Van Helsing

[Branduil]

As I said on the other thread, this is one of the worst movies I've ever seen. The movie had no story- everything just happened randomly with no setup. The plot justifications of having all these different monsters together was ridiculous. And the characters were as flat as could be. Terrible.

 

[buzzard]

As I said on the other thread, this is one of the worst movies I've ever seen. The movie had no story- everything just happened randomly with no setup. The plot justifications of having all these different monsters together was ridiculous. And the characters were as flat as could be. Terrible.

You know while I agree, I don't think you go far enough. This movie was wretched. I was considering walking out at many points. Pretty much any scene with the brides of Dracula in them made me cringe. The special effects for the sake of special effects got old so quickly that it wasn't even funny. I find it utterly amazing that this was from the man who made the Mummy, which is a movie I like a great deal.

You don't even have to begin to nitpick to find bad things in this move. It is pretty much awful on all layers. I kept wondering how many pages the script had to been since it was most likely written in crayon.

I wouldn't even reccomend that someone bother to rent in. Heck, I'd avoid it on TV.

buzzard

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

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

That made the movie (Wasn't it Dracula 2000?) for me. I'm a sucker for hinted backstory, which helped with this one, too.

Brad

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

You don't even have to begin to nitpick to find bad things in this move. It is pretty much awful on all layers. I kept wondering how many pages the script had to been since it was most likely written in crayon.

Personally, I thought it rocked on toast. I *think* that the idea behind the movie was not to be really serious, but to be as campy and cliched as possible.

Brad

 

[Tarrasque Wrangler]

Haven't seen it. Not planning on spending hard-earned coin at the cineplex to see it either.

We don't care about somewhat-hammy dialogue.
We don't care if the actors "over-act."
We don't care if there are tons of effects that "you know aren't real."
We don't care if there not a huge character-driven story-arc, with lots of double-meanings and complexity.

What's this "we" garbage? Are you royalty?

I, for one, don't understand why these things can suck and it's still an OK film. The special effects guys aren't writing the dialogue (or ARE they?), a writer is. So, either they take the time and money to write a good script because they care about making something of quality, or they don't because they know you'll give them a free pass.

WHY do the actors have to over-act? Watch Jackman in X-Men and X-2, similarly FX-heavy films. He's actually pretty good in those. We get a sense of Logan as a man as well as a fighting machine. What's the difference? Bryan Singer is a good director, Stephen Sommers is adequate.

But who cares, it's just an eye candy movie right? Except they didn't even bother to put good eye candy in the previews. The Wolfman looks BAD. The vampire brides look BAD. The transforming Dracula CGI looks BAD. I'm not asking for photorealism here, but these things look more like video game sprites than monsters.

And why can't we have a "huge character-driven story-arc, with lots of double-meanings and complexity" AND have special effects and action? Is there some golden Hollywood rule that says if you have more than one action sequence in your film then you are not allowed to have believable characters, emotional resonance, or story depth?

A-list talent and great special effects cost money, no doubt. But it doesn't really cost that much more to have a good script than it does to have a bad script, and that's the knock I keep hearing on this movie. Thus, no Tarrasque Wrangler dollars shall it see. I'm just getting fed up with this whole mentality that we should excuse lazy filmmaking because it's genre or something. An action/scifi/fantasy/horror/whatever film that works as art CAN BE MADE. Ask Peter Jackson.

 

[Desdichado]

Am I nit picking? Very possibley, I do usually hold movies to a higher standard then most people, especially these types. I think Hollywood can do them better and make them a bit more accurate and smart and not scare off the core audience.

What's accurate? The literary version? The old black and white movie version?

Like it or not, these monsters have entered the collective modern mythology, so to speak. "Original source material" has little meaning anymore.

 

[Desdichado]

As I said on the other thread, this is one of the worst movies I've ever seen. The movie had no story- everything just happened randomly with no setup. The plot justifications of having all these different monsters together was ridiculous. And the characters were as flat as could be. Terrible.

Dude, if this is one of the worst movies you've ever seen, you need to see more movies!

 

[Crothian]

What's accurate? The literary version? The old black and white movie version?

Like it or not, these monsters have entered the collective modern mythology, so to speak. "Original source material" has little meaning anymore.

The literary version is accurate. Why? Becaue its the birth of the character. Other monsters have entered in the modern mythology, but Hyde is rarely used. Orginal source material has full meaning, becasue its the orginal. Without it you have no Hyde.

 

[Crothian]

Dude, if this is one of the worst movies you've ever seen, you need to see more movies!

I would say he's just seeing the wrong movies then. I've seen plenty worse, and I've seen plenty better.

 

[Dark Jezter]

Just got back from the movie a few hours ago, and I can say that I really enjoyed it. It had all the action and special effects I was hoping for. Yeah, the dialogue was a little hammy, and Kate Beckinsale's Transylvanian accent was awful, but if you were going into this movie expecting to see The Godfather or The Return of the King, then you probably need to get your head checked.

To paraphrase something that Josh said in another thread related to this movie, Why should we expect every movie to be brilliant when not every movie is trying to be? Some movies just aspire to entertain and provide a cheap thrill, not provide a life-changing expirience.

Oh, and like many other posters in this thread, I loved the party scene.