| Original message ([an error occurred while processing this directive] Views )[an error occurred while processing this directive]
| Replies:
|
| DarkZero 752th Post
 
Red Carpet Regular Member+
   
    
    
|  "Re(4):Van Helsing sucks"
, posted Sat 8 May 12:41
For those who haven't seen the movie and are wondering just what, exactly, we're complaining about, I'll lay it out for you with very minimal spoilers:
1) If you've seen the commercials, then every fight up until the last half hour really kind of sucks. The fights are laid out so that all of the elements build slowly and then culminate in one big, great money shot -- which you've already seen on the commercial. So for instance, in the carriage fight you'll first see that they're attacked by vampires, then the werewolf appears a little later, then the carriage starts to burn, and then you see the money shot: that shot of Van Helsing diving off the burning carriage firing his pistols, which has been in every commercial and trailer for the movie for months. Every fight is like that. They build up to absolutely nothing for you. You'll feel like you've been reading spoiler sites for months when actually you just saw a couple of commercials in passing.
2) Massive, massive plot holes. I can't really describe it in detail, but it's not the "Oh, hey, did you notice that little detail? That part didn't make sense," kind. I mean the "WTF was that movie even about?" kind. The entirety of the plot is just one big plot hole lined with other plot holes.
3) It doesn't really have a resolution. A big part of the movie, which is introduced right at the beginning, is the mystery of Van Helsing's past. Near the end of the movie, they even do the whole "Luke, I am your father" scene where the villain explains the hero's sordid past to him -- but it doesn't make sense. A lot of words come out of his mouth, but none of them really give you any information or tell a story that makes any sense. So really, the best Van-Helsing-to-English translation that you can get from it is "Wait for the sequel!".
4) Absolutely everyone, no matter how big or how frail, can fall fifty feet out of the air without being hurt and perform acrobatic tricks with ropes that would put Spider-Man to shame. By the end of the movie, this becomes absolutely hilarious.
The fight at the end of the movie does kick ass, though, along with most of the last half hour. There are still some really stupid scenes toward the end, but at least there are finally some good parts to make up for those.
|
| DarkZero 753th Post
Red Carpet Regular Member+
| "Re(6):Van Helsing sucks" , posted Sat 8 May 14:58
quote:
The fight at the end of the movie does kick ass, though, along with most of the last half hour. There are still some really stupid scenes toward the end, but at least there are finally some good parts to make up for those.
So, your saying its a stupid, stupid, stupid movie. Don't expect anything good from it except fancy F/X and fight scenes?
No. That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that there are twenty to twenty-five minutes toward the end where this movie is enjoyable. That's all. For the rest of the movie, neither the F/X or the fight scenes are that great. Frankenstein and the werewolves look really cool, but the vampire brides, the baddies that you see most often, look like shit in their vamp form (which they spend 90% of their time in). And they can fly, but Van Helsing and company can't, so the fights with them are nothing but a bunch of arrows and other assorted crap flying into the air and missing the vampire brides.
It's not just stupid, it's not even a good action movie.
Oh, and something from earlier in the thread:
quote:
I've heard that the Werewolves were the bodyguards of Dracula during the daylight ...
Is it true ?
Spoiler (Highlight to view) -
Yes, but that's not exactly unprecedented. House of Frankenstein and Castlevania, as well as a bunch of other TV shows, movies, or games that throw a bunch of different horror monsters together, have werewolves serving Dracula. They work nicely as strong, mindless grunts, and like any dogs, they're willing to serve an alpha male.
End of Spoiler
|
| crazymax 336th Post
Bronze Customer
| "Re(1):Van Helsing sucks" , posted Sat 8 May 18:17
I think the easiest way to sum up the movie to most people is to ask them if they like The Mummy Returns. Cause basically Van Helsing is like all the CG parts of the Mummy Returns extended over ( the actually running time of the movie is 2hrs 26 mins ) 2 hours, I'm giving 26 minutes are dedicated to what passes for a plot. The real stars of this movie are the CG and incredible backgrounds, it makes it worth seeing it on the big screen, cause so much will be lost on tv.
Everything you know about vampire/werewolf/frankenstein lore, throw it out. This is Stephen Sommers' movie, thus it's his world, he does what he feels like. Like me you'll be scratching your head that vampires can come out like you know when the sun isn't present, but when you see a vampire bride fly out during the day to talk to Van Helsing & friends to tell them about a party, you just go whatever. The movie will make you groan, then throw out a cool scene or two.
So I'd give this movie a middle of the road grade, and tell you to see it in the theatre on the big screen. But go with the warning that movie is just one long big special effect that you're eventually happy to see finally end.
|
| Hungrywolf 2763th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
    
