League of Extraordinary Gentlemen

[Mortaniuss]

Has anyone seen this yet? The trailer looked pretty good, and I was thinking about catching it, but I've heard nothing but bad things so far. It currently has a horrible average on RT: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/TheLeagueofExtraordinaryGentlemen-1123784/

[ReaperFett]

"These guys have dumbed down a comic book."

I could kill some "experts", I really could. Alan Moore writes intellegent comics, everyone who knows ANYTHING about comics knows that. Comments like that really do show how little research some people do. I bet you anything she/he (Think it's a she) took the rest of the comic references from other articles. Grrrr...


Even after the reviews, it looks how I have always seen it, a fun popcorn film and nothing more. My one worry is this. I notice a theme amongst reviews that they have a beef with the Tom Sawyer character, who is basically there to add an American (I'm not making that up). Because naturally, noone in the US would care to see a Sean Connery film, right? :rolleyes





EDIT- One other thing to note. I post at Mark Millar(Ultimates)'s message board, ane have been watching people opinions. As a fair few are Moore fans, they've been slamming it a lot in the buildup. But having seen it, the majority are at least saying it was a fun film, albeit not much like the comic. Considering the amount some of them have been slamming the film, that's impressive to me.

[sirdizzy]

what a crock, its only dumbed down if the audience isn't intellegent enough to catch the little litterary tidbits thoughout

i cracked up hard when the assisant goes call me ishmael, and i loved the fact that the villain was Moriarty, wjho is Sherlock Holmes nemisis for those who do not know

honestly there is so many fun tidbits to watch this movie for, plus the great action, the superb special effects and the wonderful fight sequences

[sirdizzy]

The League of Extraordinary Gentleman (2003)


Action/Adventure and Science Fiction/Fantasy
1 hr. 55 mins.
MPAA Rating: PG-13 for intense sequences of fantasy violence, language and innuendo.
Release Date: July 11th, 2003
Starring: Sean Connery, Peta Wilson, Stuart Townsend, Tony Curran, Jason Flemyng
Directed by: Stephen Norrington



A hunter, a vampire, a pirate, a invisible man, an immortal, a mad scientist, and a famous American troublemaker are about to make the most unlikely of teams. Allan Quatermain is a legendary hunter who’s exploits such as finding King Solomon’s mine have made him famous in his home country of England, but because of a previous exploit gone bad he has forsaken his country and lives happily in Africa. But when a new threat arises that could endanger the entire world his country calls upon him once more to lead a group of extraordinary men to combat the new evil. The Phantom has brought the world to the brink of a world war with new inventions such as tanks and automatic weapons, all in an effort to sell his new arms to the highest bidder. So now it is up to M the top British official to recruit a team that is special and has a chance to beat the Phantom. Mina Harker is a woman that in her search for the legendary Dracula not only cost her, her husband’s life but also turned her into a vampire. Captain Nemo is a famous pirate with his legendary ship the Nautilus whom is now trying to redeem himself. Rodney Skinner is a thief who took an invisibility potion to help him in his trade but now lacks the cure and is stuck indefinitely invisible. Tom Sawyer is the famous American troublemaker all grown up now who helps out the team and finds himself a offer to join the team. Dr. Jekyll is a scientist that invents a formula that turns him into a monster Mr. Hyde. And Dorian Gray’s past is a mystery but he is also an immortal who can vastly help the team. So these extraordinary gentleman set off on a journey to save the world before its too late and to help redeem their somewhat shady pasts.

