Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

*** Official VAN HELSING Discussion Thread


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
255 replies to this topic

#41 of 256 OFFLINE   Nick Sievers

Nick Sievers

    Producer



  • 3,481 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 01 2000

Posted May 06 2004 - 03:59 PM

Quote:
and its pretty damn ignorant that in the commercials they are referring to Frankenstein's monster as Frankenstein.

They actually do refer it correctly in the film, but the monster is beyond ridiculous. Seeing it swing down 500ft on a cable like a freakin Tarzan is just to much to bear.

Did anyone else who saw it think 'Lord of the Rings' when they were following the map during the Coach ride?
Top 10 Film Lists: 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004
Film Lists: 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005

#42 of 256 OFFLINE   Scott Weinberg

Scott Weinberg

    Lead Actor



  • 7,482 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 03 2000

Posted May 06 2004 - 06:54 PM

Here's my review.

I hope you guys like it more than I did.

#43 of 256 OFFLINE   Adam_S

Adam_S

    Producer



  • 6,119 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 2001

Posted May 06 2004 - 10:21 PM

I gotta say that this film was written at a flash gordon serial level with a completely straight face. And therin lies the problem. Even Lucas, with Star Wars (later titled Ep IV) didn't write at a Flash Gordon. Later, Lawrence Kasden would show what was possible (with Raiders of the Lost Ark and Empire Strikes back) when there is GREAT writing involved. Genius is possible when you combine the very high and very low, it's hard, but possible. Van helsing took the route of low aesthetics and low writing. Visually it took the high road, but that doesn't help the ludicrous plot and story. Wow, it took them almost a month to ride to Budapest for no purpose and then they get back to translyvania in half a day? Jeez.

you can't just write like a nine year old on a sugar high, they can have great ideas (I know personally from being in that same position knowles talks about), but they don't have the vocabularly of world experience to make it relevant or meaningful to a wider demographic.

Adam
 

#44 of 256 OFFLINE   Stevan Lay

Stevan Lay

    Second Unit



  • 485 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 05 2000

Posted May 06 2004 - 10:24 PM

Quote:
I admit it. If I was 11, I'd probably think this was going to be the best movie ever, and would proclaim it as such after seeing it.
I took my 9, 11 and 16 year-old cousins to watch Van Helsing and their reaction wasn't as glowing as it was for LXG Posted Image

Predictable was the consensus amongst us all.

#45 of 256 OFFLINE   JonZ

JonZ

    Lead Actor



  • 7,793 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 28 1998

Posted May 07 2004 - 02:00 AM

Man, this is a bad review

http://movie-reviews....n_helsing.html

#46 of 256 OFFLINE   john doran

john doran

    Screenwriter



  • 1,326 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 24 2002

Posted May 07 2004 - 02:16 AM

sounds like the review is more entertaining than the movie.

Quote:
Richard Roxburgh portrays Dracula as a cross between Tinkerbell and his frothing-at-the-mouth Duke in Moulin Rouge. The count would have been better served had the filmmakers violated Bela Lugosi's grave and propped up the dead actor's corpse.
what an awesome line.
 fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt

#47 of 256 OFFLINE   Jordan_E

Jordan_E

    Screenwriter



  • 2,233 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 03 2002

Posted May 07 2004 - 02:16 AM

Well, with these reviews coming in, and gas prices where they are, this isn't even worth it for me to drive to the local theater for the matinee. $6.25 + the prices of gas to get there = DVD.
And you believe, at heart, everyone's a killer...

#48 of 256 OFFLINE   Craig S

Craig S

    Producer



  • 5,514 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 04 2000
  • Real Name:Craig Seanor
  • LocationLeague City, Texas

Posted May 07 2004 - 05:26 AM

Quote:
what an awesome line.

It must be an awesome line, considering that's the third time it's been quoted in this thread... Posted Image

Roger Ebert is bucking the trend - he liked it:

http://www.suntimes.....elsing07f.html

Three truths about movies, as noted by Roger Ebert:

 

* It's not what a movie is about, it's how it is about it.

* No good movie is too long, and no bad movie is short enough.

* No good movie is depressing, all bad movies are depressing.


#49 of 256 OFFLINE   Patrick Sun

Patrick Sun

    Studio Mogul



  • 37,895 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 30 1999

Posted May 07 2004 - 05:59 AM

I'm going into this film with my expectation ratcheted down severely...
"Jee-sus, it's like Iwo Jima out there" - Roger Sterling on "Mad Men"
Patcave | 2006 Films | 2007 Films | Flickr | Comic-Con 2012 | Dragon*Con 2012

#50 of 256 OFFLINE   Chuck Mayer

Chuck Mayer

    Lead Actor



  • 7,996 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 06 2001
  • Real Name:Chuck Mayer
  • LocationNorthern Virginia

Posted May 07 2004 - 06:03 AM

[Newt]It won't make any difference.[/Newt]
Hey buddy...did you just see a real bright light?

