Anyone else go see Van Helsing?

[cincyreds]

I went to see it this past week and I must say I really enoyed the movie.

I took my 10-yr old nephew with me and judging from the way he never took his eyes off the screen, I could tell he really enjoyed it too.

The acting isn't that great, but the non-stop action is what I went for, so I feel I got my money's worth. 2.5 hr movie.

I thought that Kate was absolutely beautiful and it was a shame..well I won't say for those who have not seen it.

She is quite the hero.

Van Helsing I give 3.0 stars out of 4.

The special affects were pretty awesome too.

If you haven't seen it and like action packed movies then you will enjoy it.

Peace to all my FOFC brothers!

[JeeberD]

No. It never really looked that great to me, I've heard lots of bad things about it, and I'm really pissed how they took a great character from a great book like Dracula and totally changed who he was. Van Helsing was just an intelligent doctor, not a super hero wannabe...

I'm glad that you enjoyed the movie, though...

[Young Drachma]

Saw it a few weeks back with a friend who wanted to see it and absolutely hated it. Everyone I've talked to that saw it hated it too. But yeah, Jeeber hit the nail on what my friend told me why she had such problems with it. I didn't know anything about all that, just knew it didn't look interesting to me - so hearing all that just made it worse IMO.

It reminded me of a Hollywood Mogul movie where you spend $20 million on special effects, have lots of gore, violence and a few love scenes to appeal to everyone. It wasn't a flop, but should've been. It was a huge letdown, considering the hype. But what isn't these days.

[Franklinnoble]

Originally Posted by JeeberD

No. It never really looked that great to me, I've heard lots of bad things about it, and I'm really pissed how they took a great character from a great book like Dracula and totally changed who he was. Van Helsing was just an intelligent doctor, not a super hero wannabe...

I'm glad that you enjoyed the movie, though...

You know, no offense to Jeebs or anything, but why does stuff like this really piss off fanboys of sci-fi/fantasy novels?

I could see getting mad about a film that's meant to be based on actual events when it isn't true to historical facts, but this is a movie loosely based on an entirely fictional world. So what if they changed it for the movie? There's no political agenda here... it's all just frickin' make-believe anyway. In most cases, it makes the movie more entertaining. I mean, is anybody going to object if Hermione Granger has a lesbian orgy in the Gryffindor girls dormintory in "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban" just because it wasn't in the original? Why ruin it for the rest of us?

[Eaglesfan27]

I'm going to see it tonight with my wife. I only skimmed your review so as not to hit any spoilers, but I'm hoping we also enjoy it.

[Young Drachma]

POTENTIAL SPOILER
though i think it might be one of those "hmm, lemme see if i think that way after i see it, type things


Not to go on a rant either, but Kate Beckinsdale's character goes from "strong woman" in the first part of the movie, to Van Helsing's bitch after they start working together. Like it doesn't make any sense how her character who had been fighting all these people on her own before, now has some man to come help her do it and she just retreats to the secondary role. I mean, I recognize it was Hugh Jackman's movie and that they needed a female character and all. But it seemed a bit crazy to me that her character's depth morphed as the movie went on.

Ugh, sorry. That feminist theory block of my social theories class must be coming out. I'm over it now.

[bosshogg23]

I thought it was going to be a terrible movie while my wife was really looking forward to it. She didnt like it at all(almost left the theatre) while I thought it was better than I expected. I still wouldnt suggest people see it in the theatre, wait until HBO has it or rent it or get it on PPV or download it or do whatever you do to see it that doesnt cost $8 a ticket.

[Franklinnoble]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

Saw it a few weeks back with a friend who wanted to see it and absolutely hated it. Everyone I've talked to that saw it hated it too. But yeah, Jeeber hit the nail on what my friend told me why she had such problems with it. I didn't know anything about all that, just knew it didn't look interesting to me - so hearing all that just made it worse IMO.

It reminded me of a Hollywood Mogul movie where you spend $20 million on special effects, have lots of gore, violence and a few love scenes to appeal to everyone. It wasn't a flop, but should've been. It was a huge letdown, considering the hype. But what isn't these days.

No need to repeat yourself, dude...

http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/~fof/for...ollywood+Mogul

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

I saw Van Helsing last week with a friend who REALLY was looking forward to it - and we both hated it. I've heard that from almost everyone that I've talked to that saw it. I hated it too, but I didn't really want to see it, so I'm not sure how much my opinion helps.