Based on the comic by Alan Moore the comic and this movie incorporate some of the most famous of literary characters of all time, even the villain in the end turns out to be a famous literary villain. I doubt many of the people who see this movie will get a lot of the side jokes and humorous literary references like that of Moriarty but they made me laugh as it seems this movie had fun trying to fit in as many references as they could. The best though has to be Rodney Skinner who was not only the comic relief but the special effects on his power of invisibility was jaw drop dropping awesome and wonderfully done. And even the effects for Mina Harker’s transformation to a vampire were better than in any vampire movie I have ever seen, and the makers of such stories might want to take notes. The story seemed a little hurried at times as it seemed like they tried to fit in too much in a two hour time span but well worth the journey. The movie moves from one action sequence to the next in one great special effects sequence after another. You come away drooling over the possibility of a sequel since now that they have done the back-story for all the characters they could now just dwell on their adventures. If you enjoy classic literature or you enjoy a good action movie with eye appealing special effects this is the movie for you as the movie had a little of everything including a spectacular end sequence that included some of the best fight sequences in any movie released in recent history.
4 stars out of 5

[ReaperFett]

How was Dr Jekyll?

[Jinn Fizz]

I'll be seeing it tomorrow, so I'll definitely post my opinions here! :D

[sirdizzy]

i perfered hyde personally they made him a lot more real and entertaining, it seemed like Dr. Jekyll was the side effect instead of Hyde

my favorites were Skinner and Herker, great great great job on these two characters

[Dyan Kharis]

Alan Moore is an excellent comic book writer... no question about it. But you see I am already bias against this movie because how moronic it casts great literary characters such a Oscar Wilde's Dorian Gray; H.G. Wells' Invisible Man; Robert Louis Stevenson's Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde; etc. Everyone I know that has seen it says it is terrible! A meaningless movie!

However, if you want to see great movies, watch James Whale's 1933 classic The Invisible Man starring Claude Raines. And Mamoulian's 1932 take on Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde which earned Fredric March an Oscar for best actor and don't miss Fleming's looser based 1941 version either which starred Spencer Tracy, Lana Turner, and Ingrid Bergman.

I love horror and of all the films I have seen these two adaptations of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde are very well my favorites. Why? Both versions contain rich character depth and are a strong examinations into the realities of good and evil from both moral, psychological, and theological viewpoints. Also brings into question the issue of ethics in medical research. The movies also touch upon many stronger themes including sexual repression, infidelity, abuse (both physical and mental), depravity, and addiction. The feverish hallucinations Dr. Jekyll suffers when transforming into Mr. Hyde speaks in volumes and gives you incredible psychological insight into this character. Afterall, Dr. Jekyll is doing research on the reality of evil of man and attempting to find it's cure. Instead, he plummets into the darkest reaches of his own uninhibited excesses and wantoness. Personally, by far what is most relevatory about both movies is... the realization that there remains a Mr. Hyde inhabiting each and all of us waiting to be unleashed. That when we look at Dr. Jekyll and his alter ego we see an undeniable reflection of ourselves. Both films are provocative modern masterpieces, I couldn't give any higher recommendation to a horror movie.

I have ranted enough but put these three movies in your VCRs and then go see this comic-crap called League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. I smell Avengers revisited!

[ReaperFett]

Why would someone want to spoil their cinema going experience by seeing them first? I am waiting to try the comics until AFTER the movie, so that I can enjoy the movie without sitting there complaining about what they should have done.

Also, one point:

Both versions contain rich character depth and are a strong examinations into the realities of good and evil from both moral, psychological, and theological viewpoints.
It's a whole different kind of film.

[Ryla Relvinian]

Y'know, no matter how many positive reviews of this I see, it still looks bad.

Sorry. :)

[Dyan Kharis]

Originally posted by ReaperFett
Why would someone want to spoil their cinema going experience by seeing them first? I am waiting to try the comics until AFTER the movie, so that I can enjoy the movie without sitting there complaining about what they should have done.


Spoil?! Spoil what? Every literary character in the movie has been completely rewritten. There is nothing materialwise in LXG that closely resembles any of the books or any other film adaptions for that matter. I really love the review Roger Ebert gave on this movie. Hilarious and biting. One thing I will compliment Ebert for is he always write an intelligent, coherent review and never prattles on trying to show us what a scholarly man he is in psychology or filmography like others. Always straight to the point. The review is here (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/click/movie-1123784/reviews.php?critic=columns&sortby=default&page=1&rid=1173708)



Also, one point:

It's a whole different kind of film.

