Jump to content

LXG


MisterD

Recommended Posts

Originally posted by Killer Shrike

Im not massively read up on the classics, but I cant really think of much going on for American literary figures around the late 1800's. Americans of that era apparantly werent too keen on literature :confused:

 

Of course, as I mention, Im certainly no expert on the subject....

 

Louisa May Alcott

Ambrose Bierce

the Bronte sisters

James Fenimore Cooper

Stephen Crain

George Eliot

Joel Chandler Harris

Nathaniel Hawthorne

Washington Irving

Henry James

Jack London

Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

Herman Melville

Edgar Allan Poe

Harriet Beecher Stowe

Henry David Thoreau

Mark Twain

Lew Wallace

Walt Whitman

Laura Ingalls Wilder

 

Seems like what a lot of Americans were writing about in the 19th century was, the 18th & 17th centuries. Lots of poetry too. Poe invented the detective story, but failed to invent a memorable detective. Most memorable characters from the authors on this list is B’er Rabbit. No character from these authors can match the real life Ambrose Bierce or Jack London.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 92
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Originally posted by Worldmaker

Tom Swift would have been a better American character.

 

Two DQ's. First, the first Tom Swift novel was 1910. Second, Victor Appleton's grandchildren, or possibly by now great grandchildren, has maintained the copyright by continuing the Swift family adventures for four generations.

 

Correction to previous list, somehow left Horatio Alger, Jr, off of the list, but while I know the general plot of his books (one plot, 120 books), I can't nane a single one of his protagonist.

 

It was not a time for character driven literature on this side of the pond. Tom and Huck are the most memorable characters of 19th century American literature.

 

(Which brings up the question, wy special agent Sawyer? Think of special agent Finn, then reveil at a critical point of the movie that his given name is Huckleberry.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, let's see if I've improved with Hero Designer. Based on the movie, the graphic novel, and Dracula , especally Chapter XVIII .

 

 

Wilhelmina Murray Harker

 

Player:

 

Val Char Cost
30 STR 20
23 DEX 39
30 CON 40
10 BODY 0
23 INT 13
23 EGO 26
20 PRE 10
16 COM 3
6 PD 0
6 ED 0
5 SPD 17
12 REC 0
60 END 0
40 STUN 0
6" RUN02" SWIM06" LEAP0Characteristics Cost: 168

 

Cost Power END
7 Vampiric Powers: Elemental Control, 30-point powers, all slots: (15 Active Points); Limited Power (Night only; -1)
7 1) Bite: Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 2d6 (plus STR) (vs. PD) (30 Active Points); No Knockback (-1/4) 3
6 2) Mind Control 5d6, Telepathic (+1/4) (31 Active Points); Eye Contact Required (-1/2) 3
26 3) Healing BODY 1d6 (max. Healed Points: 6) (Resurrection), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Persistent (+1/2) (60 Active Points); Self Only (-1/2), Limited Power (Weapon must be removed from wound before healing can activate; -1/4)
7 4) Flight 15" (30 Active Points) 3
7 5) Shrinking (0.2476 m tall, 0.1238 m wide, 0.1949 kg mass, -6 PER Rolls to perceive character, +6 DCV, +9" KB) (30 Active Points); No Growth Momentum (-1/4) 3
5 6) Bat Swarm: Darkness to Sight Group 2" radius, Altered Shape (Any Area; +0), Megascale (1" = 1 km; +1/4), Personal Immunity (+1/4) (30 Active Points); No Range (-1/2), Nonselective Target (-1/4) [Notes: Had considered multiform, swarm of bats, or shapeshift to a bat combined with lots of duplication, or summon bats. But in the movie the function of the bat swarm was to obscure the sight of the snipers, so I went with darkness, with the bat swarm a special effect.] 3
30 Energy Damage Reduction, Resistant, 50%
15 Physical Damage Reduction, Resistant, 50% (30 Active Points); Limited Power ( not vs silver or wood ; -1)
8 Life Support (Eating: Character does not eat, Longevity: Immortal)
5 Nightvision
Powers Cost: 123

 

Cost Martial Arts Maneuver
4 Martial Escape: 1/2 Phase, +0 OCV, +0 DCV, +15 STR vs. Grabs
3 Martial Grab: 1/2 Phase, -1 OCV, -1 DCV, Grab Two Limbs, +10 STR for holding on
4 Martial Strike: 1/2 Phase, +0 OCV, +2 DCV, STR +2d6 Strike
3 Martial Throw: 1/2 Phase, +0 OCV, +1 DCV, STR +v/5, Target Falls
4 Nerve Strike: 1/2 Phase, -1 OCV, +1 DCV, 2d6 NND
Martial Arts Cost: 18

 

