Brad's Reviews > The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Vol. 2

The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Vol. 2 by Alan Moore
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
1022982
's review
Jan 01, 11

Read from December 28, 2010 to January 01, 2011

I don't know why, but I don't much care to write a review, yet I feel compelled to do so. And because of that you get point form adapted from a discussion I've been having about the comic while reading it.

•One of my favourite parts of League of Extraordinary Gentlemen Vol 2 are Kevin O'Neill's pencils. The way he exaggerates features through understatement is difficult to describe, but there is a sort of Victorian reality that he captures that is really effective. Another cool bit of pencilling is when O'Neill places the League in the background and foregrounds the people of England, fleeing from the cities, getting drunk in alleys, whatever. It creates a sense of the people surrounding Alan Moore's anti-heroes, which isn't something you always get in comic books.

•There is a cool cameo from Dr. Moreau and all his "Moreauvians" (thanks for the new word, Amber), all of whom live in a forest. The art is bizarre, almost comical, and I had trouble getting into it to begin with. It turned out well though, and I think it really suited the general aesthetic. And there were plenty of extra references to children's lit that I liked.

•Big fan of Wilhelmina Harker in the second volume. I see now that Moore is trying to show us a strong woman in a Victorian England which completely frowns on strength in a woman. Quartermain's control begins to slip, and it is banished entirely once Mina takes him to bed. Mina is in control of who she and Quartermain are.

•I liked the first sex scene in the Inn, but I didn't care much for the outdoor sex scene that is intruded upon by the Moreauvians. Together they show an interesting shift back and forth between Mina in control and Quartermain trying to regain the control he's lost, and it is nice to see that his attempt to regain control is Moreauvians (I just like hearing that name in my head).

SPOILER ALERT (look away)
•The rape(s). What to say? I wasn't convinced that Griffin actually raped Mina, although there seems to be some implication of that in her diary response after the Invisible Man's attack, but since the only violation from Griffin we actually see is Mina's severe beating, the question of rape remains up in the air. Interesting, then, that her rape (if that is indeed what it was) is withheld, but we are given a clear view of Hyde raping Griffin for revenge. It is a unsavoury piece typical of Alan Moore’s work, His heroes are nowhere near as heroic as heroes are supposed to be. And even calling them anti-heroes seems too kind. They are villains whom we delude ourselves into thinking are heroic; they’re not heroes.
SPOILER OVER

•Volume 2 is much better than Volume 1.

•I wonder if any of those who died are actually dead. I doubt it. It is a comic book after all, and there was much talk amongst the characters about staged deaths. A little foreshadowing, I've no doubt.

•I love Nemo. Mina's my favourite. And Quartermain is my least favourite, but I appreciate the role he plays. And Griffin and Hyde fascinate me.

•Avoid this movie at all costs. It is utter crap. Such a shame that it will likely be the last movie Sean Connery ever makes.

•The Almanac contains tons of interesting stuff, but it is boring. Seriously boring. Sleep inducing, in fact.

That’s it for my lazy list. Hope you enjoyed it.
10 likes · likeflag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Vol. 2.
sign in »

Comments (showing 1-5 of 5) (5 new)

dateDown_arrow    newest »

message 1: by Scribble (new)

Scribble Orca Brad, my only exposure to this work was via the movie (I'm assuming there's only one, because that's all I've seen).

Would you elaborate on what should have been in the movie and wasn't and why it is crap? It only encompassed Vol 1, correct? So maybe a discussion on Vol 2's review isn't appropriate. But I am curious.


Amber Tucker A second vote for BORING on the Almanac. A lot of work must have gone into it, but it's so bloody long. More comic, less Almanac, please. (Laziness for the win.)

I agree about (most things, but especially) O'Neill's pencil work. I hadn't fully appreciated that till you brought my attention to it. It's like he's trying to capture their stiff propriety and their terror as "real" human beings at the same time. The smattering of comments denigrating the British-in-general indicate the same thing.

And you're entirely welcome for the word.


Brad G N wrote: "Would you elaborate on what should have been in the movie and wasn't and why it is crap? It only encompassed Vol 1, correct? ..."

The movie was barely like Vol 1. and nothing like Vol 2. Quartermain in the movie was a Sean Connery style hero (fitting since Sean played him), even though his graphic novel counterpart is an opium-addled, control freak, who does very little to further any of the adventures the League find themselves in.


Brad Amber wrote: "A second vote for BORING on the Almanac. A lot of work must have gone into it, but it's so bloody long. More comic, less Almanac, please. (Laziness for the win.)

I agree about (most things, but es..."


All I can say is "Ugh!" to the almanac. Too clever by half. Too boring to the fifth power.


Amanda Leon The Almanac could have been cool but you're right, it was so dull! I think if they framed it differently and used a different tone, it could have been cool.


back to top