Rating: 
Summary: Better than you'd think!
Review: I think this movie got alot of undeserved flack. There is really only one main problem with it, and that is Connery. He's great in so many movies, but he's too old to play Quartermain in this film. That and the fact that the movie comes out like "Connery . . . and a bunch of OTHER actors you've NEVER heard of!" In other words, it was a Connery star-vehicle - and thus it rose-and-fell on him - and as I said, he's too old for the role.Aside from that, though, you have a film with a very interesting idea, really good special effects (the Nautilus is AWESOME!) and a far amount of good action. It would have done very well as a Spring or Fall movie, but I think it got lost amidst Ahnold's machines and Depp's pirates. Don't let the naysayers fool you - it's a solid flick!
Rating: 
Summary: The comic is infinitely better
Review: How disappointing. This movie could have been great. The writing was poor, the editing uneven, and much of the acting was lackluster, especially considering what the cast could have accomplished with the right script and director. The only bright spots were the actors: Sean Connery, who did what he could with what he had; Jason Flemyng and his partly convincing torment; Shane West (the most believable next to Connery) as a cocky youth. I expected much much more from Peta Wilson, who intrigued me as La Femme Nikita, but was relegated to the role of obligatory chick--and played it that way--in this movie. Stuart Townsend uttered perhaps one line with credible delivery; the rest of his performance was overblown. Moriarty/M was see-through; who didn't see that coming? Sadly, as is the case so often, the preview for LXG was better than the actual product. This movie is best when placed to one side and quietly forgotten, unless you're into special effects created for the sake of spectacle and seemingly inserted wherever the director felt the movie needed a little pick-me-up.
Rating: 
Summary: That 1989 adventure movie with Connery is a better choice.
Review: During the summer of 2003, there were three movies in particular I was looking forward to: Terminator 3, Pirates of the Caribbean, and The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (hereto referred as LXG). The latter two, in particular, as both would be released in the same week and, from what I gathered in their respective trailers, harkened to the summer blockbuster I enjoy the most, the "Spielbergian" adventure. By that, I mean the grand escapism that was virtually created by Raiders of the Lost Ark, later to be surpassed only by its second sequel, The Last Crusade. As of right now, none of the Jones flicks have ever been matched in sheer exhilaration. I look upon the trilogy as the three greatest and most purely enjoyable action movies ever made. Pirates and LXG both seemed to be striving for the same sense of fun, and I watched the former film first, left bitterly disappointed (though it's not a bad movie and it's one I'll probably give another look), then decided for some down time before I'd see LXG, much of that having to do with the dreadful reviews it'd been receiving from even typically "lenient" critics (Berge Garabedian, AKA Joblo, gave it a 4/10). Having just seen it, I found myself surprised by some aspects and not so surprised by others. It's got a totally unspectacular story, sort of a James Bond-style plot about a madman who wants to start a world war so he can reap the profits. Allan Quatermain (Sean Connery) is brought in to form an "extraordinary" team of unique individuals to stop the villain. Among the league include Tom Sawyer, the Invisible Man, Mina Harker, Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde, Captain Nemo, and Dorian Gray, the latter of whom being the only literary character I'm entirely unfamiliar with. LXG grossed just a little under 70 million dollars, and while not entirely a paltry sum, it's a lot less than I was expecting, even if the movie was as bad as most critics made it out to be. The trailers and concept, after all, wisely appealed to two crowds, Indiana Jones-style adventure lovers and superhero/comic book fans. I'm thinking, perhaps, the Indy crowd was turned off by the teamwork and special powers while the superhero crowd probably preferred their heroes more modern, or less "literature-ish." Whatever the reason, I'm sure LXG is still destined for a reasonably-sized fanbase in the years to come, whether or not it's actually deserving of it. When all is said and done, LXG is nothing more than a ludicrous movie that entertained me somewhat for the duration of its fairly short running time (which I'm a bit thankful for, after sitting through the bloated Pirates of the Caribbean). Though I realize the movie has its roots and origins in a comic book, there's a lot here that's difficult to swallow. Too much, in fact, but I'll give a few examples. For one, when it's discovered who the traitor is (spoiler warning), and it turns out it's the guy who formed the League in the first