Talk:The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (film)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The contents of Cast of Characters vs. The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen lawsuit were merged into The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (film) on 16:42, 28 May 2008 (UTC) and they now redirect here. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history; for its talk page, see here

	Film Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.
Editing Guidelines Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article: If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film) For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references. Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film.
Additional Information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no

[edit] Edward Hyde's size

In the description here hyde is described as such: "also in the novel Mr. Hyde is a short man with murderous instincts and not a giant beast like in the film". However, it is mentioned in the novel and in the second comic book series that Jekyl was withering from the lack of his sins while Hyde had grown due to his indulging in them. The hulking Hyde is appropriate. It is the lack of civility when not on a rampage that is in error in the film. 68.48.174.136 17:19, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Addition the the criticism list

Sorry I added this without any proper referencing...if anyone has anything to add, I'll be a very happy man. Iwan Berry 21:12, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article Problems

The descriptions of characters do not make sense. The following is taken from the Allan Quartermain section: "The character matches with his original storyline as we are informed that he had two wives and a son. Since he doesn't die in any of the books we are led to believe that this adventure takes place after all the others."

This is badly structured and assumes a knowledge of the film, and the structure/timeline of the original comic. Therefore, it is not properly encyclopaedic.

I will attempt to re-write these so they make sense to a first time reader (i.e.. me), after doing a bit of research into the differences between the film and comic. fatbarry2000 22:45, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Also, how could a character from an 1897 novel (The Invisible Man), still be under copyright? The only copyright exception I know of this nature is Peter Pan, which J.M. Barrie willed to a children's hospital for the perpetuity of the hospitals' existence. --Scottandrewhutchins 18:33, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Copyright extends for 70 years after the death of the author in many countries and Wells lived a long timeColScott 02:43, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

H.G. Wells is English and Enlgish copy right law last 70 years after the author die as said above, as H.G. Wells died on the 13th of August 1946 the copyright ends on the 13th of August 2016 which means we have to wait till then for the use of the original invisible man. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.139.125.49 (talk) 18:13, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Venice Problem

Having added a list of perfectly rational criticisms of the Venice scene, I was surprised to discover that someone had written that the LXG is set in an alternate Universe, and "Venice in that universe is not our Venice.". That's perfectly reasonable of course, but makes for poor storytelling and detracts from the reliability of an already plot-hole filled film. If it has St Marks's Basilica, maskerade balls and gondolas on the canals - not to mention the word "Venice" appearing on screen when the scene begins - it probably is "our Venice". The scene is a perfect example of how the studio had very little knowledge concerning what they were handling, and wanted to make an action flick rather than something intelligent and compelling. 84.65.36.118 22:58, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Alternate Ending?

I along with several friends remember the ending scene having Quartermain's hand come up through the grave and grabbing the rifles, but I can't find any evidence supporting this. Can anyone help? Dodrian 03:43, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

They talk about that on the DVD commentary.

[edit] Sequel?

I found no evidence supporting the claim made in the "The Ending" section that there is going to be a sequel. Therefore, I have deleted it.--Farquaadhnchmn 15:41, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] There certainly are a lot of fair-use images on this page

n/t Salad Days 03:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] In response to that warning

I just stumbled upon this page and saw that warning, but i'm surprised nobody is talking about it. As far as I can tell, the plot description is WAAAAAAAY too long (longer than the plot description for 'The Godfather') and convoluted, and nothing on the page describes the central concept for the movie. I think the opening paragraph should have an extra sentence, something like "It is an adventure film set late in the 19th century, featuring an assortment of literary characters appropriate to the period." Then should come a list of characters, because that's important to the understanding. Then a short summary of the plot.

Just my two cents.ThatGuamGuy 22:54, 2 February 2007 (UTC)sean

I agree, some serious trimming needs to be done. I'm willing to help. DurinsBane87 21:58, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] F/Phantom

which is it phantom or fantom

its phantom. why someones decided it's spelled fantom I have no idea... Twitchmoss 16:23, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

In the credits it's spelled "Fantom". Gr8white (talk) 18:33, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Box Office

Film is listed as one of the top 25 for that year worldwide yet monkey keeps reverting

http://www.worldwideboxoffice.com/index.cgi?top=50&start=2003&finish=2003&order=worldwide&keyword=&links=allposters.com&popups=yes

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Lxg214S.jpg

Image:Lxg214S.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:46, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:The league of Extraordinary Gentlemen movie.jpg

Image:The league of Extraordinary Gentlemen movie.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 02:34, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

This article seems to attract vandalism. Poking around because of some odd transitions I found there were quite a few wholesale deletions of sentences and sections, only some of which were caught by bots. Somebody more familiar with this article and/or the material should go back a ways and see what has been chopped out. --Dhartung | Talk 10:09, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Roger Moore in sequel

There is a bit about Roger Moore playing a character in the sequel, but the two sources give for this claim are not very good, one doesn't even contain the word "roger" and the other mentions sources for the claim, but doesn't provide them. The main reason I doubt the claim is that Roger Moore would have been almost 80 years old by the time they started making the planned sequel and wouldn't be very well suited to play James Bond again. JayKeaton (talk) 09:29, 5 June 2008 (UTC)