Add a Review

  • The film talks about the known story from Jules Verne novel and previously rendered in the classic by Richard Fleischer . The oceans are no longer safe , many ships have been lost , the sailors have returned to New England's fishing port with tales of vicious giant whale with long horn . A naturist , marine expert named professor Pierre Aronnax (Patrick Dempsey in the role of Paul Lukas) along with a professional whaler named Ned Land (Bryan Brown in the role of Kirk Douglas) and a helper (Adewele Agbaje) join forces in a perilous expedition that attempts to unravel the mysterious sinking ships by an unknown creature . Aboard the ship called Abrahan Lincoln , they go out to investigate the "monster" roaming the seas . They are captured and get thoroughly involved with captain Nemo (Michael Caine in the role of James Mason) and his daughter Mara (Mia Sara) who take an extraordinary adventure underseas in an advanced submarine called Nautilus .

    This fantastic TV movie displays sensational adventures , noisy action , suspense , marvelous scenarios and results to be pretty enjoyable . The great novelist , Jules Verne , described this thrilling tale about a dangerous journey to the darkest depths of the sea with Captain Nemo aboard the Nautilus . Surprise-filled entertainment and with plenty of action on grand scale , including excellent special effects made by means of computer generator and some ship and submarine by maquette or scale model . However , overlong runtime is not boring but turns out to be entertaining and amusing . Memorable and superb casting with Michael Caine plays a magnificent captain Nemo , similar to immortal James Mason ; Patrick Dempsey plays a young Annorax while in Disney version was an old Paul Lukas ; attractive Mia Sara in a new role , she has an excessive romance with Dempsey ; Bryan Brown is an obstinate, stubborn Ned Land just like Kirk Douglas . Atmospheric and vivid score by Mark Snow (X-Files). The television movie was nicely directed by Rod Hardy . Other versions from the classic story for TV are directed by Michael Anderson with Ben Cross and a cartoon movie directed by Arthur Rankin . The motion picture will appeal to fantasy-adventure fans .
  • I recently purchased this movie on DVD from Brazil. As for the DVD, the Portuguese subtitles can not be removed, and the opening titles and end credits have been cut off. The movie (2 part TV mini series) has some really nice aspects to it. For one, Ned Land (Kirk Douglas in the Disney Version) is not the hero. Really Not the Hero! In the Australian cartoon from 1980, Ned Land is an also ran. In this version he is one of several villains. This version also has 2 women on the Nautilus, which is 2 more than in Disney's take. And one is the Daughter of Nemo. Very cool. This version also includes Atlantis, although Atlantis could be more fantastic. Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje is great in this. Usually he plays villains or heavies, but this time he is searching for an opportunity to be a hero. There is also a whole running back story for Pierre Arronax with family issues reminiscent of Edward Malone in The Lost World. It does have its weak moments, but I was impressed with its different take.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I was intrigued when this version came out, as I like Caine and Dempsey and I love Sara . . . watched the first night, missed the second night due to a VCR misfire. Bought the DVD years back and finished it . . . here are my thoughts . . .
    • Was hopeful for Caine as Nemo, but I could never get used to him as Nemo despite his acting chops.
    • Sara is beautiful and poised
    • Dempsey tried, but he was too young to blend with my vision of Aronnax and the script made him into a whiny child. The addition of Aronnax's father made this even worse.
    • Bryan Brown is a good but not a great actor. Ned Land may have been the closest character to the book, but it did not work for me with Brown.


    Too many changes, the script was poor and the director seem to be lost half of the time . . . much like the storyline!