It drags on, the plot - wait, what plot? It was just a mish-mash of stuff and reminded me of flops I've made in Hollywood Mogul, where I spent $20 million on special effects, put in some swearing, a few love scenes and try to attract everyone. I think they failed here, IMHO.

[Franklinnoble]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

POTENTIAL SPOILER
though i think it might be one of those "hmm, lemme see if i think that way after i see it, type things


Not to go on a rant either, but Kate Beckinsdale's character goes from "strong woman" in the first part of the movie, to Van Helsing's bitch after they start working together. Like it doesn't make any sense how her character who had been fighting all these people on her own before, now has some man to come help her do it and she just retreats to the secondary role. I mean, I recognize it was Hugh Jackman's movie and that they needed a female character and all. But it seemed a bit crazy to me that her character's depth morphed as the movie went on.

Ugh, sorry. That feminist theory block of my social theories class must be coming out. I'm over it now.

No need to apologize... this is exactly the sort of thing that would piss my wife off, hence ruining the movie for both of us.

[JeeberD]

Originally Posted by Franklinnoble

You know, no offense to Jeebs or anything, but why does stuff like this really piss off fanboys of sci-fi/fantasy novels?

I just don't see the point in taking the name of a character from a novel, basing a movie on him, and then totally changing the character around. Why not just create a new character for this movie? Would it make that much difference?

Originally Posted by Franklinnoble

I mean, is anybody going to object if Hermione Granger has a lesbian orgy in the Gryffindor girls dormintory in "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban" just because it wasn't in the original?

You know, Hermione and Ginny Weasly do seem to be getting rather close...

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Franklinnoble

No need to repeat yourself, dude...

http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/~fof/for...ollywood+Mogul

Yeah, I thought of that. But it was a new thread and maybe I wasn't able to invoke more Mogul wisdom into another thread.

Gotta get those post numbers up somehow

[Franklinnoble]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

Yeah, I thought of that. But it was a new thread and maybe I wasn't able to invoke more Mogul wisdom into another thread.

Gotta get those post numbers up somehow

Clever, but the f*cking elitists who read nearly every thread on here will catch you every time.

There's a better way to get your post numbers up... start a new threadkiller thread... or maybe a hattrick dynasty...

[Franklinnoble]

Originally Posted by JeeberD

I just don't see the point in taking the name of a character from a novel, basing a movie on him, and then totally changing the character around. Why not just create a new character for this movie? Would it make that much difference?

Probably not... but maybe they're just paying homage to the original by giving him the same name?

Originally Posted by JeeberD

You know, Hermione and Ginny Weasly do seem to be getting rather close...

Hmm... I would think Professor McGonagal would be the more logical choice, but to each his own...

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by JeeberD

I just don't see the point in taking the name of a character from a novel, basing a movie on him, and then totally changing the character around. Why not just create a new character for this movie? Would it make that much difference?



You know, Hermione and Ginny Weasly do seem to be getting rather close...

Not the same character. Van Helsing in Dracula is Abraham Van Helsing. This isn't the same guy, different first name and everything.

Oh, by the way, still not that great of a movie. I don't like how they ruin the Frankenstein story, and it's the same general gripe that you have. Too cuisinart for my tastes, and not enough stand alone stuff.

-Anxiety

[Bad-example]

Originally Posted by Franklinnoble

There's a better way to get your post numbers up... start a new threadkiller thread... or maybe a hattrick dynasty...

Or you could whine about the QOTM so many times you make people ill.

[Peregrine]

I thought it was a horrible movie. Way, way, way over the top, there was entirely too much pointless action and any time the movie tended to go towards a thoughtful moment, they had to shove some more crazy action into it. My friends for the most part felt the same way. I noticed that Rotten Tomatoes has a 25% fresh rating for it, which is pretty bad for a major movie release, so I know we're not alone.

[Franklinnoble]

Originally Posted by Bad-example

Or you could whine about the QOTM so many times you make people ill.

Now, now... don't encourage him to steal my schtick..

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by JeeberD

I just don't see the point in taking the name of a character from a novel, basing a movie on him, and then totally changing the character around. Why not just create a new character for this movie? Would it make that much difference?

The fictional Helsing clan has been in quite a few novels/shows. After seeing the previews, I'm not sure why anyone familiar with the original would expect this movie to be about him, though.

I just got finished watching the DVD set of the animated series Hellsing and found it extraordinary. It's a thirteen episode run about a modern day Hellsing (Helsing) organization in London that's battling man-made vampires. I'd recommend it to anyone who enjoys the genre.

[Darkiller]

I went to see it last week and must say it was a joke.
A waste of my time.

