League of Extraordinary Gentlemen- Kaitlin
The characters, for the most part are excellent representations of the great characters of Victorian literature. Dorian Gray is one of Oscar Wilde’s iconic creations. I appreciated the way Stuart Townsend seemed to exaggerate his performance in a way that seemed slightly Wildian. Oscar Wilde was known to be very charismatic and great presence in real life. Tom Sawyer is completely out of place, but I will get back to that later. I’m sure he was added because there is an assumption that Americans won’t watch a film that doesn’t involve them somehow as attractive romantic leads. Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde are good representations of the concerns of scientific experimentation and the effects of scientific pursuit on the soul. Allan Quatermain comes from the King Solomon’s Mines novel, which Ganges mentions in his book; it’s the novel where a group of Europeans is able to trick local natives by accurately predicting an eclipse. As much as this aspect is toned down for the film, Quatermain is good example of imperial arrogance and expansionism. Professor Moriarty is the main villain, which implies the existence of Sherlock Holmes though he is never mentioned by name. Holmes used early forensics to solve cases. Captain Nemo is from Twenty Thousand Leagues under the Sea, and he has very advanced technology, mainly his submarine. All of these characters are chosen from extremely popular literary works. They are all strongly rooted in the settings of their source works.
The adventure is distinctly Victorian because of the emphasis on technology and exploration that would have been appropriate in the imagination of the time. They are in a modernized Victorian world. Imperialism is in the background, but is still present. There is still a concern with how technology/ scientific and medical advancement impact the user. Dr. Jekyll and Skinner will never be the same men they were before they took their respective potions. Dorian Gray is a horrendous person because he doesn’t have to answer to the repercussion of mortality. Captain Nemo has a lot of military technology, and although he is one of the good characters in this movie, that is a lot of power to give to one person. There is a clear sense of danger when Moriarty gains some of Nemo’s secrets. There is also some interesting modernizing of Victorian technology. For example, the phonograph record is able to set off a bomb in Nemo’s submarine because it sends high pitch sounds to an incendiary device. This wouldn’t be feasible now let alone with the sound quality of a phonograph. I think this relates to Ganges’ idea that the Victorians are both familiar and strange to us. The technology of the movie seems somehow old fashioned but still fantastical. Captain Nemo’s submarine is the most striking example of technology in the film. It seems both antiquated but extremely advanced at the same time. It’s nimble enough to move through Venetian canals. It has an exploration pod. Another example is when flash powder from a camera is found on deck, so clearly someone has been taking pictures of the submarine. It’s funny to juxtapose someone with photographer’s cape also possessing the requisite technological capability to reproduce Nemo’s instrumentation.
There is also a particular fear of the British government present in the film which is interesting. I think M is meant to be the M who controls MI6 in the James Bond stories. What are we supposed to make of that? Clearly British imperialism has damaged the lives of some of our main characters. Captain Nemo is bitter over the British occupation of India. I don’t think it’s specifically mentioned, but Quatermain alludes to something having happened to Nemo’s family, hence his resentment of Britain. Quatermain’s son-in-law apparently died during the Boer War. None of this is a complete condemnation of imperialism though. Quatermain lives in Kenya, apparently under very affluent circumstances when compared to the natives. What is going on there? There’s a troubled history that is not explored in the film whatsoever. In fact, it seems that a shaman brings Quatermain back to life at the end of the film—because apparently he was so beloved by the natives.
I know I am being a little unfair. This is not the kind of movie that any of us should be expecting to have a complete and multi-layered representation of empire and the lasting global impacts. This is the kind of movie where a beautiful, large-busted vampire, along with a small army of shadow bats, kills Second Reich soldiers while a submarine drives through the canals of Venice all in a desperate attempt to have Sean Connery stop a bomb. So perhaps I should be a bit more forgiving.
As far as the year of production, I’m not sure what specifically was happening in 2003, but after 2001 there was certainly an increased fear of terrorism and chemical agents like anthrax. This might explain the obsession Professor Moriarty/M has with gaining the chemical essences of the members of the league—Jekyll’s potion, Skinner’s skin cells, and Mina’s blood. There is very much an awareness of the potential dangers of biological warfare. If any of you have read the original comic, I’m very curious what your take on this is. Was it the same in the comic?