Yes, they are an immensely more intelligent and engrossing movies.

[Jinn Fizz]

Well, I saw the movie today, and I liked it. Quite a bit. So did my parents. My father is my barometer sometimes...he doesn't go to the movies much, and he tends to have a critical eye (he's a retired aerospace engineer), so if he likes a movie, I always figure that has to mean something. And he liked this movie. So critics be damned. It was a lot of fun! :)

I figured out that Professor Moriarty was the main bad guy...I thought that was a nice touch. If you're going to have a movie where all the heroes are literary characters, then it's only appropriate to have them go up against the greatest villain in Victorian literature!

And the special effects were quite impressive. As a matter of fact, the Mr. Hyde effects were better than anything I saw in The Hulk. Sorry, ILM, but it's the truth. :cool

Three thumbs up from my family! :thumbup :thumbup :thumbup

[Mortaniuss]

Originally posted by Dyan Kharis
Spoil?! Spoil what? Every literary character in the movie has been completely rewritten. And because they use a character's likeness, they have to stay true to the source material... why? Sorry, your argument makes no sense. I can tell from the trailer that LXG isn't exactly going to try and stay true to the original stories, because that would be flat-out impossible.

Also, it seems pretty apparent that this isn't going to be some delve into psychology or human nature: It looks like a slightly silly action movie that blends some elements of fantasy with some James Bond/Indiana Jones elements, drawing upon characters we're familiar with and possibly giving them a new twist.

Whether or not this formula works or not, I don't know yet: Haven't seen it. But bashing it because Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde don't have some in-depth analysis of the nature of evil is silly.

[Jinn Fizz]

Mortaniuss, I agree completely. To me, this was a good ol' action-adventure movie where all the characters happened to be famous figures from literature. I'm an English major who's read tons o' books, so I had more than a passing familiarity with all the characters..I was especially glad to see Dorian Gray featured, so maybe now people will be more likely to get my cracks about some young-looking person who must have a portrait of themselves stashed away in the attic :p. But the fact that some of the characters might have been reworked or reinvented doesn't bother me at all. I went into this movie hoping to be entertained and have fun. And I was. I liked it a lot, and I recommend it to anyone who's interested in seeing it, without any reservations at all. :)

[Jared Mriad]

Originally posted by Ryla Relvinian
Y'know, no matter how many positive reviews of this I see, it still looks bad.

Sorry. :)

That is what I thought until two hours ago.

I was thinking that it was going to be something boring, little action aside from what the trailers showed. But, I was thrown out of my seat from what I expected it to be and what it actually was.

[Darth Viscera]

This movie irritated me no end due to its numerous historical inaccuracies, which were too flaunty for any educated person to possibly overlook. I'm not going to say that this movie was as bad as Charlie's Angels, but it was darn close.

[Jinn Fizz]

Originally posted by Darth Viscera
This movie irritated me no end due to its numerous historical inaccuracies, which were too flaunty for any educated person to possibly overlook.

I take great offense to that comment, in all honesty. Because it implies that since I was able to overlook the inaccuracies, because the inaccuracies didn't bother me in the least, I am therefore uneducated.

Nothing could be further from the truth. While you're definitely entitled to your opinion, I don't appreciated being unfairly slurred by your opinion.

[ReaperFett]

Woah, heaven forbid someone enjoys a film for what it is instead of caring about historical innacuracies in a movie starring a Vampire, a half-beast and an invisible man :rolleyes

[Jinn Fizz]

Not to mention an immortal being and a pirate with a really big fancy submarine.

[Jared Mriad]

And fancy automobile!