place, his reasons behind his actions make no sense. He claims he created the group so that he could steal their powers, but with the "spy" he had working for him, he could just as easily have accomplished his task without forming the league. Captain Nemo's submarine varies in size the same way Godzilla did, and the sub even manages to squeeze into the Venice canal. Connery's Quatermain is in amazingly great shape for a man of his age, able to leap off a moving car with no repercussions (and lands on his two feet without a hitch, no less!). Mina Harker, a vampire, is able to walk around in broad daylight. I realize these kinds of movies are made for pure, unpretentious fun, and LXG at least has the action and f/x to back it up. The film is packed to the brim with gun battles and all-out brawls, and despite way too much rapid cutting from director Stephen Norrington, the action scenes are pretty fun to watch, if never truly rousing in the same fashion all the action from the Indiana Jones trilogy was. I was also impressed by a lot of the visual effects, particularly the Mr. Hyde creation, which is as at least as convincing as the Hulk. Unfortunately, the cast mostly failed to impress me, probably the movie's damning fault. While Sean Connery is every bit as charismatic as ever, everyone else is clearly under his shadow. Only Shane West as the cocky, but likeable Tom Sawyer and Jason Flemying as Jekyll hold their own. Peta Wilson's Mina Harker is uninteresting, Stuart Townsend is what Johnny Depp would be if he were a bland actor (though, to be fair, Depp is a vanilla plain performer when he's playing non-eccentric roles), and Tony Curran's only noteworthy for sounding exactly like Jason Statham. I suppose, in the end, LXG is a reasonably fun, but singularly idiotic experience. With a better script, this could have been an adventure movie for the ages, not just a middling timewaster. As of now, I'm still hoping for the best from the soon-to-be fourth Indiana Jones film, which could bring the movie that brings that grand escapist Saturday Matinee style serial back into fashion.
** 1/2 out of *****
Rating:
Summary: People who like literature should detest this movie!!
Review: I don't care if it's based on the comic book, this movie was terribly inaccurate. How does Dorian Gray make a superhero? In Oscar Wilde's novel, Dorian was not immortal- he simply did not age. All of the effects of his sinful and degenerate lifestyle were relayed to his portrait. If someone shot him, he would probably die- why was he so afraid of James Vane? Simply looking at his portrait would not kill him. I would have liked to see Dorian Gray's story treated in its own movie; it's such a neglected subject. It's a shame Henry Wotton has been lying silent as a character for so long ... he's the best Mephistopheles adaptation I have ever read. Besides the plot, the effects were substandard and the dialogue- not to par for Extraordinary Gentlemen. When I heard someone was taking on this project, I was pleased, but when I actually saw the movie I was vastly disappointed. I hope people read the novels instead of watching the movie. They are far more enduring.
Rating:
Summary: it wasn't that bad exepct........
Review: that i still wonder why tom sawyer had to be the hero!!!! (not that i have anything against him), i mean the movie started cool but when was tom a extrodinary gentlemen???, call me ignorant but i have read the life of sawyer (who hasn't) i don't remember him as a special agent???, but anyway let's not get mixed up, the movie had it's big moments, loved the part where sean is chasing dr. jekyll in paris and also the fianl scenes and backgrounds, the story is pretty original, and besides it's just a movie, we've seen worst right???? 'but i just hope there's no second part, the movie is fine the way it is!!!!!
Rating:
Summary: If You're As Obssessed with the Victorian Novel As I Am...
Review: I must confess to never having read the original graphic novels. That said, I think that LXG is a great movie, SO much fun for those of us who love the 19th century British novel and have a sense of humor about them.
I was cracking up pretty much the whole time in the theater. I mean, Dorian Gray and Mina Harker, how cool is that? I love how she embodies the whole Victorian woman issue, getting more and more disheveled as the plot progresses. (Stuart Townsend is great as the slick sexy rather villanous type and the vampire Lestat (Queen of the Damned) and Dorian Gray do have a lot in common! Peta Wilson is awesome, as she is in Nikita). And Tom Sawyer of the Secret Service...Maybe Mr. Hyde was a bit over the top, but Jekyll was right on the mark, I think. And when M revealled his identity, oh dear, I was laughing...it was a lot of fun, really.
As far as being fabulous as a work of cinematic art, well, I admit that it could have been better if there had simply been more to it. Perhaps a sequel will make up for it. I sure hope so.
Rating:
Summary: Not much thinking involved, but it's still a fun movie!
