Movie Club Week 7 - 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea

WELCOME EVERYBODY TO THE SEVENTH DISCUSSION THREAD OF THE NEW MOVIE CLUB, DESIGNED TO RUN PARALLEL WITH R.O.C.K.S.
A big thanks to everyone that are joining us through all of this. It’s going to be an enjoyable ride!

In honour of Kirk Douglas’ turning 100 this week, I’ve picked one of his for us to watch, the 1954 adaption of the Jules Verne classic “20,000 Leagues Under The Sea” - notable also for being the first science fiction film to be shot in glorious cinemascope.

Remember any ideas for films to discuss are most welcome, and should be made on the Movie Club Introduction thread (the sticky one).

Just a friendly reminder to everyone that, whilst fans are obviously welcome to passionately discuss and give their views on these episodes, please remember to keep things on a friendly footing and respect your fellow posters.
Also, please do not post where or how to find the full movie online. And do not post asking others to PM it to you. You are however allowed to watch the movie in whatever manner you want.

Well, if no-one else is going to say anything, I might as well.

I’ve seen this film a few times but hadn’t for a few years until last week. And I’m glad I did watch it again.

The film is of course based on the book by Jules Verne, one of his very finest. I’ve read a few of his and this was the one that I liked best in my teens. I haven’t read it for a while, and I need to rectify it. However, the film is a worthy adaptation.

James Mason is particularly compelling as Captain Nemo, one of the most intriguing characters in all of literature. He has isolated himself in judgement of mankind, and while he may be a little extreme in his views, his basic point is sound enough. If you go by the stereotypical black & white labels, then Nemo is “the villain” but Mason imbues him with just the right degree of passion to make him someone you can identify with.

Kirk Douglas, who has just celebrated his 100th birthday (one of very few actors from that era who is still alive at the time of writing this!), is the complete antithesis in his character of harpooner Ned Land. Light-hearted, outgoing, friendly, he has the top billing and is very much presented as “the hero”, although the main character, who narrates the action, is Professor Arronax, played by Paul Lukas. Curiously, both Lukas and Peter Lorre who plays his assistant Conseil, were both Hungarians playing Frenchmen. Ironic that they couldn’t get Frenchmen for the roles. You’d have thought it would have been easier! Mind you, a few years later when they made The Guns Of Navarone they cast Mexican Anthony Quinn as the Greek Andrea . . . a role he played very well, but I digress.

If there’s one flaw, it’s Paul Lukas’ narration, which is adequate enough, but for me it’s missing something. I didn’t get the sense of wonder. The journey beneath the sea is filled with wondrous things, and his character, a renownd scientist, should convey that awe to the audience. He doesn’t really manage to do that for me. However, he is very good in the role the rest of the time. He understands the worth of what Captain Nemo has discovered, and is trying to be patient and convince the captain that mankind is worthy. Ned meanwhile has no truck with this, while Conseil is torn between the two sides. He is loyal to the professor, but he agrees with Ned’s basic position. In some ways Conseil is the role most identifiable to the audience.

Visually this film is a treat. The effects are amazing. From the ship attacks to the electric charges to the explosions - wow. They pulled out all the stops. This was the first sci-fi film to be shot in cinemascope, and they did a fantastic job. One thing that I do remember in the book is that I don’t think it had that final an ending. They had to rectify that for the format of the cinematic experience, and they gave it a good one. Destroying the Nautilus worked very well, and the Professor, Conseil and Ned have to escape - and that’s where Kirk Douglas really gets to be the hero. And rightly so here, of the three his character, a harpooner I remind you, is the best suited to the physical bravado of knocking out the attacker, breaking doors open to rescue the others etc.

I once heard Back To The Future described as “everything you go to the movies for” - well, that’s what this is. It even has the odd comedy moment here and there, mainly involving Ned talking to Nemo’s pet seal, Esmeralda. Although Nemo’s telling Professor Arronax where the cigars come from works beautifully, because it’s a funny moment but played in total seriousness. That’s the way to do comedy in a narrative setting, don’t play it for laughs. Sounds slightly the opposite of the natural idea, but it’s not. You play for believeability, and the laughs will come anyway if the situation is funny.

All in all, I was delighted to see this film again, and plan on making my next viewing of it a lot sooner!

1 Like

Great analysis, Liam! Very well put. This is definitely one of the very entertaining movies that endures the test of time. The effects are pretty impressive, especially when you consider the difficulty and lack of technology back then. The squid attack scene is still enthralling even today when people are used to seeing CGI monsters. I can’t help but wonder how difficult and expensive it must have been to create such a scene in those days. I think I read somewhere that they actually had initially shot that scene during sunset but then later on re-shot it again in its entirety but this time setting it at night. I believe the unused scene is on YouTube.

James Mason is arguably the “star” here. He gives a stellar performance. You described his character perfectly, Liam. It is often taught in writing classes that when creating a villain, it is important that in the mind of the villain, he is the hero. He must do whatever he does because he thinks he is doing the right thing, even if everyone else thinks otherwise. Only then can one come up with a great villain.

1 Like

The effects are amazing. There’s a lot of films from that era where the effects are really good, because they put the effort into making it believable. The key to good special effects is to not think of them as special. They are there to serve the story, not the other way around. You don’t start out with an idea for a spectacular explosion and then think how to build a film around that one scene. You come up with a story that holds water, and if the explosion serves a purpose in the story, you put it in.

James Mason is arguably the “star” here. He gives a stellar performance. You described his character perfectly, Liam. It is often taught in writing classes that when creating a villain, it is important that in the mind of the villain, he is the hero. He must do whatever he does because he thinks he is doing the right thing, even if everyone else thinks otherwise. Only then can one come up with a great villain.

Absolutely. In some of the bonus material for Babylon 5, creator Joe Straczynski expresses it beautifully. “The monster never sees the monster in the mirror.” The best villains are not really villains at all. They believe in what they are doing, and are not evil by nature. Captain Nemo has been described sometimes as an “antihero” - because he’s not an evil man, he’s more a good man who just doesn’t like having much to do with his fellow men.

I still haven’t had chance to watch this movie yet.