    IMO, a poor attempt . . . not really watchable . . .
  • 1997 saw two TV versions of Jules Verne's classic and I suppose which ever a viewer saw first would forever tarnish their view of the second (Warning: I saw the other version first.) This means neither film was all that bad, neither all that great, and neither threw the Disney version off it's pedestal as being the true film classic (James Mason, Kirk Douglas, and Peter Lorre are a tough act to follow). Personally, I will watch ANYTHING remotely associated with Jules Verne so don't get too upset at my review, I did purchase it for my collection. Yet, compared to the other TV version, this version which features Michael Caine as Captain Nemo is overlong and without style. It boasts a great cast (well cast and decent performances), nice sets, and sufficient special effects, but little imagination. While it lights up like a Christmas tree in production values, it pales in making anything seem interesting. I expect remakes to show me something a little different than what I've seen or read and this whole film tries to base itself on things all too familiar. Dig deeper! Please read my review of 1997's other "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea" for that film had style and some original additions. In previous versions we were awed by James Mason behind his pipe organ like the Phantom of the Nautilus, and Ben Cross chilled us as he stood atop his submarine like a Russian commander with American gun fire bursting around him. In this version Michael Caine's bags under his eyes suggested he was quite tired and made me feel very sleepy as well. 1969's "Captain Nemo and the Underwater City" with a nothing budget and a bland cast (Robert Ryan, Chuck Conners!!!) was more interesting! But it is Jules Verne and can be proud to be the second best made-for-TV version of "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea" to be aired in 1997. I may have been a little harsh, but I think Captain Nemo would have it no other way.
  • Superb acting as far as TV goes although Michael Carries the movie. It is a bit long but the time flies on this one. Certainly watchable for those who have read the book. If you have , yeah probably avoid this one. For me it was way better than I thought given the reviews. True Why Mia is in the movie I have no idea but why not. Gotta have a love interest. Which the poor sod has two.

    Quality: 6/10 Entertainment: 9/10 Re-Playable: 4/10
  • Warning: Spoilers
    To start off it is certainly not as good as Disney's iconic film version that being said it tries to expand on the Jules Verne and Disney tale most of the time badly but there are some interesting concepts explored. The best things about the miniseries is the production values that rival in some ways the Disney version. Very lavish and large sets and loads of extras used in the film. The effects are not that bad I particularly liked the films version of the Nautilus submarine a totally different take and look from Disney's iconic submarine but very cool in my opinion. The cast is exceptional as well with Michael Caine as Nemo and the rest of the cast name actors or professional thespians. The big flaw is of course the script which twists and demonizes Ned Land . The length of the miniseries is noticeably padded to make it a miniseries event hurting the film as well. The dialogue is stilted and stiff hurting the actors deliveries. Despite these shortcomings it's worth a watch for people interested in seeing lavish well mounted science fiction particularly if your a fan of Jules Verne and Michael Caine.
  • kobus66630 November 2002
    WHY?

    Disney already made the definitive cinematic adaptation of Jules Verne's novel in 1954 (needs DVD reissue badly;) there was no reason at all for Hollywood to crank out this awful piece of television fluff. There are so many things wrong with it, one does not know where to begin. A review is hardly even necessary, a rock-bottom vote should speak plenty:

    During the shameless 'creative reimagineering' process they stripped away pretty much everything from the novel save for the basic premise of a rogue skipper named Nemo who has a submarine. Oh, and Nemo is now a cyborg with a metal hand and is "portrayed" by the formerly respectable Michael Caine. A standard multi-ethnic sample of modern teenagers or twentysomethings get on board and there's much Angst and Father/Son conflict and everything goes kablooie in the end with a bunch of cheap video effects. The production design is flat and dull and totally undercooked, but things of course happens very fast. The skewed camera angles, MTV paced cuts and the aforementioned cast of bratty young people all add up to a pre-chewed microwave fluff pastry of a TV movie for the types of young people who were very happy to learn there really was a J. Dawson on board the real Titanic. ("OMG!")

