Alan Moore’s epic graphic novels about The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen have become steampunk classics, putting a new, Gothic twist on characters from Victorian literature and letting the technology enhance, rather than overwhelm, the complicated storyline.
The movie adaptation, unfortunately, mostly serves as proof positive that when Moore calls his work unfilmable, he has a good point. A box-office and critical flop, The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (abbreviated LXG for marketing purposes) has served more as a cautionary tale than a movie in its own right. That said, for those who don’t mind a little schadenfreude, there’s comedy gold in them thar hills!
1. B-Movie Character Actor Theatre
Ignore Sean Connery and his shameless lens-hogging (if you can), and check out the ranks of veteran big-budget-B-movie actors filling out the cast: Tony Curran (Underworld), Jason Flemyng (Transporter 2), Stuart Townsend (Queen of the Damned), and Richard Roxburgh (Van Helsing).
Flemyng makes the rookie mistake of trying to do a good job in a bad movie, but the rest of them clearly took one look at the script and decided to have a field day by going as over-the-top as their meager screen time allowed. It’s worth the price of a rental just to watch Richard Roxburgh gnawing on scenery like it’s Victorian beef jerky.
2. The Dialogue
Why this movie hasn’t hit the midnight-show circuit is beyond me. The dialogue sounds suspiciously like lines pulled from early-90s cartoons and knocked together at random, and gets increasingly hilarious as you go along. Even the orphan snippets of Moore’s original writing sound bizarrely out of place in their own adaptation, and if Moore didn’t write it then it’s all downhill from there. If you don’t believe me, just wait until Sean Connery gets to smarm his way through, “My dear girl, I’ve buried two wives and many lovers…and I’m in no mood for more of either.”
…and knowing is half the battle.
3. The Gadgets
The spirit of Alan Moore’s novels is nowhere to be found in this film, but the gadgets were easier to bring to the screen, and even though the Victorian aesthetic is largely confined to libraries and the rest of the sets weirdly stark, the movie is still stuffed to the gills with the fancy trappings that have become a hallmark of steampunk style. Submarine shaped like a cigarette holder, anyone? How about a filigree sports coupe that can go 80 miles an hour while tipped on its side? (Don’t worry, everything will be fine; the American’s driving.)
4. What Not to Do
The movie is a veritable checklist of things to be wary of in steampunk (over-Matrixing the martial arts, excessive explosions, narrative incoherence, period shout-outs dropped like anvils at regular intervals). Much like seventh grade, The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen is a character-building experience that will prepare you for anything the world of steampunk has to throw at you. With any luck, in fact, the movie is just enough to get you interested in Moore’s graphic novels, which means you’re well on your way to getting your hands on some quality steampunk.
…and knowing that is half the battle.
Genevieve’s first steampunk novel, Mechanique: a Tale of the Circus Tresaulti, is forthcoming from Prime. (She promises not to turn any cars on their sides.) In the meantime, she indulges her taste for bad movies on her blog.
One of the actors *isn’t* a B-movie actor. Naseeruddin Shah is one of the best actors in Indian cinema. People who don’t ordinarily watch Indian movies may have seen him in Monsoon Wedding. I haven’t seen the movie under discussion, but I find it hard to imagine Naseer turning in a bad performance.
Unless he was ordered to ham it up, of course …
No love, or lack of it as this case maybe ;), for Peta?
@1
I thought he was the best part of an otherwise very wobbly movie. Seriously, had they just done a Nemo movie with him, that would have been great. Could have skipped the rest of the characters.
Whatever the problems with the film, he wasn’t one of them.
Ug well I just lost all faith in anything else you tell me to go see sorry. I have seen many movies in my time and most of them I don’t regret seeing or spending money on but when I went to see this in the theatre I wanted my money and my time back. Even mst3king this movie didn’t make it worth going to see. It was by far the worst movie I have seen, for pretty much all the reasons you gave above.
