La Ligue des gentlemen extraordinaires
Original title: The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen
- 2003
- Tous publics
- 1h 50m
In an alternate Victorian Age world, a group of famous contemporary fantasy, science fiction, and adventure characters team up on a secret mission.In an alternate Victorian Age world, a group of famous contemporary fantasy, science fiction, and adventure characters team up on a secret mission.In an alternate Victorian Age world, a group of famous contemporary fantasy, science fiction, and adventure characters team up on a secret mission.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
- Awards
- 12 nominations total
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
I've been reading the comments page in a somewhat bemused fashion. It seems to be divided between people who don't like the movie because it's not enough like the original graphic novel and people who don't like it because they've never heard of half of the characters that are members of the League. The latter seems to me to be an unutterably silly reason for disliking a film. Does nobody read the classics anymore? Nobody reads Oscar Wilde, Bram Stoker, Robert Louis Stevenson, Jules Verne, H.G. Wells, or Sir Arthur Conan Doyle? I find that difficult to believe. As to the former--not enough like the graphic novel, in other words--just how in the heck can a screenwriter accommodate the dark and twisted visions of Alan Moore in a two-hour Hollywood movie, anyway?
I don't believe that one can compare anything written by Alan Moore to what ends up on the screen being ostensibly "based on the graphic novel". (The same applies to FROM HELL, which is another one most people pan, and one which I think is under-appreciated even though the style is breathtaking. I don't even want to think about the reaction that will ensue once THE WATCHMEN comes out!)
What seems to have been missed by most people is that this movie is about style as opposed to substance. It's based on a graphic novel. That's a fancy way of saying it's based on a comic book. On that level, the film succeeds admirably. The characters are archetypes of their literary forbears. They aren't supposed to be, strictly speaking, human. Of course the plot is grandiose, impractical, and over-the-top. Hello? Aren't most comic books like that? Good heavens, isn't most of STAR WARS?
I don't claim that this is a masterpiece. I do claim that's it's fun to watch if one approaches it with a willing suspension of disbelief. For a couple of bucks shelled out at the DVD rental shop, it takes one to a different world for close to two hours. On that level, it's worth a rental. It's also worth a rental, once one watches the movie, to listen to the commentary from various actors and to realize just how well these so-called "unknowns" do assorted accents that aren't even close to their own. Plus the golfing anecdotes are amusing. (And I don't even like golfing.)
This ain't CASABLANCA. Nor is it TITANIC, for which I eternally thank the gods. (Now, THERE was an overhyped piece of inaccurate trash that pretended to be history, but I digress.) But it's kind of fun, anyway, as long as one doesn't take it too seriously.
I don't believe that one can compare anything written by Alan Moore to what ends up on the screen being ostensibly "based on the graphic novel". (The same applies to FROM HELL, which is another one most people pan, and one which I think is under-appreciated even though the style is breathtaking. I don't even want to think about the reaction that will ensue once THE WATCHMEN comes out!)
What seems to have been missed by most people is that this movie is about style as opposed to substance. It's based on a graphic novel. That's a fancy way of saying it's based on a comic book. On that level, the film succeeds admirably. The characters are archetypes of their literary forbears. They aren't supposed to be, strictly speaking, human. Of course the plot is grandiose, impractical, and over-the-top. Hello? Aren't most comic books like that? Good heavens, isn't most of STAR WARS?
I don't claim that this is a masterpiece. I do claim that's it's fun to watch if one approaches it with a willing suspension of disbelief. For a couple of bucks shelled out at the DVD rental shop, it takes one to a different world for close to two hours. On that level, it's worth a rental. It's also worth a rental, once one watches the movie, to listen to the commentary from various actors and to realize just how well these so-called "unknowns" do assorted accents that aren't even close to their own. Plus the golfing anecdotes are amusing. (And I don't even like golfing.)
This ain't CASABLANCA. Nor is it TITANIC, for which I eternally thank the gods. (Now, THERE was an overhyped piece of inaccurate trash that pretended to be history, but I digress.) But it's kind of fun, anyway, as long as one doesn't take it too seriously.