    rating : 1 of 10
  • drummer-320 June 2000
    Why, why, why!!! Can anyone please explain to me why in gods name screen writers always think that they can write a better story than the original author??? I mean, i might accept that you throw in a love story, although the original story were completely minus women, but why rewrite the whole story? About all that was left was the title and the names of the characters, and a very thin plot outline. Why involve the story of Oedipus(ancient Greek story about a young man who kills his father and makes love to his mother)? Why involve Moby Dick? (the admiral was clearly based on Captain Ahab). Why indeed? The most annoying thing about the whole mess is that it is a great opportunity wasted. The film has the right actors, (Michael Caine is great as Nemo) the right special effects, e.t.c.- everything you needed to make a good adaptation of Jules Verne's novel. But the screen writer decided that he could write a much better story than Jules Verne, although he wanted to borrow the title. Sorry. Not good enough. You must rename this movie to something like "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, very loosely based on the original story"
  • maxvaughn3 August 2002
    I was in the seventh grade when I saw this movie and going through a Jules Verne/Robert Louis Stevenson phase. I loved the original movie and when I found out the cast for the remake my face must have just lit up because my parents gave me a blank tape for when it came on. I didn't have a chance to watch it the night it was on, so I saved the movie for a rainy day. What a waste of a rainy day. It started off well, the acting was great and they were trying to hold onto the original message. Then, it kept going and going and soon I wasn't sure what the point was anymore. The ending was the worst part and I found myself taping over it a year later. Oh well, another remake that fell short of the theme.
  • Adventure. Free film adaptation of the adventure novel of the same name by the classic of adventure literature and science fiction genre Jules Verne, which your humble servant did not deign to read. Another picture of my childhood, which I watched on a VHC-cassette, because even then I was not very interested in TV. I remember that the cassette was erased to holes. Still would! This is a sea adventure, especially since it was this picture that opened Jules Verne for me and became the first film adaptation of this novel that I saw. To date, this book has been filmed eight times, including this and the Soviet 1975 with Vladislav Dvorzhetsky as Captain Nemo, not counting parodies and cartoons. I decided to revise and remember my childhood impressions and emotions - and experienced a real thrill and pleasure. And here's my brief opinion - The Amazing Journey of a Dreamer. To my deep regret, there are disadvantages in the picture that spoil the overall impression of the picture, and I will have to name them, not forgetting about the advantages, of course. Now, let me begin. So the pros: 1. Scenario - the basis of the scenario was taken from the book of the same name, replacing and revising many details. Young professor Pierre Aronax, ridiculed by the entire scientific community, and by his father in particular, agrees to participate in the expedition, which should confirm or refute the professor's theory. As a result, Pierre and his companions find themselves on board the Nautilus submarine and get acquainted with its commander, Captain Nemo, who opens up the ocean for them with its beauties and dangers. The script is filled with sea romance, the secrets of the World Ocean, philosophy, the struggle of beliefs, idealism and materialism. The ending is unusual here, but I really like it, because it follows from the picture in the most direct and logical way. I gladly plunged into these dialogues and arguments of the heroes, which instantly surfaced in my memory. The heroes are memorable (especially Pierre and Nemo), and the rest have left their mark on my heart. If you love high-quality scripts and sea adventures, with philosophical reasoning, then you definitely come here. 2. The underwater world - despite the general low cost (we will talk about this below), general plans and graphics allow you to enjoy this majestic beauty of the World Ocean, with its familiar and unknown, and dangerous inhabitants. It was interesting for me to see, because the nearest sea or ocean is located very, very far from me. I will say right away that I am not a fan of the sea and sea romance, but it was this picture that made me buy several books on this topic as a child, with magnificent and colorful illustrations that pulled me in for a very, very long time. Even today, the underwater world from this picture is able to captivate with its beauty. 3. Captain Nemo - he, along with Pierre - are the two pillars on which this picture rests. Nemo, played by the magnificent Michael Caine and Pierre, who, no less charismatically, played by Patrick Dempsey, are both antipodes and reflections of each other, since both are dreamers who are rejected by the world, and on the other - methods, beliefs, and character - completely various. Both admire each other, but mistrust is present throughout the entire timing. It is interesting to observe their conversations, to weigh the arguments of each, it becomes, on whose side, to reflect on what has been said. So the cons: 1. Special effects - cheapness slips, especially on close-ups and in dynamic scenes (documentary underwater filming of scuba divers is used when showing the underwater world), this in the year of release looked to say the least, disgusting, and today this disgrace literally hurts the eye. 2. Reflection - this concerns Pierre and his companions, who cannot decide in any way who Captain Nemo and the crew of the Nautilus are for them, friend or foe? They walk, perform certain actions, then suffer. Yes, you decide? Thank God that this miracle happens in the finale! 3. Captain Nemo - in the book they are Hindu, but in the picture he is white, who fights against British colonialism, helping Indian rebels, and generally follows the book's original source. And knowing this, I am ready to forgive the creators for changing the hero's race. Moreover, it was this picture that opened for me actor Michael Caine - one of the best English actors of the old school, who, despite his considerable age, continues to act in films and delight his fans and fans. A little about the main characters: 1.Pierre Aronax played by Patrick Dempsey is a professor at the University of Paris who is considered an outcast in the scientific community for his theory. He gets a chance to prove it, and he falls into a maelstrom of events that will change him forever. Patrick perfectly played the role of a scientist and a dreamer, ready to commit the most insane act. 2. Captain Nemo, played by Michael Caine, is the commander of the Nautilus submarine, hiding from the world and therefore traveling underwater and becoming a part of it. Scientist, idealist, strong and authoritative leader (who at some moments behaves too softly). Personally, now, at the words "Captain Nemo", I imagine the stern face of Michael Caine, dressed in black. Bravo Michael! Bravo! 3. Cabe Atticus performed by Adewale Akkinuoye-Agbaje - you can hardly pronounce, honestly, in short - a negro who became Pierre's companion. A brave and honest man who faces racism everywhere except Nautilus. Nothing else is remembered, well, except that a good romantic line. Adewale played the hero quite well. Well, and where without the eternal rebel Brian Brown in the role of Ned Land. Well, thanks for the references to Jules Verne, of course. And yet, the two series of the picture in total make up a little over three hours, but this time passes quickly and the very pace of the narration does not let the viewer get bored. As a result, we have a good adventure movie, and even a film adaptation of the classic novel by Jules Verne with an excellent script, good atmosphere, not without a flaw, and with excellent acting work. My rating is 8 out of 10 and my recommendation for viewing!
  • jules verne makes imaginative books, but let's face it, the attempts to move them to the big screen are destined to fail. especially if you're lacking money. jules had such wild ideas that they cannot be produced anywhere but inside the readers mind.