Cost Skill
10 +2 with HTH Combat
6 PS: Stenographer 15- [Notes: Shorthand & Typing]
7 SS: Chemistry 16-
5 Seduction 14-
3 Shadowing 14-
7 Stealth 16-
Skills Cost: 38

 

 

Cost Talent
3 Eidetic Memory (5 Active Points); Limited Power (fades over time; -1/2) [Notes: Mina trained herself to remember conversations verbatum, and transcribe them later in shorthand. Almost a phonographic memory, but will fade if she does not reanscribe the conversation within a few days.]
Talents Cost: 3

 

 

Total Character Cost: 350

 

Val Disadvantages
35 Enraged/Frenzy: sight/smell of blood (Very Common), go 14-, recover 8- [Notes: Mina does not seem to need to feed on any schedule, but, sharklike, the sight or smell of blood awakes her -- appitites. Thought of doing this as a psychological limitation or even distinctive feature, but it seemed closer to an enrage.]
10 Distinctive Features: Scar on neck, almost always covered by a scarf (Concealable; Noticed and Recognizable; Detectable By Commonly-Used Senses)
15 Distinctive Features: Does not eat or drink in public (Not Concealable; Noticed and Recognizable; Detectable By Commonly-Used Senses) [Notes: Unless in a frenzy, and then only blood.]
30 Vulnerability: 2 x STUN fire (Very Common)
30 Vulnerability: 2 x BODY fire (Very Common)
10 Vulnerability: 2 x STUN Attacks to heart (hit location 10 or -3 OCV on called shot) (Uncommon)
10 Vulnerability: 2 x BODY Attacks to heart (hit location 10 or -3 OCV on called shot) (Uncommon)
10 Susceptibility: stake, blade, or arrow through the heart (hit location 10 or -3 OCV on called shot) paralized, Instant (Uncommon)

Disadvantage Points: 150

 

Base Points: 200

Experience Required: 0

Total Experience Available: 0

Experience Unspent: 0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Worldmaker

In fact, my only niggling problem with the film is the fact that Tom Sawyer, having been born in 1837 according to the book by the same name, should have been just over 60 years old during this movie, and obviously he's not.

 

But then what do I know... I'm just a film critic...

 

That, and (according to both the movie and the comic) Hyde was the killer 'ape' in Poe's Murders in the Rue Morgue, and Poe died several years after the LXG story...

 

JG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Worldmaker

In fact, my only niggling problem with the film is the fact that Tom Sawyer, having been born in 1837 according to the book by the same name, should have been just over 60 years old during this movie, and obviously he's not.

 

But then what do I know... I'm just a film critic...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Maybe he has Life Support: Longevity, 200 years?

 

 

 

 

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I liked LXG quite a bit. The story was a bit thin, but I kind of went in thinking the film was more about the spectacle than the plot, so it didn't bother me too much. the only bit that bothered me was when the Nautilus fired the "missle". That stretched scientific reality a bit too much. Tanks, subs, cars, and machine guns were all possible in 1899. the missle went too far. If they had simply said it was an "exceptionally accurate artillery shell" and protrayed it as such, I think it would have worked much better. the characters were all fairly interesting, but I don't know much about Quartermain, so I have no idea if the movie portrays him right. the others all had their moments. I'd like to see a sequel, but hard to say if there will be one.

 

Rob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hated it

 

I was very disappointed. I don't think this film lived up to its potential in a number of ways. Any one of those characters was good enough for their own book, and squeezing them into one movie meant that none were allowed to shine, and no real interaction occurred. There were plot gaps you could drive the Nautilus through, and the bad guy acted absolutely nothing like his literary inspiration. The fight scenes were confused and the overall plot very weak.

 

It has one thing going for it. It makes me want to re-read the classics it rips off to try to undo any cultural damage it negligently inflicted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem of course is that if the story were about one of the characters it wouldn't exactly be a "League" would it? The main purpose is to take these literary characters and place them together, kind of the crux of the thing. There was some interaction I thought, not a wealth of it obviously, but interaction nonetheless.

 

What do you consider to be the huge plot gaps? Not that I am implying that there are not any, but I'm kind of wondering what you thought of as a huge plot gap specifically.

 

The Bag guy did act a bit wussy to be the characeer he was supposed to be, and this could get us back into the apparent age situation as well. Always thought of as a much older man certainly.

 

Hoiw were the fight scenes confused? I assume you mean cinematography yes? There were times, I kind of felt that way too, and others where the fight scenes were fine. I guess that it depended on the fight scene overall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Alan Quartermain Story

 

Originally posted by Dr. MID-Nite

The characters were all fairly interesting, but I don't know much about Quartermain, so I have no idea if the movie portrays him right.