DO NOT go rent this movie not worth the time it takes away from your life much less the money. For a long time I stayed away from comics and comic based movies because of this movie. It was only watchmen that gave me faith in them again.
I would say watchmen also proves that Alan Moores work can be fillmed well, and even though it is difficult it is worth doing.
I don’t think I will ever by the comics this movie is based on, the movie is that bad.
Literally the only thing I remember from this movie was Stuart Townsend plucking his eyebrows. Because, I assume, that was the only genuinely entertaining thing that happened in the entire film.
What you said about the actors, though, reminds me of why I enjoy Bruce Willis’s performance in The Fifth Element so much, because you could totally tell he was strolling through the production going “This is UTTERLY BONKERS” in his head, and just deciding to grin at it all and have fun being in his very bad movie.
(Mind you, I kind of adore The Fifth Element, because it is completely and inexplicably tremendous fun to watch. But it is, nevertheless, a very very bad movie.)
@zaldar
Give the comics a try. They are a far, far cry from the train wreck that was LXG.
I. Hate. This. Film.
“Oh no, Mina can’t be the leader. Girls can’t be leaders, don’t be silly”
Aaaaarrrrggggh!
I agree that it’s funny, but only on the second or later viewings. The first time through the horror is just too much. And I may only be agreeing about the funny because it’s been years since I last endured it.
As long as we rationalize reasons not to openly condemn movie abortions like this, Hollywood will not bother attempting to produce quality films.
@5 I seriously was about to get all pissed when you started knocking on 5th Element. Then I saw that you somewhat adore it and even called it fun, so I calmed down. Hulk love 5th Element. As bad as that movie is I think I want to marry it.
To go with your B-movie acting line up, I think it would have been awesome if Bruce Campbell somehow had a part in this movie. Hail to the king baby!
Oh, that was no cigarette holder. (may be work-unfriendly if you’re offended by suggestive rocks)
Leigh,
I love your writing dearly. Your M/W/F WoT posts usually make my day (although some make it very late in the day, ahem) but you are utterly wrong about Fifth Element. It’s a really, really good movie. I think it doesn’t get enough credit. It’s enormously fun to watch and extremely inventive, as far as sci-fi is concerned. It’s a future that looks plausible and, dare I say, even fun to live in. I’d give just about anything to have a guy come make noodles outside my apartment window.
To get back on topic, I haven’t watched LXG all the way through. I catch 5 minutes here and there and then turn it off because it’s just not worth my time.
This movie has a car chase in Venice. Need I really say more?
@5: Oh, no, bar none, the best thing that Stuart Townshend (or anybody else) did in that movie was when the great reveal comes and for some reason it’s being done right to the camera, and the bad guy talks about sending his wolf among the sheep, and Stuart Townshend looks at the camera and says “Grrowl.”
Doesn’t actually growl, SAYS IT. I nearly died for laughing.
Jeff Patterson, @9: As long as we rationalize reasons not to openly condemn movie abortions like this, Hollywood will not bother attempting to produce quality films.
And if we did openly condemn movie abortions like this, Hollywood would still not bother attempting to produce quality films.
For me, the most baffling thing about this movie is that the screenwriter thought it would be a wonderful idea to add Tom Sawyer to the team. Proving that he knows absolutely nothing whatsoever about history (Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn are set before the Civil War–by the time the movie is set, Tom would be an old man) or American literature (read Huckleberry Finn sometime–Tom is not one of the good guys).
The four reasons to watch LXG are as the Greeks at Thermopylae.
“Tom is not one of the good guys”
Have to say that Tom, in the books, is one of the good guys.
However if there actually were a Tom Sawyer, and we were looking back at his whole life from our vantage now we would probably see him as, at best, not a good guy.
The reason for that is of course that Tom would have grown up to fight for the South. No doubts about that. Huck on the other hand might have fought for the South, might have fought for the North, and might have lit out West.
