BETTER than the comic!!!
12 January 2004
Whereas the comic will leave a dry feeling in your throat by how flat its writing is, the movie breathes fresh life into the idea set forth by Alan Moore, and makes it live.

Yes folks, I am a fellow comic book nerd, I love Alan Moore's stuff, but this time, the movie outdid him.

Why am I saying this? I stopped reading the comic some time ago, not because I didn't understand it, or anything like that. It was just very dry. Granted, its supposed to feel like Victorian literature, so it succeeds by being dry and unmoving in the style of said era, but makes a laborious read. I love all the characters Moore pulled into his amalgamation, and his idea works to a point. However, the way he writes the characters, it's hard to relate to them. I never once felt any emotional attachment to any of them, and could care less what happens to them. I just stopped putting money on the book out of boredom. I like to engage what I am reading.

This is why the movie succeeds. The characters are fleshed out, and are not stiff. You can believe that they actually existed, and not as just figures of literature. Skinner is more likable than his comic book counterpart, and shown to be more useful; Quartermain is a hero figure as he always was, not a pathetic junkie rescued from a slow death by Mina. The characters were preserved as literature wrote them, not how Moore used them to his liking. Maybe that's why I like the movie more than the book.

In any case, definately worth a watch. Trash the comic.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed