me) Haggard himself spelled it both ways.
I like to think so. 
That’s where it comes from – Nosferatu. There does not seem to be any prior folkloric or literary source that suggests that sunlight is actually harmful to vampires. F.W. Murnau apparently just made it up for the movie. Although if my memory serves me correctly, even then it wasn’t clear that sunlight alone could kill a vampire. There was that whole “sacrifice of a pure hearted woman” business, and I’m not sure whether that was just the preferred way to keep Count Orlock up until dawn or if it was meant to be an essential component in the slaying of the vampire.
More likely the fact that Moore uses Quatermain, not Quartermain. (Then again, they reverted Mina to Harker, so even in the names you can’t count on faithfulness…)
Well, I’m back. And you know, I liked it.
It wasn’t great; really, it wasn’t even very good. But honestly, what did anyone expect? For heaven’s sake, even if you had heard none of the buzz about the film, the trailers made it abundantly clear; It’s a Victorian-era film, and yet there’s a car chase. So, since I had absolutely no doubt that the film was going to be anything other than wretched, I could view it without fear of disappointment and concentrate on appreciating the fun bits. So in the end I was actually pleasantly surprised, because there actually were some.
Yes, the movie was shockingly untrue to both the comic book and the source material that the comic itself was based on; yes, the action and dialogue were often gape-inducingly awful:
AWFULLY SPORTING GUN-TOTING VILLAIN (TO NEMO): Draw your pistol!
NEMO (DRAWING HIS SWORD): I follow a different path. (PROCEEDS TO KICK VILLAIN’S ASS KUNG-FU STYLE)
And yes, the villain seemed extraordinarily two-dimensional even for an action-movie villain based on a comic strip villain (!); you could tell that his heart really wasn’t in it just from his initial scheme: “I intend to… sink Venice!” Um, excuse me? Honestly, what kind of lazy-ass diabolical plan is that? Dude, it’s Venice. Maybe you should try sinking a city that isn’t already under water. One wonders what this joker’s backup plan was: *“I plan to… freeze Juno, Alaska! I’ll turn Death Valley into a desert! I’ll destroy the thriving cultural district of Melbourne, Florida!” * Sad, really.
In the end, I was able to approach this movie with a certain amount of cognitive dissonance; viewed without expectations, as a noisy steampunk-era summer action film that has absolutely nothing to do with the comic book League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, it’s actually kind of a hoot. I enjoyed the generally suave, beturbanned portrayal of Captain Nemo and his ultrastylized Nautilus, and I was frankly amazed at how well the Jekyll/Hyde character was realized–sort of provided a glimpse of how well a faithful adaptation of the comic would have looked, but ah well… I also got a kick out of the movie’s Invisible Man, who is quite distinct from the comic, and even the presence of Dorian Gray and Tom Sawyer didn’t seem too intrusive amid the general chaos.
I have to wonder what, if anything, Alan Moore thinks of all this; whether he was consulted at all, or whether he just took the check straight to the bank and put it out of his mind. I kind of suspect the latter, and wouldn’t blame him at all for doing so. Nonetheless, I have to say that the movie does have its moments.
sigh
I just returned from seeing LXG and exited the theater feeling slightly ashamed for everyone involved in the making of this film. It had the potential to be a great movie, and it is SO bad.
I think the worst thing about it is that is takes itself way too seriously. Almost every line is delivered as if it were THE MOST IMPORTANT THING YOU HAVE EVER BEEN TOLD. With a dash of humor, even the bad effects and jarring editing might have been helped. Instead, it tried way too hard and fell way too short. There were a few funny moments, but they were too few.
The plot had major holes in it, and the effects didn’t even come close to being believable. When did they move Paris to the sea? And the Venice storyline was both boring and incredible.
It is a sad little movie.
And yes, the villain seemed extraordinarily two-dimensional even for an action-movie villain based on a comic strip villain (!); you could tell that his heart really wasn’t in it just from his initial scheme: “I intend to… sink Venice!” Um, excuse me? Honestly, what kind of lazy-ass diabolical plan is that? Dude, it’s Venice. Maybe you should try sinking a city that isn’t already under water. One wonders what this joker’s backup plan was: “I plan to… freeze Juno, Alaska! I’ll turn Death Valley into a desert! I’ll destroy the thriving cultural district of Melbourne, Florida!” Sad, really.
I nearly woke the house laughing at this! Even Kaos had better evil plans! I think I’ll patiently wait for 50 cent Tuesdays and go with the proper attitude that this was one of those truly great, inadvertent comdies.
Tss, tss… what a shame! Could it be some curse over Sir Connery? I like his acting a lot!
It must be rather challenging to rape invisible schoolgirls.
Silly Snoooooopy.
As a point of interest, among the schoolgirls Griffin rapes are Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm and Pollyanna. (She’s the one he’s doing when they nab him. Her reaction is…well, she’s Pollyanna. ‘Although I’ve been mishandled by a demon, I’m determined to remain optimistic.’)
I…am not sure why I delight so in pointing out that Griffin raped Pollyanna…
Moore never bothered to see the film adaption of From Hell, so more likely than not he won’tbother with this.
The real shame is that it might turn people off the fantastic comic.
Actually, I think I want to now check out the comic as well as see the movie. But the movie first. I almost always end up hating a movie if I read the book first. I don’t mind if the movie is bad, I’ve been waiting for it to come out too long to give it a miss. This just means I’ll catch the matinee at a theater where the tickets don’t cost $14.00.
Gunslinger and I are going to go see it anyway, if only for the car in the previews, which looks like an (anachronistic, but beautiful) 1935 Auburn Boattail Speedster.