    this particular one has a great cast, but the mini way too long compared to the boredom it arouses. i had to use three days to watch it because i kept falling asleep.

    the special effects look amateurish, and all the intensity from the book has vanished somewhere in the production. all i felt about it was a little claustrophobia.

    a tip to the crew: you should have asked the champ, kevin costner, he could have probably told that it's not automatically an epic if you make it long. you need some events, too, you know.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    On the level of the worst Disney and more like some 1930s action-adventure movie where, say, the guide yells "Look" and points left while the camera cuts to cheap stock footage of a lion running off to the right somewhere.

    There is nothing - not one single thing - worth watching in this movie. Even Caine is bad.

    The effects - one of the reasons one might watch something like this - are below anything you can imagine: a ship floats in the back on an ocean a different color from the "real" ocean in front; the octopus has one rubber tentacle that's dragged around in an aquarium.

    But most - maybe 95% - of the movie is talk. Nemo shows folks around his sub for hours (or days or weeks); the hero lectures some scientists forever. it's just talk and more talk with an occasional shot of a metal sub model.

    Avoid this at any cost. It's not even watchable over pizza when you're reading or doing something else; it's not even close to as good as the worst Godzilla movie; it's worse than "Plan 9" but without the camp.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Michael Caine as Captain Nemo. Michael Caine as an embittered Indian Prince. Since when were Indian Princes blond, blue-eyed, wide-boy cockneys? In the book, Arronax is somewhat like Watson to Nemo's Holmes. In this version he is a flouncing runt who not only sleeps with his Father's young wife but Nemo' daughter too. Where Nemo actually got a daughter from I'll never know. This production is utter excrement. Unwatchable. The production design is unattractive, the casting is wrong, the... I'm bored now. Usually when I encounter a bad film (The BBC Christmas Sherlock Holmes adaptations for example) I like to have a good rant and give everyone involved the ticking off the deserve but with this, I can't.I just can't. It's not that interesting. There isn't even a story, just endless padding. Brian Nelson is obviously an amateur hack who hammered out the screenplay the night before it was due in. We have to blame somebody, though there is nothing in this whole production that is right. OK; lets blame everybody.
  • schwarz-1322 January 2005
    It is like pissing on Jules Vernes Grave. Nemo is just a simple maniac and Michael Cain lost every talent. Pierre Arronax is some kind of bad son who never find a way out of his fathers shadow (Verne never mentioned that. I wonder). Ned Land is a psycho. His only goal is to kill a whale. *sigh* Cabe Attucks is ... not a person created by Verne. And Nemos Daughter is... hey, wait a moment. What the f*** is going on. And where the hell is the whole relationship between Arronax and Nemo? They developed a very fine friendship despite the fact, that Arronax disapproved some actions Nemo undertook.