This is a really good film. I went to see it not knowing many of the details. I really enjoyed it. I believe that in order to appreciate this film, you need to have an open mind and not take it so literaly. I've read reviews of it in which the authors claim that not of the characters, or cars, or Nemos Sub, could work like they did. WELL DUH! It is a movie based on a comic book. It naturally wouldn't be for real. I wonder what these people take us for. The other great thing about this movie is the characters. Some reviews stated that people wouldn't understand this movie because the characters are not that new. That they've been around for a while and no one will remember them. The only two characters that I didn't know were Allan Quatermain and Dorian Gray. But I would like to know more about them. So that in itself is good. It makes you want to know more about the characters. Bottom line... It is a really great film. Go see it with an open mind, and not take everything so literaly. You may find that you enjoy it. Don't trust all the bad reviews. You should see for yourself. LXG is a really good film
I found this movie wonderfully predictable. To most people that may not make sense, but I have read most of the books that these characters were taken from. While there were major differences between the characters and the books they were taken from, for the most part it was like seeing old friends, i knew what the various characters would do becuase they kept the proper personalities. I even figured out who the villian was because I noticed one of the major works of victorian literature that was missing from the movie. And you do not need to have read all of these books to understand the movie, but there is a bit of a lack of character developement that you may find, but my friends who hadn't done the reading also enjoyed the movie.
It has great visual effects, some really good action sequences, and a really nice looking car.
Oh if you know anything about these characters and other victorian books, see if you can catch the little references they toss. I recomend this movie for someone who wants a good adventure movie.
It has great visual effects, some really good action sequences, and a really nice looking car.
Oh if you know anything about these characters and other victorian books, see if you can catch the little references they toss. I recomend this movie for someone who wants a good adventure movie.
I get why this movie bombed back in 2003. It would have been hard to understand what was this movie's idea. Is it a Connery badass movie? Is it a group effort? And what about all the adventure stuff laced in between? And wait, fantasy with a little fiction laced in there?
But watching it today, after we've all been educated by the Marvel Cinematic Universe, The Umbrella Academy, The Boys, and more, this movie makes sense. It's unfortunate that in this sense the movie came out at the wrong time.
Because 20 years later, after all we know and love in current movies, this movie fits very well. Sure, some elements are dated, they didn't quite know how to define a "universe", and the VFX leaves a lot to be desired, so it wouldn't have been made just as it is today. But overall, I found it enjoyable.
I would watch a reboot if they keep the same spirit, but now there's the reverse problem - it could arrive too late to the party.
But watching it today, after we've all been educated by the Marvel Cinematic Universe, The Umbrella Academy, The Boys, and more, this movie makes sense. It's unfortunate that in this sense the movie came out at the wrong time.
Because 20 years later, after all we know and love in current movies, this movie fits very well. Sure, some elements are dated, they didn't quite know how to define a "universe", and the VFX leaves a lot to be desired, so it wouldn't have been made just as it is today. But overall, I found it enjoyable.
I would watch a reboot if they keep the same spirit, but now there's the reverse problem - it could arrive too late to the party.
Having been critically panned by both film critics and fans of the original comic book version, you'd be forgiven for thinking that the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (which is hardly a league of "Gentlemen" considering the presence of a female character) was absolute rubbish. However, despite the flagrant misuse of characters established in classic Literature (Dracula, The Picture of Dorian Gray, The Invisible Man, Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea and especially The Adventures of Tom Sawyer) there is an essentially a massively fun film to be found, made all the more enjoyable if you disengage your brain and just don't question the ridiculous goings on of the alternate Victorian universe the film is set in.
So in conclusion, if a night of brainless action adventure fun is what you'r after, then the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen is sufficiently enjoyable material.
So in conclusion, if a night of brainless action adventure fun is what you'r after, then the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen is sufficiently enjoyable material.
Did you know
- TriviaAt one point, Peta Wilson does a humourous impersonation of Sir Sean Connery's voice. According to Wilson, this was a last-minute addition to the scene, and she felt nervous doing it, since Connery impersonations were considered a no-no on the set. Before the shoot, she called Connery and offered not to do the accent, but he insisted she should. Afterwards, she asked him what he thought. He replied, "You were great!" She was taken aback and asked if he really meant it. He said, "Yeah, it's terrible! It's the worst impersonation I have ever heard, and it's perfect."
- GoofsNemo introduces his invention as an "automobile." Later in Venice, Quatermain tells Sawyer to take the "car." The word "car" (from Latin "carrum" for chariot) has been used in English to mean any wheeled vehicle since at least 1350.
- Quotes
Mina Harker: You're sweet... and you're young. Neither are traits that I hold in high regard.
- Crazy creditsThe 20th Century Fox logo fades into a sign on the London skyline.
- Alternate versionsFor the Swedish release, approximately 33 seconds were cut from various violent scenes in order to receive an 11 certification.
- ConnectionsEdited into 2003 MLB All-Star Game (2003)
- SoundtracksSon of Africa
Score lyrics written by Joseph Shabalala
Score vocal performance by Ladysmith Black Mambazo
Ladysmith Black Mambazo appears courtesy of Gallo Records Company
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Languages
- Also known as
- La liga extraordinaria
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $78,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $66,465,204
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $23,075,892
- Jul 13, 2003
- Gross worldwide
- $179,265,204
- Runtime
- 1h 50m(110 min)
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.39 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content