[Darth Viscera]

Originally posted by ReaperFett
Woah, heaven forbid someone enjoys a film for what it is instead of caring about historical innacuracies in a movie starring a Vampire, a half-beast and an invisible man :rolleyes

Well, they could have followed the example of The Hulk and injected a little bit of reality into their fiction. After all, the best lies are always part true. It was a nice plus seeing sub-munition artillery shells, F-22 Raptors, M1 Abrams tanks, Commanche helicopters, etc in Hulk. Had they used period-specific technology in LXG, it would have been a better movie.

@Jinn
Well then you're more tolerant than I am, and I apologize for any offense.

[Dyan Kharis]

The movie didn't only reinvent these brilliantly conceived literary characters but thoroughly butchered them. Why?! What an unnecessary travesty!

This is the kind of no-brainer film that you are required to leave your mind completely at the door because there won't be much intelligent thought encouraged. But if you into cheap thrills and eyecandy than this may be the perfect movie for you. Personally, give me a Bond or Indiana Jones film any given day!

[Lilaena De'Ville]

yada yada yada yada...

The invisible man = NOT THE SAME ONE !! oh nos heaven forbid! Instead, he's a thief who stole the original formula. So is he the same as the 'famed' invisble man? no! But he's not pretended to be, either.

Tom Sawyer = all grown up! Is he the same as he is in Mark Twain's classic literature? NO! But then, Twain never wrote about what Sawyer went on to do. And Shane West = hottie! >insert drool smiley<

Dr. Jekyll was great, I really enjoyed his character, and how he managed to tame the beast, so to speak. Also, the transformations were pretty awesome, Jenny you need to see it. :D

I enjoyed the movie, but I won't say it was a masterpiece by any stretch of the imagination. Was it intended to be? Probably not. It is a popcorn muncher, a summer movie with some 'smart' literary references, and some really cool special effects.

The work on Skinner was remarkably good. My only "meh" point is that they never showed how Skinner got out in the end. We last see him all burnt up and whimpering, and then he's at the gravesite with the rest of them, perfectly okie-day again.

And personally, I don't know a Bond movie that doesn't use cheap thrills and lots of eye candy. :)

[Dyan Kharis]

Yeah, Bond is all about cheap thrills and eyecandy but done with a stylish tongue firmly in cheek. I am not much of Bond fan myself more Indiana Jones personally. But there comes a point when the line is drawn on when the cheap thrills and eyecandy go from fun to downright offensive and insulting.

[Jinn Fizz]

Originally posted by Lilaena De'Ville
It is a popcorn muncher, a summer movie with some 'smart' literary references, and some really cool special effects.

Exactly! In general, I go into a movie like this with one expectation...to be entertained. And was I entertained? Immensely so! I think a really nifty side bonus would be if even one person who saw the movie decided to check out the books that these characters originated in. :)

And I have to drag out the one piece of advice that seems necessary in times like these, when some people have very passionate objections to something like this:

It's only a movie. Relax, it's not the end of the world. :)

Also, I still don't appreciate that some of the comments here seem to imply that those of us who liked the movie are somehow not as smart as others. If I'm misinterpreting things, please correct me, but that just seems to be an underlying thread to the criticism of this movie. :(

Lilaena: I noticed the thing about Skinner's injuries as well. I was floored by the image of him lying there, partially visible with all the burned skin, wow, what an effect. I actually expected that he might die because of it. So yeah, it was a little anti-climactic to see him just standing there at Quartermain's gravesite with no explanation. But what the heck! :)

[Lilaena De'Ville]

Yeah, Bond is all about cheap thrills and eyecandy but done with a stylish tongue firmly in cheek. I am not much of Bond fan myself more Indiana Jones personally

:rolleyes Yes, because everything in LXG was meant to be taken totally seriously. I suppose you didn't enjoy The Mummy either, as it is a less serious take on Indiana Jones. :mneh Your point has been made, tried, and found wanting. :)

Jinn: I was sooooo SAD when Quartermain died...but the whole bit about Africa not letting him die was pretty awesome, and then the promise of more to come from this extraordinary league.

