No, taky, tell us what you REALLY think. Don't hold back.
I'm with you.
Van Helsing was crap crap crappity crap crap. I was pretty excited about it since I greatly enjoyed MOST of Sommers' previous films. I love
Deep Rising and
The Mummy and enjoyed most of
The Mummy Returns. His version of
The Jungle Book blows huge chunks though, so he's not a solid always-home-run director.
The problem with VH isn't the fencing in heels. It isn't the liberties it takes with old legends. It's that it's dull. It uses lots of flashes and noise to distract you from how dull it is, but ultimately it's boring, it will die and nobody will remember it, and I wasted my time watching it.
What's worst is that twenty minutes in I turned to my wife and said, "This is AWESOME!" and right at that moment (the end of the village fight) is when the whole contraption went off the rails and died.
Sommers dropped the ball in, as taky says, pretty much every way he could have.
One further note: a movie isn't a really really great idea. It's MILLIONS of really really great ideas, all pulled together and drawn into a functioning package of really really great ideas. ANYBODY can have a great idea. It's continuing to produce great ideas and organizing them that creates great films.
And films are either great or crappy. There are no crappy films that are worth watching.
Sister Street Fighter is a great film.
Them! is a great film.
Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter is a pretty good film. So the argument "Entertainment doesn't have to be great art," doesn't fly with me because BY DEFINITION great art is entertaining. If it's entertaining, it's good.
And if VH entertained you, then great. But I found it dull as frickin' dishwater. And for a movie with Frankenstein, Dracula and the Wolfman to be DULL is the most unpardonable sin I can think of.
Final point: Turanil, what made you think MOST ENWorlders hated this film? It scored a solid 7-8 on it's "Rate This Film" thread. Most ENWorlders (as evidenced by the responses in this thread) liked it.