RedeemedChild said:
Well I'm excited that this is an origin story because I've always wanted to know more about Captain Nemo's past and how he came to be.
Yeesh...You don?t need a Disney movie to find out the origins of Captain Nemo! Just read ?Mysterious Island?.
Orginally, Nemo had no origin (the name means ?no one? in Latin). Verne wanted him to be a Polish nobleman but his publisher & friend, Jules Hetzel, dissuaded him for political reasons. In the sequel to ?20,000 Leagues?, the novel ?Mysterious Island?, he is revealed to be Prince Dakkar from India and his backstory is told. The backstory is also given extensive, full-blooded screen time in the 1916 film version of ?20,000 Leagues? because it covers both that story and ?Mysterious Island?.
As much as I despise ?Extraordinary League of Gentlemen?, a good job was done with the portrayal of Nemo?s look & appearance. Same with the 1916 version (although James Mason is still my favourite).
RedeemedChild said:
...as I understood Davy Jones to be an alter-ego of Captain Nemo and the Kraken an obvious reference to the Giant Squid.
Either you don?t understand Nemo?s character or you don?t know what ?alter ego? means.
And?um?the Kraken are part of ancient mythology. Double
RedeemedChild said:
I'm quite excited and joyous over this...
How 'excited and joyous' are you?
AndyLGR said:
I'm a big fan of the original, and this potential new version sounds interesting. However, its another in a long line of remakes from Hollywood.
Which original? Nemo has appeared in film innumerable times but this will be the 5th live-action take on ?20,000 Leagues?. ?Mysterious Island? has an even higher number of treatments (live-action) and there are many other non-Verne movies with Cpt. Nemo & the Nautilus. I have
almost all of them. Remakes are nothing new...
Finn said:
Can you call something that has its roots in classic literature a 'remake'?
If that's the case, we've seen, for example, tons of Hamlet remakes ever since people discovered cinematography. That'd also make the new Robin Hood a remake of a remake of a remake of a...
Heh, at least this'd mean that the trend of remakes is not exactly new. Only complaining about 'em is.
Indeed. This isn?t even a remake. It?s another adaptation with a plot somewhat similar to the Michael Caine version (1 of the 2 from made-for-TV movies in 1997).
Mutt92 said:
AWESOME! Ridley Scott? Bring it on. The more Verne, the better!