#51 of 256 OFFLINE   Aaron Garman

Aaron Garman

    Second Unit



  • 382 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 23 2001

Posted May 07 2004 - 06:23 AM

Let's face it, what could we really expect out of this movie based on the trailers and the fact that it is coming from Sommers? For what it was, this film was great. I had so much fun watching, and it reminded me why going to the movies can be fun. It's campy, cheesy cinema at its best. It was also really really loud! I can't wait to this one again.

AJG
"It's been my lifelong ambition to be a movie usher, and I have failed, as far as I am concerned" - Bob Dylan

#52 of 256 OFFLINE   Nick Sievers

Nick Sievers

    Producer



  • 3,481 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 01 2000

Posted May 07 2004 - 09:28 AM

Quote:
It was also really really loud!

I noticed this as well, but I wouldn't say it as a good thing.
Top 10 Film Lists: 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004
Film Lists: 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005

#53 of 256 OFFLINE   RobertR

RobertR

    Lead Actor



  • 9,539 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 19 1998

Posted May 07 2004 - 09:40 AM

Quote:
It was also really really loud!
So does that mean that when the movie comes out on DVD, we'll see posts from guys going goo-gaw over the surround and subwoofer effects while saying they couldn't care less about the story, acting, etc.? Posted Image

#54 of 256 OFFLINE   Nick Sievers

Nick Sievers

    Producer



  • 3,481 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 01 2000

Posted May 07 2004 - 09:55 AM

I had the same thoughts after I got out of the cinema, Robert. Posted Image
Top 10 Film Lists: 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004
Film Lists: 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005

#55 of 256 OFFLINE   Norm

Norm

    Screenwriter



  • 2,015 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 01 1998
  • Real Name:Norm

Posted May 07 2004 - 10:29 AM

I liked DR alot! But VH was the same Charlie's Angels over the top crap! I really thought Sommers had promise after seeing DR, the Mummy was ok, M2 was a mistep but VH was a waste!

#56 of 256 OFFLINE   Steve_Tk

Steve_Tk

    Screenwriter



  • 2,833 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 30 2002

Posted May 07 2004 - 10:33 AM

What has happened to ILM? LOTR raised the bar and ILM just said screw that and continue to make terrible looking CGI.

#57 of 256 OFFLINE   Nick Sievers

Nick Sievers

    Producer



  • 3,481 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 01 2000

Posted May 07 2004 - 10:44 AM

I noticed in the credits that WETA Digital did some of the work as well.
Top 10 Film Lists: 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004
Film Lists: 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005

#58 of 256 OFFLINE   Neil S. Bulk

Neil S. Bulk

    Screenwriter



  • 1,256 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 13 1999

Posted May 07 2004 - 10:53 AM

Quote:
this isn't even worth it for me to drive to the local theater for the matinee. $6.25 + the prices of gas to get there = DVD.
Rent it. Don't give in to the studios. This film is 100% pure junk. It's not scary, it's not exciting, it's not entertaining. It is really loud, really dumb and really piss poor and the less money it makes, the more the studios may realize that audiences may not be as dumb as they think.

As for the whole "if you're 12 you'll like it" argument, what about films like The Adventures of Robin Hood, Star Wars or Raiders of the Lost Ark? They never talked down to there audience and that's why they are such beloved classics. Kids enjoy them as much as adults do. They are genuine crowd pleasers. I'm not saying every film has to be as good as those classics, but you'd think with everything being released nowadays there might be one or two. But no, all we seem to get now is this video game inspired crap designed for every teen with an attention span of 2 minutes or less. I expect better than this crap. I will not be pandered to.

Thankfully my viewing was free and only one other person was there. We could yell at the screen and laugh at this movie as much as possible. Paying money and then having to watch it siliently with a crowd must make this movie even more intolerable.

Neil

#59 of 256 OFFLINE   Norm

Norm

    Screenwriter



  • 2,015 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 01 1998
  • Real Name:Norm

Posted May 07 2004 - 11:05 AM

I sure wish I didn't pay for it! I'm so tired of supporting this kind of crap! I have been skipping these type of movies over the past year, I just wish I had followed my instinct this time.

#60 of 256 OFFLINE   Cameron Yee

Cameron Yee

    Executive Producer



  • 10,657 posts
  • Join Date: May 09 2002
  • Real Name:Cameron Yee
  • LocationSince 2006

Posted May 07 2004 - 11:08 AM

Maybe this will be better?

http://www.amazon.co....702979-0971307
One thing leads to another at cameronyee.com


Back to Movies (Theatrical)



Forum Nav Content I Follow