    20,000 leagues under the sea is still after more the 100 years a fantastic book with a sense of wonder. But the film is simply bullshit.
  • I have nothing against fun and fantasy. But this piece has so little to do with Verne's story that I wonder why the writers didn't just dispense with their token analogies to it and create new characters!

    Yes, Caine's performance is "intense", but also utterly meaningless: his Nemo has none of the subtlety, the pensiveness, the drivenness of James Mason's; the two can no more be compared than Kevin Costner's Robin Hood can be compared to Errol Flynn's, or Marlon Brando's performance as Bligh in Mutiny on the Bounty to Charles Laughton's. The ballyhooed "intensity" of Caine's portrayal resolves itself into very little more than hypermanic nuttiness. (Maybe Caine was trying so hard to avoid being compared to Mason that he couldn't figure any other way to do the role than to toss all subtlety overboard?)

    The character of Attucks, of course, is the "man of action" that the plot needs, thus totally eclipsing Ned Land and making the latter's presence gratuitous. So if the writers were so obsessed with political correctness that they needed to add a nonwhite character, why in the world not just make Ned himself nonwhite?

    And haven't we had enough of upstarts trying to improve on Verne by adding a love interest? Apparently not: this version gives Nemo a daughter, who sails with him on the Nautilus and with whom Aronnax (here depicted as a young sexpot) has an affair.

    Of course, the fact that this Nautilus has a multi-ethnic crew (an idea hinted at, but not developed by, Verne himself) is a nice touch, but one that doesn't take us very far because this version tells us so little about Nemo's and the crew's background. In conclusion, a lot of fine acting talent is wasted on this philosophically confused piece of work.

    Verne has suffered a bewildering number of bad adaptations, but this is ridiculous.
  • Few knew when Jules Verne was writing his futuristic novels in the 19th century that such entertaining page-turners would foretell so much reality. In this 1997 adaptation of Verne's '20,000 Leagues Under the Sea' the screenwriter (Brian Nelson) and director Rod Hardy have elected to pay homage to the scientific aspects of the thriller rather than make the story into a cartoon. And though it is a long song (3 hours), it plays well and introduces some fine special effects and philosophical statements about environmental issues, slavery, feminism, familial relationships, and commitment to dreams. Not bad for a Sci-Fi novel! The cast is solid: Patrick Dempsey makes a wholesome, handsome Pierre Arronax, Bryan Brown as the driven sailor Ned Land, Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje is excellent as Cabe Attucks (nice to see this fine actor in a role far different than the one he played on the TV series 'Oz'), John Bach is the arrogant father Thierry Arronax, and Mia Sara serves up the beefed up role of Mara nicely. But the submarine mysterious ship Nautilus surfaces or sinks at the hands of Captain Nemo and while Michael Caine isn't the embodiment of evil we so often see, he finds the soul of the driven scientist whose goal is to protect the 'surface' he has forsaken to scuttle the seas in search of ways to stop future earthquakes topside.

    Originally made as a mini-series for television in 1997, the movie for sails along, holding our attention and fascination for the full three hours, not only because we care about the characters, but also because we are treated to some spectacular underwater sequences and a Nautilus that is as elegant a vessel as Verne described. And yes, Captain Nemo still plays the pipe organ as part of the musical score. The script gets a bit on the corny side, especially in the areas of father son relationships, and the unnecessary spin on romances that seem to be de rigueur in keeping an audiences attention. But in the end this is an entertaining interpretation of the Jules Verne classic that still stimulates our thinking and challenges our concepts of environmental concerns. Grady Harp
  • We gave this thing forty minutes to spark our interest. The acting is wooden,and the computerized special effects are laughable, obvious, and have that "slapped on" feeling and look. We couldn't even stand to finish it skipping whole chapters. This can't possibly be all that faithful a telling of this story.

