New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Lxg

post #1 of 23
2/11/04 at 6:32pm
Thread Starter 
I recently got League of Extraordinary Gentlemen on DVD. I saw it in theatres and dug it, and I still dig it. It didnt totally flop as some people said it would, and I thought, especially considering the back stage antics, it came out particularly enjoyable.


I felt the story was slightly disjointed, but the excellent charecterisation and decent acting saved it for me, with some cool effects (Nautalius and Mr Hyde, Invisible man..everything except the Dante beast). I am a fan of the comic and I thought this was a decent big screen outing for the gents. What did you guys think?
Reply
post #2 of 23
2/11/04 at 6:34pm
I really liked it....

Erm, maybe I should stop there.

Ah, fuck it. I'm kinda glad they didn't go by the book.....



Ah heh heh heh heh.......

Anyway, to quote Fry from "Futurama"-

"This movie has everyting-explosions AND a vampire!"

Sure does.
Reply
post #3 of 23
2/11/04 at 6:47pm
I haven't seen it yet but with all the hate it has been getting I'll probably be pleasantly surprised if I do rent it one of these days. A few people whose opinion I value highly enjoyed it quite a bit. Caitlin Kiernan, author of two of my favourite novels that I read last year (THRESHOLD and LOW RED MOON) wrote in her online journal that it is very enjoyable. I've never read the comic so that may help me like it as well. I feel a bit sorry for Norrington for the back-stage clusterfuck that this production turned out to be. I mean, I'm sure he's not the easiest director and he had trouble on BLADE as well (IIRC Snipes even called him an asshole in an interview or even the commentary) but he's definitely talented. He's now sworn never to make another Hollywood film which may or may not be a good thing, for him, for us, the audience, for actors, studios, producers. Who knows. He'd have done the live-action remake of AKIRA next and while I had enourmous doubts about that project I was also extremely curious what would happen with it ... It seemed like such an insane idea ...
Reply
post #4 of 23
2/11/04 at 7:20pm
Ugh, this movie...

This movie.

I hate this movie.

Why?

Cause it entertained me, it really did. And it was one of the goddamn crappiest movies I've ever seen. At the same time.

It has the makings of a good film, though thats 90% thanks to the source material. And Norrington is a competent director, I loved Blade; its a shame he went mad doing this one.

Its just..so, so terrible. It's an unfinished, underdeveloped..thing. This is really just one of those 'easy targets'. But it shouldn't be, cause like I said, I was entertained, and not just in the 'so bad its good' way. I can't really explain it. I actually enjoyed it, and in doing so, felt my standards drop five levels.

Skinner rocked, so did Gray. Mina bit (pun intended, bitch). Sawyer was utterly pointless. Connery was a, ugh..I don't know. Hyde..no comment. And the Phantom/Moriarty was perhaps the most uninspired, uninteresting excuse for a villain ever. Well, second, if there was a villain in Meteor Man. I don't remember.
Reply
post #5 of 23
2/11/04 at 7:24pm
I think you're referring to Frank Gorshin.

But I'm snickering at how Herr Fantom looks like a very snappy chariacture of Alan Moore.
Reply
post #6 of 23
2/11/04 at 7:27pm
Whoops, here, see for yourself-
LL
Reply
post #7 of 23
2/11/04 at 7:32pm
While I enjoyed the movie (wretched crap it is) I still like the comics better.

If they kept one thing from the comics I wished they would've kept Quatermain's opium addiction. We need Connery to play more drug addicts.
Reply
post #8 of 23
2/11/04 at 7:37pm
let's just say that I hope Quartermaineres stayed in the ground



Nemo r0x0red though
Reply
post #9 of 23
2/11/04 at 7:46pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Moose of Doom!
While I enjoyed the movie (wretched crap it is) I still like the comics better.

If they kept one thing from the comics I wished they would've kept Quatermain's opium addiction. We need Connery to play more drug addicts.
Wait..lol how can it be crap and you enjoyed it? LOL Consider me confused.

Also, no offense, but it's NOT the comic. Just an adaptation.

Same thing bugs me about Vampire$. I love the book, love the film, yet some people seem to thinkt hye are in competition. When I see a movie that i loved and find out its based on a book, i will search the book or comic or whatever out, but I don't expect it to be EXACTLY the same as thee movie, and vice versa. Its' not possible to make a 300 page novel or six issue comic scene per scene, and if you did I think it would be a little pointless.


There isn't a competition. The movies based on the comic, not taken page for page.
Reply
post #10 of 23
2/11/04 at 7:51pm
I didn't hate it but it did suffer from awful effects and a subpar plot...it was fun enough though and Peta Wilson (sue me I enjoy looking at her) was in it...though I can't quite figure out how she was standing on the deck of the Nautilaus without turning into a crispy critter. But then again I can't remember if she could in the comic...
Reply
post #11 of 23
2/12/04 at 1:15am
Quote:
though I can't quite figure out how she was standing on the deck of the Nautilaus without turning into a crispy critter. But then again I can't remember if she could in the comic...
Of course she could, because she wasn't a vamp in the comic.
God, I loathed this movie --- awful, awful, awful. Moore's comic is better in every imaginable fashion. He actually paid attention to the various literary characters he used, logically picking them up from where they'd been left off in their respective stories.

For God's sake, there was a scene with them driving that ridiculous supercar through the STREETS of Venice. VENICE DOESN'T HAVE ANY STREETS. IT NEVER HAS.

I won't argue or damn those who do find it enjoyable. Everyone's entitled to their own guilty pleasures, but every one of you should read the books the first chance you get.

