Van Helsing

[Banshee16]

I just saw Van Helsing and I can tell you it was pretty sweet. The action and special effects were great, just as expected. The story and performances were pretty solid for an action movie, the directing was good but left some plot holes and misunderstandings for me (the moon phases are kind of weird on these movie).

The monster deserve special notice because they were outsanding. Mr. Hyde (minor appearance around the beginning) is so much better than the 'League of...' Hyde. The Werewolves look and fight just like World of Darkness Garous in Crinos form, and that's good...very good. The Frankenstein monster is in my own view a very original and fresh new image for this classical monster. Dracula and her brides are cool and all...but I kind of prefer WoD-sort-of vampires who don't change into battle modes.

I was pretty suprised when I saw Dave Wenham (Faramir) in the role of a non-heroic bookwormish friar. He's the movie's comic relief and he does a good job at it, I found it particularly interesting to watch Wenham in such a different role from his LoTR role.

The only thing I disliked was the ending...but I won't tell you about that.

Oh yeah and Kate Beckinsale is freakin' hot! But I guess you've already noticed that.

As much as I wanted to like this movie, I walked out of there realizing I'd just lost 2 hours I'll never get back, and spent $20 to boot. This was as bad as the D&D movie or Weekend and Bernie's 2.

I guess everyone has their own tastes. It looks like they blew their budget on special effects, which weren't even that good, then checked the story at the door.

Banshee

 

[gregweller]

I haven't seen it yet--I'm looking forward to seeing it Sunday. Meanwhile, I'm keeping myself amused by reading all the bad reviews. My favorites are the ones complaining that the makers of the original 30s movies didn't rely on CGI ...well, duh...there wasn't CGI in the 30s. Do you think for a moment that James Whale wouldn't have used CGI if he had it available--those movies used the special effects of the day that were available. I keep thinking of the quote about nostalgia--'nostalgia is the irrational longing for restrictions.' And then there are the reviews complaining that an action movie actually has action in it. It's as amusing to read these as it was to read Harold Blooms screeds against the Harry Potter books.

 

[Thanee]

Left Hand of God.

Exactly.

Gabriel / van Helsing has nothing to do with Abraham van Helsing.

And Crothian... I'm pretty sure that Mr Hyde isn't really Mr Hyde either... see last post on first page for other observations...

It's quite obvious, that people who expect to see the original characters will be disappointed, since not much there is actually equal or even very similar to the original. Most characters just use some of the original and replace the rest with something completely different.

Bye
Thanee

 

[hong]

"I'm sick of being the left hand of God. He keeps using me to do all His sticky business."


Hong "next, on Greatest Lines Never Said" Ooi

 

[reapersaurus]

Axelos - thanks for putting that clear as day. We totally missed the Gabriel reference.
That is so VERY cool.

 

[Thanee]

BTW, the God / Gabriel / Dracula part of the story (while it really had nothing to with it directly) reminded me somewhat to another vampire movie I have seen (don't remember the name, tho - but luckily there is my extended memory, aka google... Wes Craven's Dracula), where Dracula was in fact

Spoiler

Judas

.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Assenpfeffer]

What did you expect from the movie, if not hulking monsters?

Why, <I>The Godfather</I> or <I>Citizen Kane</I>, of course.

 

[Dimwhit]

Then I presume you haven't seen the Lord of the Rings, any of the Matrix films, or, well, Hellboy...

Seriously, there were some good CGI shots, but some were just...eh. Most of the shots involving werewolves could have been better, and the flying vampires sometimes had some weird problems.

OK, I'll give you the LotR Trilogy and the FIRST Matrix movie. The CGI in the other two were no better than Van Halsing, IMO. As for Hellboy...I really liked it, but I don't remember the CGI all that well. But I didn't see a major problem with the CGI in Van Helsing, so...

 

[Argus Decimus Mokira]

OK, I'll give you the LotR Trilogy and the FIRST Matrix movie. The CGI in the other two were no better than Van Halsing, IMO. As for Hellboy...I really liked it, but I don't remember the CGI all that well. But I didn't see a major problem with the CGI in Van Helsing, so...

Seconded. Hellboy and the Matrix sequels (and Harry Potter, for the lighter side) are about on par with van Helsing - some parts better, others far worse.

Is it just me, or is this movie screaming for a sequel/prequel? Gabby and Drac seem to have a lot of barely-hinted-at backstory. And, I mean, this movie is from the same writer/director that made a prequel to the Mummy, in which the events surrounding a minor character in the sequel were laid bare! :\

Thanks
-Matt

 

[Mog Elffoe]

I rated it a 4. If I were grading it I'd give it a C-. I really wanted to like this movie. It's the kind of stuff that I normally love. I love the IDEA of this movie. It could've been great. Some of it was great. Most of it doesn't work, for me, anyway.

I wanted some atmosphere. I wanted the movie to be spooky as well as fun. I wanted the characters to be COOL, but the movie never slows down enough for us to really care about them, and they do say some dumb, DUMB stuff. (Especially the bit about the bomb with the power of the sun and not knowing how it'll come in handy against vampires! What!? They all knew what the standard vampire's weaknesses were--he was loading Van Helsing up with stakes, crosses, holy water, etc.--but he doesn't know how a sunlight bomb could ever come in handy!?)

I'm all about cool special effects, but I want to be able to actually SEE them. The camera is constantly whizzing around and the creatures are almost always a blur. When the vampire brides and the werewolves actually stood still I thought they looked great. If you have a good effect, like this movie did, SHOW IT OFF.

I did NOT like the makeup on Frankenstein's Monster at all. The neon green lightning in his head really, really bothered me. I didn't care for his character and place in the plot either. Every time he spoke (I mean bellowed) I cringed. He may as well have just broke out into 'Putting On the Ritz'.

What was with all the swinging? I understand that it's a swashbuckling action film and that's what these kinds of characters are apt to do, but this movie had more swinging in it than Spider-Man 1 and all of the Tarzan movies ever made combined.

I hated, hated, HATED the score. It just never let up. It was constantly blaring. I mean, Van Helsing is strolling down a corridor and we're pounded with music that makes it seem like he's zooming through the Death Star. I kept wanting to tell this movie to JUST SHUT UP. Music is an important part of a movie, but when it's overused or used inappropriately it loses all effectiveness.

There were a lot of things that I did like in the movie. I liked all of the main actors quite a bit. They were really into it and really tried. They just had some really, really lame dialog to work with. I dug all of the castles and giant sets, along with the costume design. The production was top notch. I liked the creature designs for the vampire brides and werewolves a lot. I just wished that they'd slow down a bit so that I could enjoy them more.

Not that I minded really--I thought the whole bit with the full moon was fun in the movie--but it didn't seem that lycanthropy was really that much of a curse. So you're a werewolf? OK, just stay inside. As long as the light of the full moon doesn't touch you you'll never change. It'd just be a bit of an inconvenience, is all.