    McDreamy is McCrappy, Bryan Brown is bad, and Michael Caine HAS to be embarrassed. The ship isn't even all that imaginative, the whales look fake, and by the time the first ship is attacked, we were rooting for a sinking.

    Avoid this movie like the flotsam it is.
  • I read the book years ago and I love it so much that I watched the film version made in 1954 and it was great. Yesterday, I convinced some friends to watch this version from 1997, because the acting was promising and I was expecting nicer special effects than those made in 1954. Well, I have to say that RTL2 chose the worst movie they could have ever chosen for New Years Eve. These guys trying to be original changed the original story to a really boring story, full with inconsistencies and bad acting. Save your time and angriness and don't watch this film, try better to get the version from 1954 which won 2 Oscars and is really based on the novel from Jules Verne.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Anyone with an axe to grind against the delightful 1950's version starring James Mason need only look at this remake from 40 years later to see how good it was for its time.

    Here, Nemo is played by the usually excellent Micheal Caine. And it is clear that he only came along for the ride, donating his name in the process. He leads a cast of stylishly young, second-division lightweights through a script with more wobbles than a jellyfish.

    What can I say? The acting is stultified and wooden. The directing is amateurish. And as to the set-pieces - well, they are the worst advertisement for CGI presentation I have ever seen. Anyone who thinks this can be done believably on the cheap needs to think again. There's no substitute for good solid metal and wood.

    It is not enough to say that it was 'made for TV' as if that were an excuse for poor quality. An awful lot of people watch telly, and pay handsome for the pleasure. Yet this wretched piece of vacuosity stumbled on for longer than, say - 'Schinder's List'.

    I don't know if it had greater fidelity to Jules Verne's novel or not; what I do know is that it was an absolute travesty of entertainment for which Mr Caine should be suitably ashamed. Actors of his calibre and reputation have a duty to those who made them rich when they were young, ensuring that any production which solicits their name bears the stamp of quality the viewing public deserve, and not just 'take the money and run'.
  • Could this film have been made in the 50s? Was the black guy in Jules Vernes novel? I don't think so, but then it's been a while since I read the Classics Illustrated version of this one. The special effects are outstanding, in fact gives me even more incentive to go for that big screen TV I keep trying to buy. This one is movie theater material.....the romantic interests are there--still going white on white, colored on colored...but we can't have everything at once. The ugly father's mistress plants one on his son, but that's all in the background.

    The primary star here is the submarine and Nemo, looking just like the funny book. We never find out why he is the 'man without a country', self-exiled, but it seems to have cost him his wife. The fellow obsessed with freedom and his redundant escape attempts is a hunk, and his brainlessness is well acted.

    I don't think he is of the same cut as the brutal, humiliating father though. Verne must have had some parental issues, as they say. The father hates the son cause he lost his wife in childbirth.

    There was some attempt to bring in Civil War issues as well, but they are cloudy. The suspense is wonderful, as Nemo and crew attempt to bring the sub up from under the ice. As I watched the diving bells (so up to date, yet written in 1899) and the divers fighting the giant squid (in the same costume practically as I saw in today's Boston Globe), I couldn't help but think of the brave divers who are about to risk their lives down in that murky, human-hostile area south of Nantucket....seeking to answer the question of why yet another jet went down.

    The age-old but new questions are well demonstrated in this movie: What price glory...as the pseudo-scientist/father steals the sub in order to board the submarine first? How strong is the drive for freedom in men's souls? Of course, some of us have to have the bars clang shut and the leg-irons on before we understand how much freedom we've lost.

    But the REAL question: Who was that hunky black guy and why haven't we seen him in other movies since? He was a good actor and beautiful!!!