On the plus side, at least Alan Moore got a paycheck for them butchering his original concept.
Reply
post #12 of 23
2/12/04 at 1:19am
LXG has a pretty great 10-15 minutes in the beginning, then just collapses into a pile of garbage. Sean can STILL do the action hero thing, it just does not come together as a film. Many of the actors are just plain miscast, such as Stuart Townshend and whoever played Tom Sawyer. AND THE SUBMARINE. THat was the worst CGI I have ever seen in a big event picture. Anybody who complains about Van Helsing's CGI and doesn't find extreme fault with this movie is blind. The Hyde transformations were nothing to brag about either. Altough weak CGI is not always the only reason a film is not a favorite. God knows I love some movies with shoddy FX. Still, LXG just did not iimpress me in the slightest.

4/10
Reply
post #13 of 23
2/12/04 at 1:22am
Didn't care for it. Loved the comic but I saw it with an open mind knowing it wouldn't be the same. I found it to be dull and predictable. Plus the CGI. I'm just down on the CGI. But that's m problem and I'm dealing with it as best I can.
Reply
post #14 of 23
2/12/04 at 7:08am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by chappers
LXG has a pretty great 10-15 minutes in the beginning, then just collapses into a pile of garbage. Sean can STILL do the action hero thing, it just does not come together as a film. Many of the actors are just plain miscast, such as Stuart Townshend and whoever played Tom Sawyer. AND THE SUBMARINE. THat was the worst CGI I have ever seen in a big event picture. Anybody who complains about Van Helsing's CGI and doesn't find extreme fault with this movie is blind. The Hyde transformations were nothing to brag about either. Altough weak CGI is not always the only reason a film is a favorite. God knows I love some movies with shoddy FX. Still, LXG just did not iimpress me in the slightest.

4/10
Submarine looks excellent to me. Maybe you were thinking of the Dante beast? That was bad cgi.
Reply
post #15 of 23
2/12/04 at 8:03am
Quick poll on who'd like to a CGI'd Jason Flemyng fucking Tony Curran to death ?

I vote Miike for the sequel.
Reply
post #16 of 23
2/12/04 at 8:38am
I love Alan Moore to death, I think the man is a rightgeous genius.

I knew the movie would be different than the source material, but I honestly wasn't expecting it to be complete crap...which it was to me.

I hated the way Hyde looked, I'd rather the invisible man stick with his comic persona, a pyscho rapist on the good side.


Ill have to say Townsend(sp?) as Dorian Gray was pretty damn good. Tom Sawyer could fall off a cliff for all I cared.


I would rather sit through repeat viewings of House of the Dead than this movie.
Reply
post #17 of 23
2/12/04 at 9:28am
The last two thirds of this movie was ALL CGI. It was like watching Final Fantasy with Human actors. VERY disappointed with this movie
Reply
post #18 of 23
2/12/04 at 10:10am
I thought it was a fun movie. Good ideas, and some good action. Sure, some of the CGI looked hokey, but it looks hokey in almost any movie now a days.


I hope if they make a sequel they go with the story of the LXG vs the Martain war machines from H.G. Wells War of the World.
They are saying that it's their plan if they make a sequel.
Reply
post #19 of 23
2/12/04 at 10:18am
Thats the storyline for Volume 2 of the graphic novel.

But they diltued the wonderful storyline of the first one for something more generic geared toward those that probably don't read a whole lot (plus it would have come off as slightly racist without the darstardly sly wit of Moore's characterisation), so I can only assume they'd do the same to the equally great part 2.

Though I'd love to see Dr Moreau in there - the sequence in the comic reminds me of the surreal nature of one of the only standout bits of the Avengers adaptation: when the furry bear costumes are trotted out....
Reply
post #20 of 23
2/12/04 at 1:40pm
Thread Starter 
Honestly, I have only ever read Dracula, and I have RLS' novel, but I got to get through a bunch of others first. I stick to more modern reading, to be honest, so maybe it's just me being ignorant..... but I would like to pick up some stories on Allan Quatermain sometime.

A line that always makes me laugh......


"I'm an immortal, sir, not a gazelle!"

Also, I have read the first series of the comic and enjoyed it throughly. I am pondering picking up the second series, probably will eventually.

Though it must be said, if it wasn't for the movie intriguing me, I probably wouldn't have bothered with the comic. So thats one good thing about adaptations.
Reply
post #21 of 23
2/12/04 at 2:21pm
"Submarine looks excellent to me. Maybe you were thinking of the Dante beast? That was bad cgi."

No Fireflyfan, I am thinking about that rancid looking submarine that magically can appear out the channels of Venice(read Ebert's review for some heavy critique on that subject) that looks like it was done for a DTV movie. Like I said, that submarine is the worst CGI I think I have personally seen in a big movie. I mean the sub looks like it is paper thin, and is just some big blue/silvery abomination on the screen. Sometimes it does not even look three dimensional. If you can tell me that scene where the sub soars out of the water is remotely real looking I will shit a solid gold brick. Maybe it's just me.
Reply
post #22 of 23
2/12/04 at 4:45pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Fireflyfan
Submarine looks excellent to me. Maybe you were thinking of the Dante beast? That was bad cgi.
Who the hell was Dante? Was he the giant meatball-man that fought Hyde? He looked like a level boss from a Sega Genesis game.
Reply
post #23 of 23
2/12/04 at 7:21pm
Yup.

I swear, sometimes Max Ryan wants to be Gary Oldman....
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Creature Corner Main