Skip to main content

"Ordinary" Would Be a Stretch: The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen Review

Oh, the faultiness of being a teenager. A time when disrupted weekend plans were the end of the world, where asking out a girl was a heart stopping proposition, and when The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen was considered a good film.
Yes, I will admit that I thoroughly enjoyed this film as a teenager. Me and my brother went to see it together, coming out both having enjoyed it and for over ten years that initial positive reaction to the film has been what painted my opinion of it. But, much like thinking of one’s first kiss or that far too sweaty high school dance, revisiting the past often leads to confrontation with your demons. My demons, in this case, is the blissful enjoyment of a film so dumbed down and confoundingly boring that it seems insulting now.
The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen is a parody film that does not realize it is a parody film. Bombastic and utterly lacking in any style, the film simply glides to one set piece to another with no forethought and care as to the structure of the story or the characters. It’s a film that, simply due to it’s premise of combining famous literary characters, thinks it is incredibly smart. And it could have been. The original source of which this film takes (incredibly loose) inspiration from was exactly that. The problem is that director Stephen Norrington (in his last directorial effort) feels the need to punctuate every moment of dull wit with a pause and a wink. It’s a film designed to make fools of those who don’t know the references throughout and to insult those who do.
This is a film so bad that it nearly killed the career of everyone involved. Sean Connery retired because of his experience on this film, Stephen Norrington refuses to direct again because of it, Shane West was relegated to poor television melodramas, Stuart Townsend and Peta Wilson faded into obscurity. These obvious tensions on set can be felt in the film, with every angry Scotsman scene and overly bland delivery of the rest of the cast. The film tries to be light and fun, but the cast (with the exception of Townsend as Dorian Grey) plays it like an overly serious gothic tale.
The reimaging of many of these characters from their source material is shockingly schlocky as well, specifically the massive hulk that is My. Hyde. The puppet work is, I’ll admit, not terrible, but the entire design of his creature is so unnecessarily bizarre that one can’t help but roll their eyes. Then we have Mina Harker, a vampire but only when convenient. She can go into the sun, see her reflection, and eat regular food like us humans. It’s almost like the writers didn’t bother to look up the mythology and stories of their cast at all, instead just throwing in random bits and pieces and stirring them together, like a poorly seasoned stew.
Speaking of Mina Harker, her existence in the film is impressively insulting. Her only purpose in the film is for every male character to aggressively lust after her, and they do so gleefully and creepily throughout the film. The only redeemable character throughout the film, Rodney Skinner (the Invisible Man, as played by Tony Curran) is somehow the only character who doesn’t openly express his wish to sleep with her. But they let her do science stuff! That means not giving her agency or a personality is okay!
To say this film failed would be a sad understatement. The premise as presented from the world’s comic book weirdo (which in itself is an impressive title) Alan Moore is an exciting one. Yet this film squanders the premise, the actors talents, and the classic characters it brings together. A mess of poor CGI set pieces paced like a poorly practised prog rock band, The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen tries it’s best to be none of these words.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Swings Both Ways: Swingers Review

Swingers. The title says a fair amount more than either Jon Favreau or Doug Liman imagined. Free spirited, free formed, worry free. Those are what this film encompasses, an impartial impasse. Much like our characters are drifting through the world, this film simply glides along, unattached to time or beliefs. This film is certainly a time capsule, a moment in time, a snapshot of life. Though I have never experienced it myself, I feel it is a safe bet that this is THE Los Angeles film of the 90's. Written by the people, for the people. With this comes some caveats. The film is about men picking up women in the 90's, so there may be some issues to be taken with certain things that happen. Things said, things done, people done. But applying modern sensibilities to a film released even 20 years ago is a fool's errand, so if you can see passed this, the film does have something to offer. Favreau keeps it as simple as possible, bare bones in plot and characters,...

Failing to Take Flight: Lady Bird Review

This is something I will openly admit at the start of this review: this is a film I've likely gotten wrong. With all the unending praise that this film has recieved since it's debut, I have no doubt in my mind that it's me. That I have missed something. That I denied myself the magic somehow. But, with that out of the way, I will stand by my current belief; this is a very solid, very good film, that never really reaches the brilliance it could. It reaches for it, in various moments throughout, from a quiet moment of hometown reflection, to a time of self realization and admittance to a love you've denied yourself to long. This is a film that tries to both by important, and hide it's importance through it's seemingly simple storytelling. But for me, this yearning simply came off as slight. The great pieces are there. The relationship between Lady Bird and her mother (Laurie Metcalf is fantastic as a mother always on the fringes) is of course on...

Shapes, Sounds, Samples of Love: The Shape of Water Review

The Shape of Water is both soaring and grounded in it's pursuit of love, in all forms; physical love, holy love, unrequited love. It does not burden itself with explanation, with the unnecessary components many films that pursue this course would do. It only shows what it believes it must, and much like love itself, the rest falls uselessly to the wayside. Many themes run concurrently throughout the film, all with the singular purpose of telling a love story in their own unique ways. How can the voiceless be able to love? How can a God love those different than itself? How can love be so warm yet so treacherous? All of these questions are deeply embedded in the heart of the audience throughout the film, pulling and tugging and gasping for release along with us. It is a film built upon it's moments, a near recollection of a long-lost love. All that we have left are these moments, these moments of our heart skipping a beat, of our heart being broken, of our b...