I do think it’s interesting the Tom Sawyer was added to this group as an American tie-in. He is clearly not a figure of what we would commonly consider Victorian literature. The novel was published in the 1840s, so technically it was published during Victoria’s reign. Sawyer would have been about 70 at the time that the film is set. So, he could almost have been a father figure to Quatermain. Somehow Sawyer is exactly what a stereotypical movie producer would think needed to be added to this film in order to interest American audiences—he is brash, unsophisticated, young, and shoots wildly. From what I understand, he is only in the film version.
There is another layer here for us to consider. I have never read the original graphic novel, but from what I understand Alan Moore, the author, did not like the film, and there were several changes from the text to the film. Some of his biggest criticisms were of the portrayal of Mina. Perhaps the text has a better understanding of larger Victorian culture. Even without having read the graphic novel, I have a feeling that it would have been Moore was the person who selected these figures and many others who didn’t make it to the film. He likely has a much stronger understanding of what these characters represent in the history of literature. I wonder too if there were such heavy handed references to the source material in the graphic novel as there are in the film. Quatermain references going around the world in 80 days. This line bothered me because it’s meant to be cute, and it doesn’t progress the film.
Ultimately, I really like the idea of this story, and I think I will look at the graphic novel after the semester is over. The film leaves a lot to be desired though—whether it’s Connery having the bored expression of a man waiting in line at the bank or the baffling plot turns.
Have any of you read the original comic? What were some of the most striking changes from the original to the film adaptation? Why do you think those changes were made?
What did you guys really like or dislike about the film?
What did everyone think about Hyde’s ability to work with Dr. Jekyll? I’m thinking particularly of the scenes when the submarine is sinking and the fight at Moriarty’s lair? Does that same something about the duality of human character? Rather than condemning Dr. Jekyll because he has gone beyond the reaches of what humans were meant to understand or be capable of, he seems to have almost a superpower now? Would Victorians have agreed with this characterization?
Hi Kaitlin – I’ll let others chime in, but first wanted to say thank you for such an extensive analysis! Very enlightening. It made me think about several aspects of the film.
The Tom Sawyer things was one of them. While not necessary, his presence does bring in an aspect of literature, the idea that American literature was just as legitimate, with its own particular characterizations.
I have read the original comic. Just as the film adds the vision of its director and production designers (a very steampunk aesthetic), the comic possesses the vision of the artist, and the design is somewhat different. So are the characters and plot: Mina is the central character, called upon by Campion Bond (a combination of the sleuth and the spy, so “M” in the film), Holmes is there to battle at Reichenbach falls. But the most interesting difference is that the villain is Fu Manchu rather than a deformed pseudo-German. The comic is much more intense about imperialism, and is a much stronger comment on it.
For Jekyll, the script seems to be trying to pull together the internal monologues of the character from Stevenson’s book. It’s a very quick read, and I recommend it. Ties in the interest in psychology and madness, romantic but also Victorian.
It’s interesting that Fu Manchu was replaced by vague Germans. Do you think that was because of the racist Orientalism that is associated with the character? When I think of Fu Manchu, I picture Christopher Lee in yellowface. It seems like the Germans are always a good go-to uncontroversial choice for villains even today.
Wonderful post! I loved what you wrote…” Connery having a bored expression of a man waiting in line at the bank”. You clearly viewed the movie with a very watchful eye. I really appreciate your insight. I like how you pointed that aspects of Wilde’s own character were present in the film’s charasmatic depiction of Dorian Gray.
Did you find the action scenes nauseating? I couldn’t even follow the movement and fighting with all the crazy camera pan-overs and cuts.
I completely agree with you upon the issue of Tom Sawyer! His presence in the film also felt very odd and forced to me. Also, why didn’t Tom have a Southern Accent? I have read the Tom Sawyer novels, and Tom sounded nothing like he did in the books.
After Professor Lane mentioned that Mina is the central character in the comic, I want to read the comic now. K. Scott, regarding your last comment, I wondered they same thing. If Fu Manchu was replaced by vague Germans because of the “racist Orientalism”. What was the Fantom’s accent in the movie meant to be? I found it to be very odd ( like almost an Asian influenced accent mixed with something else?)
I think Hyde’s ability to work with Dr. Jekyll in the film is very interesting. I think that you touched upon something. His ability to work with Dr. Jekyl touches upon the duality of human nature. That was a great point that you made.
Jekyl’s actions and presence also serve as a foil to Dorian’s and M’s malice and evil. If a so-called “monster” can embrace his evil tendencies and use them for good, then it makes the villains in the movie even more evil!
I apologize for not acting it. Jekyll has two L’s,
Gabriela
I apologize! Autocorrect. Jekyll has two L’s
Gabriela