Rob

 

Alan Quartermain was introduced in H. Rider Haggard's "King Solomon's Mines." He was a middle-aged, largely self-educated Englishman who was an expert at tracking and hunting in southern Africa. He made his living taking wealthy gentlemen on safari. Most of his income went to bettering his son's prospects; the boy was studying medicine in London. Despite his expertise as a guide and marksman and rough-and-tumble lifestyle, Quartermain was a pious, humble man who consistently underplayed his heroism in recounting his adventures. Think Indiana Jones without the cocky swagger. Also, despite being a product of colonial era, Quartermain respected the tribesmen he encountered and worked with and treated them as men rather than as pack animals or wild animals.

 

"King Solomon's Mines" is well worth the read. The Stewart Granger movie version is OK but doesn't measure up to the book. Avoid the Lost Ark ripoff version from the 1980s.

 

Haggard continued Quartermain's adventures in the novel "Alan Quartermain" as well as in some short stories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LIGHT SPOILERS HERE

 

The point of the book "Dracula" was to save Mina from vampirism, and they succeeded. Why did she leave John (they never mention this in the movie that I can recall)? If they wanted to use a female literary vampire, why not Lucy Westerna? Her surviving a beheading and a stake would be less a stretch, in my opinion. And Mina seemed unaffected by daylight which should have rendered her near catatonic, and they didn't even touch the religious issues inherent in Stoker's vision of vampirism.

 

***SPOILER*** Just how big is the Nautilas, anyway? Aircraft carrier sized as it first appeared or small enough to fit in an opening that I know isn't more than 60 feet wide. And I know he gets around alot, but was he ever a martial artist in the book? He should have pulled out a gadget and shot the bad guys, or relied on his sword.

 

Jekyll should have placed himself in situations where Hyde's only course of action was to do the right thing, then drank the potion. Hyde's supposed to be a sociopath of the first rank.

 

Sawyer, even if you discount the age discrepancies and the fact that the American government was still firmly isolationist at the time, should have been alot more consistently witty, and had a more pronounced accent. And if he was an agent of the American government, why did he never report in? Where was his backup? It would have worked better if he was working on his own, and lied about the agent thing.

 

***SPOILER*** DaVinci had nothing to do with the engineering of Venice, which is not built on stilts, and why on earth were the plans in the vault in the Bank of England? And why did he need to steal them? A truly military strike would have served his purpose better.

 

***SPOILER*** If you want to frame an invisible guy with a crime, you kill him and leave the body somewhere where it won't get bumped into, cause its invisible. Failing that, you carry around a few handfuls of flour and randomly fling it about.

 

I know he's complicated, but how did he learn to stear the vehicle he stole, much less navigate? And how did Tom learn to drive?

 

***SPOILER*** Photos of the bridge of a ship wouldn't tell you squat about the nature of the engines.

 

If you can invent a machine gun and a tank decades earlier than anyone else, why are you bothering to rob banks? The man should be insanely wealthy in any event!

 

If you're in an insane hurry to get from point A to point B, shouldn't there be some trace of wind in your hair? And shouldn't a floating buoy speed rapidly backwards?

 

If I was the main villain, and I knew about all these people, I would have arranged to confront them one by one and get what I wanted. Putting all your eggs in one basket is pathetic. The entire plot seemed like waaay too much effort for little potential return on the part of the main villain. I know this over-complexity of schemes is a staple of serial villains, but this was not a serial villain. And he should have been not only older, but just way more intelligent. Never run from a sniper across an open field.

 

The main fight scenes were way too choppy. They gave me a headache.

 

I'm not done, but I have to stop now. I need to calm down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A two hour movie only has so much room to work with, and in translating The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen into LXG, there were alot of compromises to be made.

 

The original comic book series had fewer characters and more time to develop. It also didn't have to appeal to a target demographic (or at least not as much) as the film did. Hence, there are no American characters, and the lead is a strong female character with no apparent "extraordinary" abilities. The comic book ran into fewer problems involving public domain, and was able to skirt around it more effectively when it did- compare LXG's "An Invisible Man" to The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen's "Doctor".

 

Actors and actresses can muddle things up as well. Monica Bellucci bowed out of the role of Mina, and while she is not very well known in the States, she would have been great. And if half the rumors about Sean Connery's creative differences with director and screenwriter are true, it's a wonder the movie didn't turn into Alan Quartermain and his Amazing Friends .

 

Take the movie with a grain of salt. While it can't compare to the original story, it can still be alot of fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by The Mad GM

LIGHT SPOILERS HERE

 

The point of the book "Dracula" was to save Mina from vampirism, and they succeeded. Why did she leave John (they never mention this in the movie that I can recall)? If they wanted to use a female literary vampire, why not Lucy Westerna? Her surviving a beheading and a stake would be less a stretch, in my opinion. And Mina seemed unaffected by daylight which should have rendered her near catatonic, and they didn't even touch the religious issues inherent in Stoker's vision of vampirism.