Anyway, Tom Sawyer also had lots of other adventures, when he fought for the South he probably ended up in Florida for some reason and found Ponce De Leon’s fountain of eternal youth, and some pirates…
Of course for narrative purposes it might have been useful to explain his strange youthfulness.
Have to say that Tom, in the books, is one of the good guys.
Have you read the last few chapters of Huckleberry Finn? The sheer callous brutality with which Tom allows both Huck and Jim to believe Jim is still a slave, when Jim had in fact been manumitted months previously, because Tom is enjoying the drama of trying (and failing) to “rescue” Jim from prison is an absolute eye-opener and it’s very clear that Twain’s using him as a means of showing Huck’s mental and moral growth by contrast.
This movie is in my top five for worst movies ever. The writers should be imprisoned for crimes against the moviegoing public. :p
“Have you read the last few chapters of Huckleberry Finn? ”
yes.
“it’s very clear that Twain’s using him as a means of showing Huck’s mental and moral growth by contrast. ”
The conclusion that Huck has grown mentally and morally, which I agree with, does not automatically make Tom bad.
Originally it was said “(read Huckleberry Finn sometime–Tom is not one of the good guys).”
which would indicate that Tom is a villain. That is my experience with that phrase – if you are not ‘one of the good guys’ then you are ‘one of the bad guys’.
On the other hand my conclusion from reading the last few chapters of Huck Finn was that Tom treats Jim still as an object, and Huck as a social inferior, for his games and that his character is so determined that he would end up fighting for the South and the social order it presented some few years after the events of that book. And that therefore he would become a bad guy. This viewpoint is probably indicated somewhat in my earlier comment.
Another argument could also be made, which would tie in with my conclusion that Tom was not bad but would become bad, is that in the story Tom is still a child and as such could not be expected to have a higher moral stature. In such a case Tom’s failing is that of the boy who does not realize his romanticized pranks were anything but great fun.
I remember reading sometime the critical insight that Tom with these pranks and romanticism represented the immaturity of Southern culture whose men were often uncaring boys inconsiderate of the real consequences of their actions. A behavior that in a child might be problematic in an adult can be bad.
In short – while I agree that Huck is highly moral (and a repository of many ironies regarding rightness and wrongness) I believe your interpretation of what that moral stature means in relation to other characters is lacking in subtlety.
Since we’re all jumping on the bandwagon:
– The League was terrible, and not in a good way. Moore’s GN did not translate at all to the screen, although I will agree that Naseeruddin Shah was wonderful.
– The Fifth Element was fun, but not good. For an idea of what a good version of that movie might have been, read “The Incal” by Moebius and Jodorowsky.
KG
Sorry I have to agree that in the end of Huck Fin Tom was bad. Yes he was still a child but even a child should have known what he was doing was wrong. As he didn’t he is bad. Yes he isn’t as bad as say Hitler but he is still bad. In those last few chapters he is one of the villans of the peice. I say this of course as a southerner.
I really don’t know if I can try out the comics but if I can find a way not to buy them I may. His other works I have grown to love but GOD was this movie awful.
As for the fith element, eh. Not nearly as bad as this peice of trash but not good either. A movie can be fun and still be bad. The point of a movie shouldn’t be only to be fun, art is supposed to tell us something about the world we didn’t know or knew but didn’t know we knew.
Man, people are saying Moore’s comic version was good? In the first three comics of it, someone (female) is raped or threatened with rape in every single one. It’s beyond good, it’s rapetastic!
At about 12-14 (Tom’s age is unclear in Huckleberry Finn, but the events occur some time after Tom Sawyer, where it seems unlikely that he’s younger than 12) Tom is not, in fact, considered a child by the standards of his society and time. Were he Huck’s class he would have been considered old enough for paid employment for some years, were he Thomasina Sawyer he would probably be considered of marriageable age. Whether he in fact fights for the South or not isn’t the determining question as to whether he’s a bad guy or not; the fact is, he has not shown any development of any ability to question the values of the society in which he lives which is a sign of immaturity. However, his treatment of Jim, and by extension Huck, smacks not merely of immaturity but of a near-sociopathic level of self-absorption which would mark him as an unpleasant person whether he fought in the Civil War on the side of the North or the South.
When I saw this movie in the theatre, I walked out. It remains the only movie I have ever walked out on. BUT, I rented it eventually to find out what happens and it did get a smidge better later on. I like the idea of characters from multiple stories merging to create one story, so in that respect I like LXG, but I realize that’s the GN, not just the movie.
I also sort of think Stuart Townsend is sexy. But that’s just me.
Bruce Willis deserved a medal for his endurance of the filming of The Fifth Element. I would say the same for Gary Oldman, but that it is clearly his nature to excel as a psycho in an odd environment. The setting was stolen from Blade Runner, perhaps in the hope that it would ride some of that classic’s coattails. Fail.
As for LXG, as anything more than a vehicle for macro-scaled FX work, it was really horrible. The producers should have saved the set expenses and made it as a cartoon. We’re all more amenable to the improbable being commonplace when animated.
Madeline@24: I read that as a comment on the horrific sexism and racism and so forth of much Victorian popular fiction that the comics are explicitly foregrounding and pushing to logical consequences. It’s nasty and horrible in Swiftian satire sort of way.
I mostly liked the film, on its own terms, though they’re the same sort of terms on which I like Hudson Hawk or Last Action Hero or indeed The Fifth Element, and modulo being peeved both at the downgrading of Mina’s part and at the teeth-gritting nature of the Tom Sawyer/Allan Quartermain bonding; I can stull enjoy Townsend and Roxburgh immensely.
Interestingly, while the LXG made me grit my teeth, I found “The Fifth Element” tremendous silly fun. I suspect that I might have enjoyed LXG more if it wasn’t such a poor adaptation of the original comic.
Interesting. Something about The Fifth Element leaves me cold.
I agree with Emmet @15 – I like LXG as a romp, similar to the way I like Hudson Hawk & Last Action Hero. And the way I expect I’ll like 2012.
I couldn’t keep my disbelief suspenders from snapping all over the place in LXG – I gave up trying to, and started enjoying the FX while driving tanks through the plot holes.
i loved this movie in the theater. it was sort of overwhelming and scattered. but i’m easy to please sometimes with just a few nuggets here and there. the graphic i stopped reading when the invisible man is located at the girls school. he’s raping the students and they’re enjoying it. unacceptable.
the film however has peta wilson camping up mina harker/vamp. she alights from a night in a cave with her hair beautifully curled; she fights full-out with said coif, only to be stabbed and collapse with dead-straight hair, then moments later she rises up with her hair and makeup back in full force! no clue why that happens but it is one hilarious detail. “i believe you said you wanted to ‘face your demon'” is one of my favorite, favorite quotes. right up there with “it was a bad call, ripley.”
another nugget: jason flemyng as dr. jekyll. after seeing this i dearly wanted him cast as remus lupin in harry potter 3. he was the only one struggling with his freakishness. which leads to the next nugget: the teamwork of hyde and capt. nemo. it was hilarious that this monstrous guy calls out for help, but then little nemo turns comes running to his aide. that is kinda delicious.
then you have the ridiculous looking hyde-potion effects that just takes the lunacy to a higher level.
and with the interiors and costumes of nemo’s ship and crew…this flick is cotton candy.
I quite enjoyed the film as a bit of silly eye-candy fun, having no familiarity (or even knowing the existence of) the graphic novels. I was thinking of getting them following this article, but will most certainly not be now, having read MadelineF and sofrina’s comments regarding the content. I hate that sort of thing in books, even more so when I don’t expect it. Thank you for the advance warning! I’ll stick with the film.