I'm not knocking Douglas, but for me James Mason made this movie into what it is. His dialogue with the professor was done to perfection and many a new actor would do well to watch and learn how a truly great actor develops a character.
I just had to get this of my chest, as I don't feel James Mason gets the credit he really deserves. Ok Britain has many great actors over the years but Mason name belongs right up there. To give you some idea of how good he is, find me one movie that James Mason is in and were he gives a sloppy half arsed performance……
By the way this is fantastic movie and I really enjoyed it.
I agree 100%. Many pick the squid scene as the best in the movie. But for me, the most gripping scene occurs when Mason, playing the Bach Toccata and Fugue full of dissonances (after playing it perfectly earlier in the movie), waits for the bell to ring, signalling a warship is moving out--whereupon, he stoically but intensely walks to his post and accelerates his way into the warship, the final moment just before impact showing a closeup of his eye looking paranoid yet seeringly under control. It doesn't get better than this.
My second favorite scene is Mason's death scene, complete with open eyes (again, those eyes). But this scene is intercut with other images, so his dying is prolonged, allowing him to play out an agonizing death and evoking pathos from the viewer despite feeling he had it coming.
I disagree with the Academy that he was nominated Best Actor for A Star is Born. As good as he was in that movie, he was overshadowed by Judy Garland, whereas he didn't play Capt. Nemo here, he WAS Capt. Nemo. And yet, it's still to his credit that everyone else shined in that marvelous film, truly the Best of 1954 (it wasn't even nominated).
I fear the day Disney will try to make a sequel or remake of it, overrun with state-of-the-art CGI and little else. Walt Diney himself, who disdained sequels, knew all the special effects are for nothing if you don't have a gripping story with top-flight acting and directing--all of which 20,000 Leagues has.
One more thing: If you're into making your own copies of the movies you see, don't copy the made-for-TV version, which is the one they always show when it's televised. The scene where the Nautilus attacks the warship leaving the prison camp is chopped to pieces and loses all its power.
Also among favorite scenes: two speeches of Nemo, taken directly from the novel, in which he talks about the freedom he's found under the seas. Beautiful speeches, beautifully rendered by Mason.
And while I too am a fan of Kirk Douglas (tho not of his performance in this film, which I thought was awful), I can't sympathize with the reviewer in this thread who suggests Douglas could have played Nemo as well as, or better than, Mason. I find that a nutty opinion.
Oh, I know: that TV edition crops out the huge close-up of Nemo's eye just before the Nautilus strikes the warship, and also edits out Nemo's eyes-wide-open-and-crazed death scene, to mention but two more idiotic changes.
No one can render Nemo's lines like Mason. It is such a shame Disney didn't push for a Best Supporting Oscar nod for him, I'd think he'd be a shoo-in. But his is a lead role and the Academy thought better of his A Star is Born turn.
I agree: that whole sequence, from Nemo's tortured rendition of Bach's Toccata and Fugue to the "power of hate" dialogue, is unsurpassed.
Douglas as Nemo?! Not a chance!! But I wouldn't put it past the remake-happy dolts running Disney these days that a reamke wouldn't be in the offing. I can just see those minds working now: "Hey, we've got state-of-the-art CGI now, we can improve on the special effects of that squid fight!" Yeah, right! If that's all this film represented, you'd think it would have become the classic it is? (question asked of those dolts). The film has intelligence of script, direction and acting that surpass all the technical stuff. You cannot duplicate all that. And if you think you have, then you lack one final ingredient--heart: it would look all-mechanical and by-the-numbers.
I agree that the studio should have pushed for a Best Actor nomination for James Mason. Sadly, I'm sure that such a nomination would have been soundly ignored.
Good Science-Fiction on film is rare enough now; half a century ago, it was rarer still. And the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has seldom recognized even the best of the genre with more than an occasional nod at the Special Effects. Not the acting, not the directing, not the film as a whole; just — once in a while — the Special Effects.
That's why a performance on the level that James Mason always gave to his roles was ignored.
*** Have you noticed that, in Shakespeare's day, soothsayers said the sooth, the whole sooth, and nothing but the sooth? ***
I agree that Mason was the standout performance in this movie, and he deserves a lot of credit for his performance.
And while Douglas did okay as the rather buffoonish Ned Land, it's my least favourite Kirk Douglas performance (and I'm a huge fan of his). I don't think Douglas treated this film particularly seriously, and it shows in his less than serious performance. I can't blame him to be honest. If I were playing the hero in a Disney kids adventure film, I'd problably ham it up and lark about a bit as well (Singing with a Seal. What the hell was that about? LOL).
The great thing about Douglas' acting range though though, is that he could have easily have played Nemo as well as, or better than Mason. Nemo is typical of the dark, conflicted characters that Douglas played best. Douglas must have know Nemo was the juiciest role and the role that would suit his strengths best. And Kirk Douglas was known to agressively seek the best/darkest roles in movies. So I'm convinced he only took the role of Ned Land because he wasn't really interested in doing yet another "intense" role of serious acting, which Nemo would have been. I think Douglas saw this film as a vacation from serious acting, so left the role of Nemo to someone else.