 

LXG

Quartermain: Please tell me this is Harker's wife, bringing a note that he's out sick.

 

Mina: Somewhat of an understatement, I'm afraid. My husband is dead.

 

Re-read Dracula, especally chapter 18. "His power ceases, as does that of all evil things, at the coming of the day. Only at certain times can he have limited freedom. If Ire be not at the place whither he is bound, he can only change himself at noon or at exact sunrise or sunset." No damage from sunlight, no daytime coma, only reduced powers. Also note Mina used a mirror, while Van Helsing said that vampires had no reflection. (I was very sorry to lose that distinctive feature in Mina's writeup.)

 

My explanation? This is an alternate universe, where John died killing Dracula. Mina was neither killed or cured, but remained a living vampire, dhampir, simular to Marvel's Blade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by McCoy

My explanation? This is an alternate universe, where John died killing Dracula. Mina was neither killed or cured, but remained a living vampire, dhampir, simular to Marvel's Blade.

 

The original League of Extraordinary Gentlemen is set in a more industrialized version of England than found in any of the characters' source material. So the screenwriter probably saw no problem in further diverging from the original stories.

 

Mina's character is the most different from the comic, where she is the stubborn leader of the group. She is not only divorced (she goes by Mina Murray), but was "ravaged by a foreigner", and displays the attitudes and behavior of a feminist decades ahead of their time. Mina's character is played with much more subtlety- other than the scarf she constantly wears and the occasional ability to convince others to her way of thinking, she shows no signs of vampirism in the first series. The loss of Belucci and Connery's rumored unwillingness to play "a drug-addled weakling" apparently shifted the lead to Quartermain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nitpicky...

 

Monsieur Gillen wrote

 

That, and (according to both the movie and the comic) Hyde was the killer 'ape' in Poe's Murders in the Rue Morgue, and Poe died several years after the LXG story...

 

Only speaking for the comics, but IIRC Dupin came out of retirement because of the similarities between the recent "Hyde" incidents and the much earlier orangutan incidents from the original Rue Morgue murders.

 

Jekyll would have moved to Paris in LOEG chronology much later than the Rue Morgue incident so the chances are that the original Rue Morgue murders were indeed the work of the crazed ape rather than the shapeshifting Englishman.

 

I'm still waiting for the film LXG (X!) to be released in England. I think, from comments on the board, as an avid fan of the comic series I should approach it as a separate entity entirely in order to give the film a fair hearing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by McCoy

Re-read Dracula, especally chapter 18. "His power ceases, as does that of all evil things, at the coming of the day. Only at certain times can he have limited freedom. If Ire be not at the place whither he is bound, he can only change himself at noon or at exact sunrise or sunset." No damage from sunlight, no daytime coma, only reduced powers. Also note Mina used a mirror, while Van Helsing said that vampires had no reflection. (I was very sorry to lose that distinctive feature in Mina's writeup.)

 

I stand corrected. As I mentioned, this movies' primary good point is that it fosters an urge to reread the originals in an effort to purge the "Hollywood Makeover" versions from my mind. And the religious overtones of damnation were completely edited out. We're getting back to 'vampirism is cool' sort of thing, which is fine if you aren't claiming to have a Victorian literary source.

 

My explanation? This is an alternate universe, where John died killing Dracula. Mina was neither killed or cured, but remained a living vampire, dhampir, simular to Marvel's Blade.

 

But it is just such deviations from the originals, or at the least from an audiences' expectations, that need to be explained. One well delivered sentence would have worked, like "That annoying journalist Stoker got a few things wrong..." or something. Throw me a bone here, people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Nitpicky...

 

Originally posted by "V"

Monsieur Gillen wrote

 

 

 

Only speaking for the comics, but IIRC Dupin came out of retirement because of the similarities between the recent "Hyde" incidents and the much earlier orangutan incidents from the original Rue Morgue murders.

 

Jekyll would have moved to Paris in LOEG chronology much later than the Rue Morgue incident so the chances are that the original Rue Morgue murders were indeed the work of the crazed ape rather than the shapeshifting Englishman.

 

I'm still waiting for the film LXG (X!) to be released in England. I think, from comments on the board, as an avid fan of the comic series I should approach it as a separate entity entirely in order to give the film a fair hearing.

 

Judging from what I have read that is a good bet. I am actually going to see the movie before reading the series. I had to drastically cut my comic book purchases in order to pay for school and food. I eagerly anticipate both...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Darth Sarcastic

LXG: Very Good Movie. Jekyll/Hyde is what the Hulk should've been. One too many

 

Some truth to that. When we first saw Dr. Jekyll, my first thought was "Now, that's what Bruce Banner should have looked like."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...