The one thing I could have done without was the appearance of the Nautilus. It was ....GILT for crying out loud. And sailing through the canals of Venice. :p But it was a fun ride and I chose to suspend my disbelief for the duration of the journey.

[Jinn Fizz]

Lilaena: My heavens, I was ssssoooo surprised that Quartermain died. Even my father went, "Ooooo!" when that happened :). But I really did like the ending...Africa truly will not let Allan Quartermain die, and he'll be back for more, that's for sure. :)

I liked the look of the Nautilus, actually, but when they were going through the canals of Venice, all I could think was, "Um, they're not going to be able to turn corners very well in that thing!" :lol But yes, I was having so much fun, I just went along for the ride!

Oh, and I suddenly thought of that one great line when Quartermain kicked Skinner out of his quarters, the one about clothes on for the entire trip or he was gonna kick his butt! :lol

Oh, and I loved both Mummy movies as well, best Indiana Jones rip-offs I've ever seen, fun fun fun stuff! That's one reason why I'm already looking forward to Van Helsing next year, since it's directed by Stephen Sommers, who did The Mummy and The Mummy Returns. And having Hugh Jackman in the lead doesn't hurt things either. :love

Hm...but this might be another movie that will cause some "controversy" because it will be toying with literary origins...eh... :p

[Jedi Master Carr]

About the historical inaccuracies since Moriatry was a genius he could probably have invented all of these things also how is it different than the Nautlius and Nemo I mean that kind of Sub couldn't exist but Verne wrote it that way or a time machine in the 19th century that is impossible too. Really I wouldn't have a problem as the movie is a sci-fiction story it is is not like it is based in reality.

[Mu Satach]

For all you literary buffs out there, the trailers and this movie actually made me want to go back and revisit the original works. I never got around to reading 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea as a kid, but I am currently 1/2 way through my jaunt under the sea and already have Dorian lined up next. I'm even considering re-reading Jekyll & Hyde afterwards.

Besides, too much realism in a movie like this is akin to seeing the man behind the curtain. It pulls me out of la la land, and reality is the last place I want to be on a Saturday afternoon. I go to movies like this to be a little kid again when someone could steal your nose, coins came from behind your ears and men in vicotrian era clothing could journey to the center of the earth and more.

[sirdizzy]

I agree the movie is about suspending reality for 2 hours and just being entertained, its also fun to catch all the literary tidbits and side jokes

it has also made me want to read the books about these characters too, i have read all of them except the dorian gray one which i think when i get a chance to swing by the library i'll pick it up

[Jinn Fizz]

Yay, Mu!!! :rollin

And did everyone catch the "Call me Ishmael" line? Now that was funneeeee! :lol

[Dyan Kharis]

It is great that this movie inspired some of you to revisit the classics or read them for the first time. But what I am saying is inventedness, originality, and creativity has taken a back seat to cheap thrills and eyecandy. What I am saying is it doesn't take much of an effort by Hollywood these days to please viewers. Has today's moviegoers fallen into complacency that Hollywood can humour us with just any 'ol cliche(s) and cheap parlor tricks rather than genuine substance and genius. I hated The Mummy and The Mummy Returns because I rather like the classic Universal take. And the Scorpion King was downright dumbified. I am only saying wake-up and smell the coffee.

[Lilaena De'Ville]

I loved the Call Me Ishmael line. :D And I won't argue that the Scorpion King sucked. :)

I started reading Dorian Gray over a year ago, but I haven't gotten past the first few chapters. It hasn't captured my imagination yet, its still delving through the painter's fascination with Dorian. It was quite a controversial book in it's day, as its partly Oscar Wilde's 'coming out' piece.

Of course, you can't expect Dorian to be just like he was in the book, either, as who knows how many years have transpired since he was the young man in the painting. I also loved the fight between the vampire (i've blanked on her name) and Dorian. "We'll be at this all day." Classic. :D

[Jinn Fizz]

Ah yes, that line was very droll, I loved it. And it was Mina Harker. :)

I'd also noticed that when Dorian ran Mina through, he was a little too far to the right, so I knew she wasn't done for. ;)

Oh, and I'm not gonna wake up and smell the coffee, because as far as I'm concerned, there ain't no coffee to wake up and smell. :p

[Mu Satach]

Originally posted by Dyan Kharis
But what I am saying is inventedness, originality, and creativity has taken a back seat to cheap thrills and eyecandy. What I am saying is it doesn't take much of an effort by Hollywood these days to please viewers.

Oh I agree whole heartedly... if I want to see something original, unique or "creative" a hollywood meatgrinder flick is the last place I expect it.

Basicly, I view "Hollywood Blockbuster" flicks like going to a carny show... the hype is more than the substance. I know the gags, I know the gimicks, I know the barker out front is selling me a pile o'crap... but I still like to go to carny shows. And I enjoy it for what it is... a cheap thrill. I can list off over a hundred movies from almost any decade that has come out of Hollywood that fits that bill.

Hollywood is and always will be about money and making money. Once in a blue moon you get something really great, but not often. And often things that are great are viewed as tripe during the time they are released.

There's a lot of good stuff out there besides the pop corn flicks, but you need to know where to begin looking for it, and not expect it on a Friday night at your local cineplex and if it is there, catch it before it's gone. *wanders off to a corner to wimper because she missed A Mighty Wind*

[Zasz Grimm]

I found this movie extremely pleasant to wathc. Good humor, plot twists, excellent actors for everyone. My favorite character probably out of the entire movie, had to have been Dorian Grey (Peter Townsend). He was played perfectly. They chose an excellent actor for him

I liked the nailed 'literaly' line. I thought it was humorous.

And other than that, I favored Hyde / Jekyll the best. They showed how he tamed the beast inside. They should have done this for 'Hulk'. Also, I loved the line..."Not the whole bottle.."...Shows he's done it before. :)

All in all, a good movie. Not the best in the entire world, but still. Pretty great.

Oh - forgot. Connery was awesome also! :)

[Dasquian Belargic]

I just saw this today (only just came out this week! Shows how far behind we are)!

I really like Dorian Gray. He is just so entertaining :) Stuart Townsend always rocks.

Mina Harker I liked too ( I always think of her as Winona Ryder, since seeing that Oldman version of Dracula ... but this version was much cooler ^_^; ).

Nemo seemed a bit useless :x

Hyde was great. "Doctor Jekyll, at your service" < that made me grin :D

I did like how the invisible man wasn't the spy in the end. He seemed like such an obvious choice to be a traitor.

How big was that sub!? It just seemed to go on forever! As soon as I saw it, I said it looked like a gigantic butter knife, and then he said it was the sword of the sea... made me giggle

There were lots of one-liners that made me chuckle (I kept waiting for Sean to say 'sit down' in his accent but he never did :lol). The one about the Fantom being operatic, the nailing, etc. Seeing the movie made me want to go out and pick up lots of books, so even if it didn't live up to my (unrealistic) expectations, it did inspire me to go read more - so I salute you LXG!

[ReaperFett]

I'll probably see it next week.



This is a shot of the sub from the comic (Which I read last week, and is great:)).

[Rognan Dar]

It looks like a octopus or squid there. o_O

[Kelt Simoson]

great movie, Sean Connery always beats the crap outta movies and makes that awsom anyway :)

Townsend was awsome :) (hey up Jen)

And (Im a gentleman theifs) special effects was awsome.

Loved the movie :)

[Dasquian Belargic]

I also liked when Mina does the impression of Sean. I sat through the whole movie doing that, mimicking everything he said ^_^; Can't help myself

[ReaperFett]

That's what Jason Fleming said on FIlm 2003, it's like a strange form of Tourettes, where you can't help it :D

There's a funny Shane West story where he answered his mobile to hear someone doing the voice, so he played along, before walking outside to realise it WAS Connery :)


Anyway, seen it.

