Rate Van Helsing

[Kai Lord]

I don't find insults, veiled or not, particularly conducive to good discussion. If this is the sort of tone you want to take then I'd rather abandon the conversation altogether.

It was a joke. Like I really believed that you spent days trying to come up with a counterpoint. Come on now.

Maybe I'm deeply misunderstanding this, but I don't see how it's relevant. I'm not talking about the rest of the movie. I'm talking about the action

This merry-go-round began when I said:

Combine the much weaker elements of The Mummy with a freaking Jar Jar Binks character and you get one lame ass adventure film. Face it, the effects *sucked* in the Mummy, the characters were totally unengaging, and when boring characters are chased by really, really bad CGI, you don't get very thrilling action sequences.

And when those elements are lacking, what's the point of even sitting through it? The "performances, script, and direction"? Who cares?

You *can* have good performances in bad action movies. You *can* have a good script but horrible execution of it. You *can* have good directing that is hamstrung by studio interference in the editing room, a budget that's too small, or incompetent stunt men/effects animators.

But failed action sequences will kill an action movie quicker than all of the above.

I'm really not sure why the previous post upset you, I was really just having fun with it, and wasn't trying to offend. We're obviously passionate about movies, but for pretty fundamentally different reasons, even with regard to our tastes that overlap. Oh well, its still fun chatting, but maybe we should put this particular one to rest.

 

[Babette]

You probably havn't given the movie poster a closer look then... the repeating crossbow, the shuriken, the various monsters, that hardly make sense in a single movie...

Bye
Thanee

Not at all.
you can't please everyone..and yet some people still go to watch.

 

[barsoomcore]

But failed action sequences will kill an action movie quicker than all of the above.

Ah. Now I see. But you're not going back far enough. This REALLY started because I listed "performances, script and direction" as three categories The Mummy had done better than Van Helsing. Your counter to that was that since the earlier film's action sequences had been so inferior, it didn't matter if those three categories were better.

I'll grant you that IF the action sequences were worse, the movie would be worse. But they were BETTER, is what I'm trying to say, BECAUSE of the superior performances, script and direction.

Is that clear?

I guess for me the conversation moved beyond a comparision of two films and into a pretty interesting discussion of "what makes a great action movie" -- a subject near and dear to my heart.

On which subject I recommend Ginger Snaps II: Unleashed as a great little low-budget film with good werewolf action and genuine scariness. Better than the first one, even.

 

[Krug]

Average score of 6.05 after 111 votes.. hmm...

 

[reapersaurus]

Without EVEN thinking - Aliens.

With a bit more thought: Alien, The Mummy (w/Brendan Fraser), American Werewolf in London, Starship Troopers, Independence Day, 28 Days Later, Tremors, King Kong (original), Predator, Invasion of the Body Snatchers, The Thing (original and John Carpenter version)...

hmm.
OK.
I'll delve back here for a quick reply (this is all of course IMO):

Alien is not an action monster movie. It's a horror movie that uses a sci-fi villain.
Aliens is closer to a good example. Except it is more like a war movie to me, the same as Starship Troopers & Independance Day.
AFAIK 28 Days Later is a zombie movie - not even close.
Predator barely even qualifies as a monster movie - it's closer to The Ghost & the Darkness than it is Van Helsing.
Invasion... and The Thing are pure psychological dramas that use a sci-fi backdrop.
King Kong is horribly dated and boring by today's standards.
Tremors and The Mummy are probably movies I would say are in the same sub-genre as Van Helsing. But Tremors is much lower-key, and doesn't deliver nearly what VH does. The Mummy I'm torn on which is better - I see good things to both The Mummy and VH.

When I used the term "action monster movie" I had a specific type of movie in my head, and there really aren't many like it. And since _I_ used the phrase, I can have a specific limited definition of it.

 

[Olive]

Saw it yesterday, thought it was ok, even quite good fun. Certainly ramped my 'Oh lordy, Kate Beckinsale is hot' quotient up, which I didn't think could be done. I must see underworld now.

But, yeah I quite enjoyed it. The effects were nice except when they were awful, the acting was average, but good considering the script, but it was kinda fun.

So, yeah, certainly not regretting the cash.

 

[Xune]

I thought this movie was great. It set out to be fun and that is what is was. Nothing more or less.

 

[Napftor]

Saw this over the weekend. Was hoping for another Mummy but I didn't get it. Thought the plot, characters, and Drac's acting all left something to be desired. CGI, of course, was on par for this type of popcorn flick and the music might have been better if it wasn't "on" all the time. Sometimes Silvestri just tries too hard, methinks.

 

[Mistwell]

For what it is worth, Monte Cook says this on his board (http:www.montecook.com):

The summer movie season is getting into high gear. Although most of you won't (or perhaps you already have), I'd recommend giving Van Helsing a pass and going to Troy instead.

 

[Kai Lord]

On which subject I recommend Ginger Snaps II: Unleashed as a great little low-budget film with good werewolf action and genuine scariness. Better than the first one, even.

Thanks for the recommendation. Just checked it out at www.imdb.com and watched the trailer. Looks pretty creepy, but right now I'm taking a possibly permanent sabbatical from unpleasantly violent films, so I probably won't catch it. Looks well done though.

EDIT: Hey barsoomcore, can you direct me to that thread where you, Mog Effloe, and I were discussing John Woo films? I can't remember the thread title and my seach strings are coming up empty. Thanks.