I was expecting this movie was such anticipation that I can't describe how bad it felt to watch this complete disaster.
the "vilains" are pathetic: Dracula has a big nose and is everything but scary, the Frankenstein monster bears no ressemblances and Kate Beckinsale always remains fresh no matter what action she has just made the minute before.
I'm not even talking about the so-called "Dr Jekkyl & Mr Hyde"...when computing is doing too much, special effects look ugly and unrealistic.

Hugh Jackman can't help this total wreck.

and what about the final scene ? with Kate in the clouds ?....PATHETIC.

Hadn't bored myself watching a movie since Street Fighter was released in 1993/94.

[Fritz]

I thought the movie was fair, nothing about it was gripping.

My big problem was the volume in the theater. It was so loud that I ended up having to stuff napkins in my ears, and almost left. I probably should have, because it gave me a blinding headache that lasted 2 days (and I am not at all prone to headaches).

[Fritz]

dola, am I the only one who thought the movie would have been just a little stronger if Jackman never kissed pretty miss Kate? It would seem to fit better with the left hand of god stuff

[TazFTW]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

POTENTIAL SPOILER
though i think it might be one of those "hmm, lemme see if i think that way after i see it, type things


Not to go on a rant either, but Kate Beckinsdale's character goes from "strong woman" in the first part of the movie, to Van Helsing's bitch after they start working together. Like it doesn't make any sense how her character who had been fighting all these people on her own before, now has some man to come help her do it and she just retreats to the secondary role. I mean, I recognize it was Hugh Jackman's movie and that they needed a female character and all. But it seemed a bit crazy to me that her character's depth morphed as the movie went on.

Ugh, sorry. That feminist theory block of my social theories class must be coming out. I'm over it now.

I don't think she was a strong woman at any point in the movie. In the beginning, she's her brother's bitch and then when she first meets Van Helsing, she seemed helpless against Dracula's wives (running away, not putting up much of a fight). Was this helplessness supposed to be explained by the "Well they never attacked during the day before"? Bull, your entire family's goal for the past few hundred years is to wipe out Drac and you're unprepared? Meh.



As for the villains, I took it that Sommers and Universal were going for the Lugosi/Karloff/Chaney Jr Dracula/Frankenstein/Wolf Man (the release of the DVDs a few weeks ago, help this point) and to me those characters were campy. So I found Van Helsing's Dracula to remind of the campiness of Lugosi's. I figure they made the Wolfman more aggressive because they wanted 'Wolverine' in this film. As for Frankenstein, not to sure about him.

[rkmsuf]

I liked it for what it is. I think it's intended as a fantasy/action romp with recognizable characters. If you are looking for an intellectual masterpiece this is not the movie. Just purely for entertaining action and cool effects this movie is pretty good.

For me I wasn't looking for gripping necessarily, just some movie fun. I'd give it 3.5 out of 5.

[AnalBumCover]

In the words of Blaine Edwards and Antoine Merriweather:

"Hated it!"

[Honolulu_Blue]

This is a horrible movie. Not worth the effort to discuss any sort of film theory about this movie. It was just stupid. I had the lowest expectations going in and they were surpassed by a good distance. Oh well.

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by Fritz

dola, am I the only one who thought the movie would have been just a little stronger if Jackman never kissed pretty miss Kate? It would seem to fit better with the left hand of god stuff

I definitely agree with this idea. However, unlike many on the board, I enjoyed the movie. It wasn't a great movie, but I was just expecting a movie with decent action and it didn't disappoint on that front. Perhaps it was because we both were excited about having the time to go to a movie together (we hadn't done that in about 6 months), but my wife and I both enjoyed the movie.

[cthomer5000]

Originally Posted by Franklinnoble

I mean, is anybody going to object if Hermione Granger has a lesbian orgy in the Gryffindor girls dormintory in "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban" just because it wasn't in the original? Why ruin it for the rest of us?

pix pls.

[cthomer5000]

Originally Posted by Darkiller

Hadn't bored myself watching a movie since Street Fighter was released in 1993/94.

One of the all-time horrible movies. So bad.

[judicial clerk]

I thought this movie was pretty funny, but it wasn't on par with the likes of Animal House. I don't know the name of the guy who played Van Helsing, but he was good in that sitcom 2 Guys and a Girl. Tara Reid is pretty hot, but she is not much of an actress. I didn't even realize that Kate Beckinsale was in this movie?! Was she one of the sorority girls? Also, I totally missed the halloween scenes you guys are talking about.