Review: ...P>League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, or LXG is sort of a rip off of the X men, but it also had more background than a comic book (LXG was based on a graphic Novel). LXG also has some scenes that remind me of scenes in the Lord of the Rings movies. This movie is set at the turn of the century, in the 1890s. A threat to the world had developed from a character named the Phantom who would build machines of destruction and get countrys to turn against each other hoping to cause a World War. As a result, a man known only as M (and something else that I won't give away) calls together a group of Extraordinary Gentlemen (and Gentlewomen). The leader was Sean Connery, who was a hunter. Then there was an Immortal named Dorian Grey. There was a Beast named Mr. Hyde who was sometimes Dr. Jeckle. A woman that was bit by Dracula when her husband was hunting him was the vampire. There was also an Invisible man, and an American Spy that you didn't find out that he was Tom Sawyer after Mark Twain was done with him until the credits. And finally, the seventh Extraordinary gentleman was a scientest named Captan Nemo who had a submarine named the Nautalus. This group goes out to conqure evil and all that stuff, and not giving too much away, they are successful, and from the ending, I'll be expecting a sequel (which they tried to hard to achieve). Of course, this movie wasn't academy award worthy, but it's still worth seeing (mostly because it was so corny). The story could have been developed much better, but the movie also has non-stop action, great special effects, and a cool way to extend the storys of classic literature. I'd see it again...
Rating: 
Summary: Fun if your standards are low enough
Review: It's a pity that yet again the movie industry decided to not risk confusing us. They took a very intriguing premise and turned it into a glitzy piece of fluff. But it is very pretty fluff, not brilliant but pretty. As long as you don't try to think about the movie and just go with the ride, it is enjoyable. Any thought, and the movie just falls apart. (For instance, consider the time this movie is taking place - early 1900's, I think - and the fact that Tom Sawyer was a teenager before the Civil War of the 1860's based on the book by Mark Twain, and that Mina and Jonathan Harker were young adults when Dracula came to London in 1894 or 1895 based on the original novel of Dracula by Bram Stoker.)
Rating: 
Summary: League of Extraordinary Gentlemen
Review: This movie is the best I have seen this year and i see on averge a good 20 movies a year so far i have seen this one 3 times on the big screen can't wait until it comes out on DVD I took my daughter see is 14 and her 13 year old friend and they loved it as well it made me remember the books these stories come from now i want to pick them up and read them all over again I really hope there is a part 2 to this movie coming soon if not you should really think about it I know i would be one of the first people in line to see it the actor who played Gray just to hot for words and Sean well any woman who has seen him with out his shirt knows just what I mean just gets better looking with age Great plot great writing just all around great i would give it a 10.
Rating:
Summary: If Alan Moore had written the script...
Review: But he didn't. This movie could be so much better if Moore's always original and intriguing ideas were pasted in the script. As it is, LXG is an interesting movie, but what annoys me greatly is the fact that it has an enormous potential, which was not developed correctly. The basic plot may be the oldest in the world, but still effective: a madman is trying to dominate the world by means of kidnapping the foremost scientists on Earth and making them develop futuristic weapons like armored cars and repetition rifles (remember, the time is 1899, when the wars were fighted in trenches). To prevent it, enter the scene six or seven of the most known heroes in the british world (and one from the American scene too): an elderly but still tough Allan Quatermain, Dorian Gray, Captain Nemo and his Nautilus, the Invisible Man, Mina Murray (neé Harker, from Dracula), Tom Sawyer and Dr. Jeckyll/Mr. Hyde. OK this is a work of fiction with super heroes, so I won't comment on the plot premises. They are far-fetched and unbelievable, but it's very cool to watch a bunch of my favourite characters together trying to stop a world-domination plot. I will post, however, some questions: 1) why the presence of an american character, if in Moore's story there are no Americans? I think the american audience can stand a movie with no american heroes, if the story is good. The way it is, all non-american viewers get a little angry with Sawyer's presence in the story. And all that talk when Sean Connery (the ultimate british actor) says to Sawyer that "this new century will be yours, as the old one was mine". C'mon. I know the producers will say it's the american audience thay will make the movie pay-off, but with such a poor story this one will hardly pay-off anyway. And 2) if they wanted to create Nautilus THAT huge, at least they should know that a thing that size wouldn't fit in Venice's narrow and shallow channels. The Nautilus design was cool but I don't buy a ship over a kilometer in lenght traveling smoothly between the gondolas. Well, there were other things that made me role my eyes, but what I want to say to future viewers is that LXG is one nice super-hero movie. Surely not great, but surely watchable with some dark interesting scenes, good computer-animated sequences and above-average graphic design. As I said before, I only wished Moore had some kind of participation in this movie. It would have been much better. Grade 6.6/10
|