Andit worked out for the best in the end. Because Mason gave a wonderful performance, one of his best, audiences get to see a more funny and relaxed Douglas than usual, and we still get a classic movie.
Looking at their performances, I felt that Ned was meant to symbolize everything that Nemo despised about humanity. Ned does save Nemo's life in the squid fight but he then is responsible for the events leading to Nemo's death and destruction of his work by leaving the message with the location of the island.
I thought it might have been a subtle message to the film that we can all be as noble as Nemo is, even an oaf like Ned!
"And with that sentence you've just lost the right to even talk to me, now BACK OFF!"
In Mason's biography by Sheridan Morley, Richard Fleischer the director is quoted as saying that Mason was the most honest actor he ever worked with - in the sense that nothing he ever did on screen was forced or fake. It's a shame that he is underappreciated because he is a wonderfully subtle actor very adept at bringing out the complexities of his characters. Nobody - sorry, not even Douglas whom I have admired in other roles as well - could do a part like Mason.
The great thing about Douglas' acting range though, is that he could have easily have played Nemo as well as, or better than Mason. Nemo is typical of the dark, conflicted characters that Douglas played best. Douglas must have know Nemo was the juiciest role and the role that would suit his strengths best. And Kirk Douglas was known to aggressively seek the best/darkest roles in movies. So I'm convinced he only took the role of Ned Land because he wasn't really interested in doing yet another "intense" role of serious acting, which Nemo would have been. I think Douglas saw this film as a vacation from serious acting,
I agree; I can't believe these people on this thread who say Douglas couldn't pull of the Nemo role. Seriously? Douglas would've nailed it, which isn't to take anything away from Mason's excellent portrayal.
Plus, notice that Kirk Douglas got top billing as the credits rolled. Let's not forget Mason was very good in "Journey to the Center of the Earth" as well. I was very surprised he wasn't even nominated for either film. BTW, the special edition DVD of 20,000 Leagues has a bonus disc that's first rate.
Who gets top billing often has nothing to do with the actor's role in a film, but is determined by what kind of a deal his agent can make with the producers/studio. Often the studio will offer top or special billing in exchange for reduced salary demands, and the agent accepts this since billing goes a long way in determining the career path and increased future salary of an actor.
This thread is, however, about the wonderful actor James Mason who brought Capt. Nemo alive, and his wonderful voice alone justified his casting. With that resonance, a faint Welsh burr, and wonderful diction and pacing, he was one of the few actors as great to hear as to see. His acting brought out the subtle blend of genius and madman in Nemo. The role could easily have been overplayed, which is what most actors would have done, but Mr. Mason knew exactly where the heart of Nemo lies: in the conflicted conscience of mankind. This was a role for a gourmet, not a gormand.
Some have very unkindly labeled this a 'childrens' film' but it certainly was never that, any more than was the novel a 'childrens' book.' This was and is a film directed at adults with enough cagy staging (hence Esmeralda, the seal) to keep children engaged and thus parents happy. Not everything Disney produced was for children, and 20,000 Leagues was the high point --the acme-- of their adult fare -- long before that adjective became sullied as it is today.
Mason was iconic in this role and it's hard to imagine anyone playing it better anytime soon. His performance in this completely dwarfs the later "sequel" made in 1960, Mysterious Island. Herbert Lom is solid, but it's like choosing Brian Cox over Anthony Hopkins for the role of Hannibal Lector. Cox and Lom are both good actors, but Hopkins and Mason created icons. There is only one Captain Nemo and his name is James Mason.
Did anyone catch the episode of Count Duckula called 'Lost City of Antlantis'? A clear parody of Mason's character and voice are done by David Jason (very funnily too). Captain Meno and the Tortilous for example.
With the exception of the person who pointed out the best actor was the Nautilus, it appears that everyone agrees: James Mason makes this movie. If they were to remake it, I cannot think of anyone you could get to play the role with such fierce and passionate acting as Mason did.
To get back to the post that started all this, No, I can't give you a single example of a bad or even mediocre performance by James Mason. And Yes, he made this film. As he made North By Northwest, The Verdict, The Desert Fox, and a lot of other great films.
As for Douglas, I agree it was far from being his best performance, and I agree that he failed to take the film seriously. He too has done some great acting in many movies, but this isn't one of them (Lonely Are the Brave and Paths of Glory come to mind). Part of the problem, however, is the way the role of Ned was written for this film. I wish the writer thereof had based his Ned Land more squarely on the novel, in which Ned is a much more dignified character.
I can't figure Douglas' top billing except that he must have been a bigger name and better known at that time. You know the film's "logo" in which Douglas as Ned and Mason as Nemo are shown back-to-back. Have you noticed that Douglas' head is a couple of sizes bigger than Mason's? Douglas' top billing is ridiculous because Ned is not even the second most prominent character in the story; Arronax is. And Paul Lukas' performance in this film is certainly far superior to Douglas'.