    And great going, Michael the acting is right on!!!
  • What do you do with adventure novels from a great writer, with some science fiction incorporated, but are mostly filled with science facts, about nature and geography? In this instance you skip a simple servant and add a black giant. You try to incorporate as much of the adventure which can be found in the novel. For some female addition, you add a lost girl and a daughter for the captain. You change a lead-captain from a harsh man into a cruel man. Does this make for a entertaining movie? Yes. Is it necessary? NO . Jules Verne's novels are good enough as they are.
  • racerx7014 September 2005
    I caught this on ABC back in 1997 and thoroughly enjoyed it for what is was... another version of Jules Verne's classic story. Yes, there were liberties taken (Nemo having a daughter for example), but then again, the Disney version (another one of my favorites), is thought of as the most accurate telling (it isn't). Michael Caine is well cast as Captain Nemo, bringing a quiet dignity to the role. Another reviewer had said he looked tired and sleepy, but it looks more to me like he was playing Nemo with a weariness of hiding from the world and a profound sense of loneliness (of having somewhat of an intellectual equal to speak with, etc.), which explains his warmth toward the young Arronax. Patrick Dempsey and the rest of the cast are good as well, with Bryan Brown making a very UNlikeable Ned Land. You understand his motivation, however. Considering this was made for TV, the effects are surprisingly good, but some of the set pieces are obvious. Some political correctness rears its ugly head, but for the most part it's not that bad. The score by Mark Snow (of X Files fame) is superb and gives this a more film like feel, rather than a TV mini-series. I was lucky enough to score a copy of this on VHS (long out of print and VERY hard to find), and would love to see it released on DVD in the US market. The Richard Crenna version from the same year has been, why not this one? In all, if you find this anywhere, give it a look...

    (Edit 5-1-06) FINALLY, it IS out on DVD! The transfer is spectacular in quality, and anybody contemplating purchasing it should do so, now!
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I didn't know what to expect about this TV Mini-series clocking in at about 3hrs "The beginning of the edition it stated based on Jules Verne's Novel" This film followed Captain Nemo and the crew of the Nautilus from the waves to their end destination the lost city of Atlantis. If you forget about the Novel and forget about the previous versions you actually have a decent mini-series. The production values of both the Nautilus and the surrounding structure seems to blend in nice, and the action scenes fit the film.

    Once again you have Women on the ship, which is due to the political correctness of our times, and also a "Black" passenger as one of Professor Aronax's entourage. Mia Sara plays Captain Nemo's daughter with spunk, and she apparently has a side cabin to keep her away from the crew.

    Professor Araonax is portrayed by a young Patrick Dempsey who apparently has a volatile relationship with his father who is obviously a money grubbing opportunist.

    I liked this min-series and thought it had quite a lot of merit.

    (**1/2 out of ****) Note: Nothing will ever equal the 1954 Version starring; James Mason, Kirk Douglas, and Peter Lorre and should they even try?
  • This version of "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea" is by far the best version. Michael Caine is an excellent Captain Nemo and Brian Nelson made Pierre Arronax into an interesting and complex character. Pierre, who is constantly under the criticism of his father, searches for the sea monster and ends up on board the Nautilus. The submarine is an excellent design - it is beautiful and yet menacing and has plenty of space for its occupants. (The Model Smiths did a superior job on the models for this film.) The story follows some of the same lines as Verne, with the exception of depth to the characters and the addition of characters to add to the plot. This movie is definitely a "must see"!!
  • klingen5715 June 2006
    Warning: Spoilers
    When first viewing the movie, you think, this is not following the book! As you continue to watch, though, you realize the lay of the land.

    The story is being told by Asst. Professor Pierre Arronax and takes place in 1867 New York, just as in the book. But the differences between the book and this TV film are similar and many as you discover that the story is being told by Pierre who later shares his recounting with Jules Verne!

    Jules Verne, writing a true story but fictionalizing it because who would believe it to be true? Awesome concept!

    The special effects are noticeable and could be called cheesy but who cares? All of the actors have portrayed their characters well and should not be compared with Disney's version as the two stories are nothing alike.

    I highly recommend this movie for it's uniqueness. Yes, it is long due to it having been a TV movie so try watching it in shorter increments and it should make for more enjoyable viewing.
An error has occured. Please try again.