Le cauchemar d'un pêcheur

Its looks awesome as many other Melies' films do but its hardly very true to the book.

Obviously you can't go that deep into the book in such a short time but as some other films like Frankenstein(1910) managed to do it so I don't see why Melies couldn't other than the fact that this is from a time when title cards were not used yet.

Basically what we get is a montage of Melies style painted backgrounds and creatures which keeps you interested for a few minutes.

Recommended for fans of OLD sci-fi and fans Melies or Verne, or if you just have a few minutes to spare

This is now the oldest feature I've ever seen beating my previous record of 1915 and in its defense it did kind of exceed my self imposed low expectations.

A french short standing around the 10 minute mark it is the first on screen adaptation of the Jules Verne classic of the same name.

A loose adaptation it see's one mans journey into the depths as he comes face to face with mermaids, seahorses and all manner of aquatic life.

Being 1907 as you can imagine the sfx are limited but in their defense they're better than I expected. However on the flip side the camera quality is appalling, very dark in some places while oddly light in others causing it to be rather difficult to follow what's going on at times. Granted this is to be expected but it doesn't take away from my previous statement.

Also as you'd expect this is a silent film (In the literal sense so no music either). This is something I can only take in very small doses (Which this is) as I find sitting in silence rather frustrating.

This is a harmless 10 minutes that will be very eye opening to anyone unfamiliar with early cinema.

The Good:

Certainly has its charm

SFX are quite good all things considered

The Bad:

Hard to make out a lot of what is taking place

Silence is deafening

Oddly, the English title for this is "Under the Seas"--even though the French title is translated as "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea" ("Deux Cent Milles Sous les Mers"). However, when you see the film, you see that it really has nothing to do with the Verne novel--and the English title was more appropriate and less misleading.

When the film begins, it's obvious that this one is in among the worst condition of any of the films from this Georges Méliès DVD collection. It's very fuzzy and bleached out--and it's a real shame. As the rest of the films looked like they'd been restored, perhaps this one was beyond their ability to repair.

Like some of the shorts on the "Georges Méliès Encore" DVD, this one has optional narration in order to explain what is occurring. While normally I don't recommend it, in this case it's worth using (at least in the beginning). A man enters a sub and the submarine slowly descends as the crowd watches. Then, you see what is supposed to be an underwater scene. It's done using stop-motion, real fish and painted images. It must have been pretty cool back in 1907--but it looks pretty dated today. Then, things get weird. Starfish turn into dancing girls--yes, dancing girls! Sadly, the ship scares them off! But, at least the guy in the boat gets to see some mermaids--and leaves the boat (and seems to be breathing just fine!). Then, he wanders about the set--acting as if he's seeing a magical underwater garden. A bit later, he's attacked by octopi--who also turn into women. How can all this be?! Not a bad film by 1907's standards, but the underwater scenes when seen today are amazingly cheesy and a bit quaint. Worth seeing, but not exactly among Georges Méliès best.

Pretty much the same as the Trip to the Moon, only now we are heading in the other direction. A man who seems to be a mime gets in a submarine after dancing around and bowing and showing off in front of another array of women, wearing a kind of military uniform. Before he reaches the bottom, we see all kinds of sea creatures floating around (cardboard cut outs, I guess) and, most importantly, mermaids (dancing girls). In reality, a third of this already short feature is a bunch of prancing and posing. Once our hero gets to the bottom, he is inundated with dangerous fish, crabs, and anemones. This has nothing to do with the Jules Verne book, but Melies probably could have cared less. It's another groundbreaking little film, though it is none the worse for wear. It also has the most tired of clichéd endings.

By 1907 in the career of the French filmmaker Georges Méliès, a variety of factors had shifted since the late 1890's and early 1900's, which were now serving as the boundaries of the great Cinemagician's success. Years before, the fantasy setting and dream sequence that he was experienced at would have been an innovative factor, displaying a substantial amount of creativity on the part of the director; now, such films had more or less lost a good amount of their popularity, and the stagy theatricality and lack of shooting on location was becoming less and less desired. Méliès, despite his tendency to only be skillful in this craft, did however try to change with the times, creating such films as "A Desperate Crime", "Chimney Sweep" (both 1906) and "Robert McCaire and Bertrand" (1907), all of which featured shooting on location and chase scenes - elements that were showing popularity through companies such as Edison and Pathé. However, even "Chimney Sweep" despite its serious subject matter included a theatrical dream sequence inconsequential to the plot, while "Robert McCaire and Bertrand" featured numerous elements of the fantastic. The director simply couldn't give up his craft, which was further demonstrated in later years such as 1908 and 1909 (although 1908 did see him trying to adapt without success).

"Under the Seas" is then a little late for 1907, considering its fantasy setting (mixed with elements of science-fiction) yet for any Méliès fan, it certainly lives up to its potential. Of course, despite the title, there is little to connect this short to the Verne novel "20,00 Leagues Beneath the Sea", which, despite my not having read, is no doubt more involved plot-wise. In fact, considering the narrative of the film, it appears to have a connection in title only, which is then used to give Méliès an excuse to show off his effects in yet another filmic journey (this time being in the ocean). In the end, it comes off as a quaint yet charming film, which continues to show the imagination of cinema's first true auteur.

In "Under the Seas", the story centers on Ives, a fisherman (played by the Méliès actor and production assistant Manuel) who dreams he is given an opportunity to go on an expedition in a submarine under the sea. Once at the bottom, a series of bland sequences that mainly serve to show off the filmmaker's extraordinary creatures follow. There is a lengthy and unrelated scene in which some mermaids and nymphs dance around a star (choreography courtesy of Mme. Stitchel) as well as a stagy long shot in which Ives wanders around the set, studying ocean life which constantly fights back at him. Curiously enough, the fisherman isn't wearing a diving suit at all, adding an element of science-fiction to the movie.

What must unfortunately be said is that, as other reviewers have pointed out, the surviving print is clearly in a very poor, washed-out state to where the entire film appears to have been shot through fog. Contrasts are high in both light and dark areas, and as such the ability to enjoy the array of interesting imagery that is on display is limited to the audience. Not only this, and unlike most reviewers believe, the original film was indeed around thirteen minutes (according to the Star Film Catalogue numbers) and survives as a fragment, with the opening scene in which Ives enters his shack, falls asleep and is visited by a fairy currently considered lost. The majority remains, which at least gives us most of the story and makes the ending come as a surprising cliche due to no previous setup. Generally speaking, it overall is not as good as many previous fantasy films of Méliès, but would no doubt be much more enjoyable had the surviving fragment been in better shape.