van helsing
POSTED BY: sanmi
UPDATED: Monday, May 24, 2004 22:49
VIEWED: 9401
PAGE 3 of 4
I noticed the dialogue switching back and forth, but I've kinda been desensitized to that by the InuYasha dub, which renders medieval Japanese as "Shakespearean" English, and uses modern English for both modern Japanese and Demonspeak (the "modern" language being treated as a corruption of the "proper" language --People like Kaede who hang around demons tend to pick up some of their expressions).
I think Van Helsing would've been far better if they'd just dropped the literary pretentions and called it Castlevania and renamed Hugh Jackman's character to Simon Belmont.
And I'm enough of a shallow visual philistine to be able to enjoy the FX when the writing got thin.
-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SevenPercent:
Sully away! I'm curious why people didnt like it- If you judge a movie (and that's what this is, it's not a film, or a piece, it's a movie) by what it seeks to accomplish, and it does it/doesnt do it, I'm all ears- I'm not saying VH is Casablanca, but it advertised spec. effects and adventure, and I thought I got it- What's your take, Capn?
Saw VH, sat thru VH, and that's it. Didn't hate it like Batman and Robin, didn't get excited by any of the stunts, or care for any of the characters.
Sommers gave an interview about the effects where he jokily said that ILM had four levels of effects, level three being "too F****** much" and level four being "Sommers". He didn't seem to get that throwing money at the screen isn't enough - particularly when you don't have enough money for all the stuff you have decided to throw on there.
I like the Mummy, but since then he seems to have fallen for the trap of bigger being better. The same problem plagued the Matrix sequels, and far too many films these days.
"I threw up on your bed"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by LadyPandora:
I liked Dracula. Sure, he was no Gary Oldman but he did a good job, I thought.
I thought Richard Roxborough (sp?) was pretty poor as Dracula, but he was clearly acting to instructions - just saw him playing Sherlock Holmes tonight and it was an interesting take; a very flawed Holmes that might have made an interesting character for an ongoing series.
"I threw up on your bed"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Misguided By Voices:Quote:
I thought Richard Roxborough (sp?) was pretty poor as Dracula, but he was clearly acting to instructions - just saw him playing Sherlock Holmes tonight
I just saw The Hound of the Baskervilles too and thought he was very, very good in it as well. I have to say, in the camp black and white sequence at the start of Van Helsing when Roxborough was going completely mad with the "Eeeeeevill Trrransylvaaaaanian Acksent" he was bloody good for in an action-comedy (a la The Scorpion King) like I was hoping Van Helsing would be.
But then they tried to make it much more action than comedy and he toned the camp accent down way to much, ended up just being another dull aspect in a very dull film.
----------
I have no faith but it's all that I want
to be loved and believe
in my soul.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Misguided By Voices:Quote:
I thought Richard Roxborough (sp?) was pretty poor as Dracula, but he was clearly acting to instructions - just saw him playing Sherlock Holmes tonight
I just saw The Hound of the Baskervilles too and thought he was very, very good in it as well. I have to say, in the camp black and white sequence at the start of Van Helsing when Roxborough was going completely mad with the "Eeeeeevill Trrransylvaaaaanian Acksent" he was bloody good for in an action-comedy (a la The Scorpion King) like I was hoping Van Helsing would be.
But then they tried to make it much more action than comedy and he toned the camp accent down way to much, ended up just being another dull aspect in a very dull film.
----------
I have no faith but it's all that I want
to be loved and believe
in my soul.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I could have forgiven everything up to
Select to view spoiler:
the howling.
. At that, I was suddenly embarrassed to be there. I sank down in my chair and shook my head. I mean, I appreciate a scantily-dressed Hugh Jackman, but, come on! And
Select to view spoiler:
her face in the sky, smiling and crying and settling his guilty spirit
was even worse. Now, I know why Hugh Jackman looked sheepish in that interview I saw right before Van Helsing came out.
For those who may be reading this who have not seen it yet, this is my advice: go only if you want to see it because you have a crush on either Hugh Jackman or Kate Beckinsale. To me, this movie is for them what 'The Saint' was for Val Kilmer -- if you're looking for anything more than to get an eyeful of the actor(s), don't bother.
Go see Hellboy instead. Twice. You'll be glad you did.
"Is there any way I'm gonna get out of this with honor and dignity?"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
For all those who wrote in about how stinky Van Helsing was.. thank you. You stated eloquently all that I felt. I took my teenage sons to see it and even they hated it. I suggested about half way though if they were ready to leave and they all said "yep".
For me it went down hill from the first time you see Anna Volarious...I mean puhleeze! And of course she puts down her candlestick and weapon to shut the banging window when she knows vampires are out to kill her. It might have worked if the producers had understood how stupid it was and played it tounge in cheek. Oh well
She understands, she doesn't comprehend
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
For solely entertainment value, Van Helsing was worth the price of a matinee ticket. The CGI was good, and the fight scenes were enjoyable, though a bit long.
Some of the things in the movie were overdone. I think that character development and plot were sacrificed for eye candy.
Not sure how this series they plan will work out. It could be good, and with no other shows of its sort on TV right now, they would not have any real competition for the genre. Of course I doubt it would pull the ratings that NBC would require of it to stay on the air.
"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Lora:
For those who may be reading this who have not seen it yet, this is my advice: go only if you want to see it because you have a crush on either Hugh Jackman or Kate Beckinsale. To me, this movie is for them what 'The Saint' was for Val Kilmer -- if you're looking for anything more than to get an eyeful of the actor(s), don't bother.
Well, if you want to stare at Kate Beckinsale and/or Hugh Jackman in leather for 2.5hrs, all I'm saying is that the Internet is right there.
Who'd have thunk - two vampire movies in which Kate Beckinsale wears tight leather, and like the undead, they both failed to raise a pulse - surely that defies some complex equation.
"I threw up on your bed"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Saw Underworld may times, will watch it many times. Have no interest to see VH. Even if Kate is lookin hottie. Of course the best look Kate ever had was in the special features of the DVD where she's learning stunts in a white work-out suit lookin like Cordy......I am disturbed. Still won't watch VH.
"Two roads diverged in a wood, and I took the road less traveled by and they CANCELLED MY FRIKKIN' SHOW. I totally shoulda took the road that had all those people on it. Damn." --Joss
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME