Freaktana A Major Disappointment

Doomtomylo a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

InformationRap This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

Kaydan Christian A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Nightgaunt This movie fails for several reasons. First of all, if someone thinks of 20000 leagues under the sea as a film, he will most likely remember the 1954 Walt Disney version of it with Richard Mason, Peter Lorre, Kirk Douglas and Paul Lukas. Against a cast like that this version stands with no chance, Richard Crenna is a decent actor if he plays a decent role and the one thing you can say about him is that he doesn't look as ridiculous as the rest of the cast. Now if you think of Peter Lorre as Prof. Arronax assistant in the 1954 version and consider what you get instead, a girl with an ugly haircut, this is the first big disappointment. As an earlier comment posted, the words "based upon" always gives the authors of a script a lot of creative options. But if you make use of that freedom, you should know where you're going and the result should be good. This time it's not. With the focus of the story on the love thing going on between Nemo, Ned Land and Ugly Haircut the whole essence of the book gets trivialized. The book is a warning about advanced technology used for wrong purposes, adapting this to nuclear power in the Disney version was actually a pretty good idea back then as it was a very popular topic used in many b-movies of that period. The evolving love story is completely dispensable as we know who she'll choose in the end anyways. Furthermore, Nemos attempts to murder Ned Land cause he is his rival in winning Ugly Haircuts heart alters Nemos character significantly to a lovesick villain but once Land saves the ship at the end they are released by him. Makes lots of sense. The biggest disappointment however in this film is the non existent fight with the giant squid, instead you get some sort of alien that gets defeated in a very silly way. Don't get me wrong, I liked Signs for the fact that the alien gets beaten with a baseball bat but this was just pathetic. Some decent underwater shots is all it has to offer, though they add a goof with that as when Ugly Haircut admires the sight outside the Nautilus scuttle the ship would crash into the corals as the camera suggest it is floating sideways. The special effects of the sharks, the monster attacking the Nautilus and the exterior animations of the Nautilus itself are done very sloppy, but that's a disease TV shows and films of that time often suffer from. However, when effects like that are mixed with bad actors, a half baked storyline and a plot basing on the most ridiculous idea that 2 guys would actually compete over a woman with an abomination as a haircut you get a silly film in the end. You may argue that Kirk Douglas building a guitar out of a turtle shell and singing songs to a seal is silly too, it is, but that's what you get when you see a Disney film. At least Disneys version had some funny moments, but who laughed watching this one? I rest my case.

Michael O'Keefe This is a pretty fair TV version of the Jules Verne novel. No way does this come close to the 1954 classic starring Kirk Douglas and James Mason. The U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln is commissioned to investigate attacks of ships at sea. The ship is carrying marine scientist Henry Arronax(Richard Crenna) and his daughter Sophie(Julie Cox). The Lincoln is suddenly rammed by what is thought to be a giant whale. The damage has been done by the evil minded Captain Nemo(Ben Cross) who has been attacking vessels at will from his advanced submarine "The Nautilus". Arronax and his daughter along with harpooner Ned Land(Paul Gross)are taken aboard the futuristic submarine in the hopes of studying underwater marine life. "The Nautilus" comes under attack itself by huge sharks and a squid-like creature. Some of the visuals are pretty good and others not so good. It is obvious this is a classic on a shoe-string.

oigres After watching the 1954 version numerous times and having read the novel several times, I was very disappointed with this version. The class, the atmosphere and acting were no where to be found. These days they'll do anything to make a fast buck! Stick to the 54' version, it may be campy but by a longer "league" than this version will ever hope to be.

mikedonovan Richard Crenna is the only name I recognized in this cast and it is fitting because he gives the only credible acting performance. The film is too preoccupied with the good looks of both the young harpooner and the young female stowaway who is posing as a boy. She doesn't remotely look like a boy. Mr. McGoo without his glasses would say, ‘by George, why is that girl making a fool of herself pretending to be a boy?' On top of that she is a bad actress with an ugly nose. This version of the great Jules Verne novel takes liberties with the masterpiece. We are informed that it is `based on' the novel by the same title. Those two dreadful words; based on. And the clown who plays Captain Nemo does no justice to that fabulous character. When he made his grand entrance I was down on him before he even opened his mouth for his first line. His is a rigid, laughably solemn and overplayed part.Crenna is 20,000 leagues a better actor than the others and the book and the ‘54 movie are each 20,000 leagues superior to this production.Luckily the story is good enough that even a bad version of it is tolerable. Its not a groaner, but its junior high lame and shouldn't be.