Overall, very enjoyable. Nice to see M, I loved that character in the comic.

Indeed, the things that were the lowlights were generally what was changed (In characters, the plot was different too) for the movie. Dorian Gray was fine, he "fit" and was acted well. Tom Sawyer was just pointless IMO, only there to put an American in. He didn't add anything, just became mini-Quartermain. Nemo went from using technological weaponary to being a martial arts master, which was daft IMO (Not from a changing comic sense, but for common sense. The guy has a sub, why not have him use technology?). And the invisible man bugged me by changing WHO the man was IIRC. He was written the same, why not keep him the same person? Best character though.

Overall, I hope there is a sequel. There is some GREAT potential for future stories here, with hundreds of possible scenarios.


Notice BTW Mina could go in sunlight? Was this doable for her in the old Dracula novels, or was this an alteration?

[Dasquian Belargic]

I noticed that about Mina too. Immeadiately wait "Hang on a mo"

I heard from a comic fan that she was mortal in the comics (I might have interpreted that wrong), so technically its true to how she is in the source - even if she isn't a vampire then.

[ReaperFett]

I've only read volume 1 (second volume only recently wrapped, Im waiting for the TPBs), but I think she is a vampire. She refuses to take off a red scarf, like she had on in the movie. We don't see her biting people or anything though, so I dont know. I suspect she is one, but Moore was hiding this. Even used a different name at first, only later did we find out her real surname.

[Dasquian Belargic]

Hyde is the savage and cunning monster he is supposed to be, Jekyll the weak-willed good man behind the beast, Allan a fallen hero with opium problems (his son is VERY MUCH alive), Nemo a BADASS who dislikes all the team (nothing polite), Griffin (the REAL Invisible Man) a sociopath that attacks women and is a backstabbing traitor (is role is taken by Gray, making the so-called IM in the film a good funny dude). And who can forget the strong willed, intelligent strategist and mortal leader of League, Dame Mina Murray? A woman fighting successfully her place on the world of men and trying to hide her horrible past (she isn't telling everyone her meeting with Dracula, is wary and has mental scars like the 'Mina' from the film). Dorian isn't a member, but I think he is mentioned or makes a cameo in someplace.


That was what I was told. Maybe she is just hiding that she was bitten, and wasn't made a vampire herself.

[ReaperFett]

Well let me see how I'd describe them :)



Dorian Gray: If you buy the TPB his painting is in the extras section, and he is on the cover.

Invisble Man: Self serving, on the team to get a potion to become visible. Wise cracks, most common thing said is "Aheheh". Not a good person particularly. Lived in a young grils school, where there some strange cases of Virgin pregnancies. A different Invisible Man from the movies.

Quartermain: Opium addict, carries his Elephant gun around, has a thing for Mina.

Mina: Leader of the team. To quote a source I found online for a RPin game which references Dracula and League, Touched by a Vampire: Mina Harker has given blood to and been forced to drink blood from Count Dracula. What 'powers and abilities far beyond mortal man' this may give her has not yet been revealed in the comic. I think she's a vampire. Also, to quote http://www.theimarketplace.com/Spence/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewitemdetail&invid=30 At one point Van Helsing says that the blood is not contaminated, but at another he tells Mina Harker that Dracula may "have infect[ed] you." Van Helsing, it seems, cannot make up his mind, an ambivalence that carries over into his handling of Dracula himself. Still no clear evidence. Don't see why she'd be on the team if she WASN'T.

Jeykll/Hyde: Kill prostitutes in France. Work an uneasy alliance between each other. Needs no potion to change, is now done by anger (Can see why THAT changed;))

Nemo: Uses guns and the like. Distrustful at first, you have to EARN his respect.

Tom Saywer: Who cares? Probably off with Huck Finn :)