20,000 Leagues Under the Sea

This film combines plot elements of Verne's original 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea and Mysterious Island, then adds its own subplot involving the origin of Captain Nemo that ties everything together. I was very impressed by the writing. This was the first major film with underwater photography. The set design was impressive. I found the diving suits to be particularly interesting--essentially early versions of scuba gear. The new score fit very well into the story. All in all, a wonderful and landmark achievement in filmmaking.

This may have been thrilling in 1916, but today it seems more of a curio. The Williamson brothers invented a camera to take pictures underwater, (the prologue tells us, complete with photos of them) so there's lots of shots of fish swimming, the bottom of the sea, men in diving suits and one battle with an octopus, which was a bit fuzzy. Still, the sense of watching movie history was strong, but don't expect too much in light of more modern techniques. What really bothered me was the hammy acting styles, with lots of arm motions and exaggerated facial features. It's the style that gave silent films a bad name. One who avoided this was Matt Moore, the hero of the film, and the only actor I recognized. Perhaps that is why he was still making movies in the 50's. The film uses plot elements of Verne's "The Mysterious Island" as well as "Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea."

This early adaptation of "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea" is interesting, and generally entertaining, though it lacks the depth of the original story. Its strengths are the underwater effects, the settings, and the camera work, which at times are remarkable for the era. On the other hand, it makes little attempt to convey the most important themes of Verne's story, settling instead for straightforward adventure and melodrama, which are much easier to film.

One can only guess how exciting it might have been in 1916 to see some of these images and special effects. Only occasionally does it falter a bit and lose the illusion of reality for a short time; otherwise it is quite convincing. Just seeing the underwater photography alone must have been pretty impressive at the time, and they also managed to get some interesting sea creatures on film. The photography itself is pretty good throughout the movie, and some of the props and settings are nicely done.

The story draws rather freely both from "20,000 Leagues ... " and also from another Verne story, "Mysterious Island". It is a mostly entertaining yarn, full of action and with some unexpected developments. But only a small portion of Verne's scientific vision comes across, and none of the depth of the characters and of their interactions has been preserved. Captain Nemo is one of literature's more complex and thought-provoking characters, but here he becomes more of a stock melodrama figure. Professor Arronax and Ned Land are mostly spectators, rather than providing worthy foils for the mad genius Nemo.

It's by no means a bad movie, and if you are a silent film fan and/or are interested in film history, there should be enough here to make it worth watching. But otherwise, the 1950's Disney version does a much better job of filming the profound vision and philosophical conflict found in Verne's original novel.

White-bearded mystery man Allan Holubar (as Captain Nemo) trolls the seas, looking for revenge against William Welch (as Charles Denver). We begin when Mr. Holubar's invention, an underwater ship called a submarine, is mistaken for a sea monster. Commanding the "Nautilus", Holubar wants to avenge the abduction of his wife and find his "child of nature" daughter Jane Gail (as Princess Daaker). He defeats, then compassionately rescues a crew of attackers, and goes near "Mysterious Island". Coincidently, enemy Welch and daughter Gail end up there, the latter falling in love with Matt Moore (as Lieutenant Bond)...

Reportedly, the first submarine photoplay ever filmed, "Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea" begins with a tribute to the Williamson brothers, "who alone have solved the secret of under-the-ocean photography." The brothers Ernest and George Williamson appear in an on screen introduction, tipping their hats (and looking like they could have had careers as actors). The film is mainly notable for their work in pioneering underwater photography; otherwise, this adaptation of Jules Verne's popular novel (with additions from his "The Mysterious Island") is sluggish sailing. It also corrupts the source material.

***** Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea (12/24/16) Stuart Paton ~ Allen Holubar, Jane Gail, Matt Moore, William Welch

I found this film extraordinary, if for no other reason than the fact, that that they used underwater photography showing divers in deep sea helmets using what looked to be rifles with spears attached (early spear guns, I imagine) actually shooting at a large group of sharks swimming around them. I also didn't see any air lines attached to any of these divers, however, if you looked closely, you could see some air bubbles come out of the helmets of the divers every so often. They must have been using some type of compressed air with a regulator, however when I queried Google, I was informed that SCUBA wasn't invented until 1939 for the US Navy and the air regulator hadn't been invented until 1943 by Jacques Cousteau. There was a device that contained compressed air in a belt attached to a diver's helmet that was invented in 1825 but that would only allow a diver to stay under 7 minutes. Were they really able to get all of the shots with the divers within that time frame. Very curious. Does anyone have the technical details for how this film was accomplished? I give this film a 9 for technology and a 5 for story line and acting for a 7 overall.