30,000 Leagues Under the Sea

30,000 Leagues Under the Sea

People all around the globe are searching for a very mysterious creature that supposedly lives in the ocean and can pull large ships underwater. Our protagonists, a researcher, his house servant, and a harmonist all come face to face with the enigmatic Captain Nemo. Should we consider him a mad derailed man or an unloved great man? What price of life is appropriate in support of a scientific expeditions? Is it permissible to use force in order to prevent the use of force? What sacrifices must humanity bear in order to avert wars and terrible actions from happening again?

Based on Jules Verne’s book, “Leagues under the sea” moves on from a simple adventure flick to something darker. The film is based on a novel that was remarkably successful, and the Disney Studios faced extreme difficulty and cost in making its live action version of the film which almost bankrupted the studio.

The main characters are very rounded individuals and while they do seem to have conflicting objectives which creates some tension, there is no ‘bad guy’ per se. Looking at it from their point, character’s deeds are justifiable and this inclusion of more dimension enhances the narrative more than just a regular action-based plot.

The initial book came out in 1870 while the action of the story is set in 1866, and the movie was made in 1954. There are considerable divergences between the film and the novel but the humor that Disney’s version adds to the plot do not take away from the science, adventure and darkness inherent in the book.

However, the film is rated G, yet it is not too difficult to figure out that it is a lot more violent and dark than what would be acceptable for the same rating today. All the older kids are going to be able to relate to several cause and effect scenarios throughout the film but for the younger audience, the constant philosophical discussions and arguments may be a tad too over their heads. One more problem is a rather ill-advised throw-away scene that is vaguely racist today and also a controversial song about women that was meant to be cute but in reality is more rude than charming, and that is if you go easy on it.

To put it plainly, the visual effects are amazing at this point in time!! All of them don’t seem to have aged well, but if you can look at it whilst keeping the particular decade in mind, then it would be quite easy to appreciate them and get involved in the narrative even though at times the viewer can see right through the gimmick. The performances here are again very good, as the beloved Captain Nemo and harmonist Ned Land both try to make sure they commandeer every frame they appear in.

There are some minor plot holes here and there but then again they do not hamper the central storyline. Perhaps the greatest discomfort that contemporary viewers may have with the film could be the films pacing. The film has a very slow beginning and only very slowly does it pick up pace. Several plot threads are introduced but are abandoned mid-way; they do provide more complexity to the characters and the relationships rather than help the pacing at all.

I’m whining about the tiniest of complaints. This is a movie with beautiful dialogues and magnificent performances set in an imaginative universe, but it still resorts to the age-old trick of having the last scene repeat one of the lines from the beginning of the movie while placing it over the final cut. YES MOVIE WE GOT THAT, THANK YOU, WE SAW THAT IN THE MOVIE BEFORE. THANK YOU FOR SUCH FORCIBLE ACCESS TO THAT SYMBOLISM. It certainly is not the best way to close the story. That is, however, one of my pet peeves that rank with freeze frames and flashbacks. It is possible that your tolerances are different from mine.

In terms of the soundtrack, it ranges from thick organ funeral marches to light symphonies. This is a nice composition but, other than one theme which will be described in detail in a moment, it is also rather unremarkable music.

Is it worth watching 20,000 leagues under the sea? As long as your eyes are shielded by the 1950s film directors’ glasses, yes. It is one of those motion pictures that requires some contemplating. It is an epic which has certain contentious elements that would make it popular even in today’s age. A raw, historical diamond. In the cases of people that are extremely sensitive to the brief hints of racism and misogyny that exists in the film, or have no taste to slow paced storytelling that has more emphasis on the characters than the actual action, you might want to swim in the opposite direction.

For more movies Visit Gomovies.