    
| "Re(2):Van Helsing sucks" , posted Sat 8 May 18:53
quote:
I think the easiest way to sum up the movie to most people is to ask them if they like The Mummy Returns. Cause basically Van Helsing is like all the CG parts of the Mummy Returns extended over ( the actually running time of the movie is 2hrs 26 mins ) 2 hours, I'm giving 26 minutes are dedicated to what passes for a plot. The real stars of this movie are the CG and incredible backgrounds, it makes it worth seeing it on the big screen, cause so much will be lost on tv.
Everything you know about vampire/werewolf/frankenstein lore, throw it out. This is Stephen Sommers' movie, thus it's his world, he does what he feels like. Like me you'll be scratching your head that vampires can come out like you know when the sun isn't present, but when you see a vampire bride fly out during the day to talk to Van Helsing & friends to tell them about a party, you just go whatever. The movie will make you groan, then throw out a cool scene or two.
So I'd give this movie a middle of the road grade, and tell you to see it in the theatre on the big screen. But go with the warning that movie is just one long big special effect that you're eventually happy to see finally end.
I liked the Mummy and the Mummy Returns, I just didn't like this.
Special note: One of my favorite vampire movies is Captain Kronos: Vampire Hunter.
"no again my apoligizes for anyone i offend!!!!!"
Hungry Like the Wolf
|
| DarkZero 754th Post
Red Carpet Regular Member+
| "Re(2):Van Helsing sucks" , posted Sat 8 May 22:20
quote:
Everything you know about vampire/werewolf/frankenstein lore, throw it out. This is Stephen Sommers' movie, thus it's his world, he does what he feels like. Like me you'll be scratching your head that vampires can come out like you know when the sun isn't present, but when you see a vampire bride fly out during the day to talk to Van Helsing & friends to tell them about a party, you just go whatever. The movie will make you groan, then throw out a cool scene or two.
I wouldn't say you'd have to throw a lot out. Honestly, it seems like the movie was pretty proud of all of the "changes" that it made, despite the fact that they've been covered before. Vampires appearing in indirect sunlight has been covered in Buffy and Angel, werewolves serving vampires has been covered in Castlevania, House of Frankenstein, and a bunch of others, vampires being killed by silver stakes was covered in Blade, vampires having the ability to spontaneously destroy crosses and see veins and organs in human beings were both covered in Vampire Hunter D... there wasn't a lot that was new, here.
Spoiler (Highlight to view) -
I'd say that the only new ideas that Sommers added were the ideas that suck so horribly that no one else would ever use them, like the ridiculous crap about Dracula's undead children. Dracula can raise armies of vampires that can turn into flying bat demons just by biting people. Why does he need to spend years of work and huge amounts of resources on bringing more bat demons into the world?
The same goes for Van Helsing's ability to "sense" whether people are good or evil. Apparently that sixth sense of his doesn't work so well when he's surrounded by a few hundred masked vampires in Dracula's summer castle.
End of Spoiler
|
| DarkZero 758th Post
Red Carpet Regular Member+
| "Re(4):Van Helsing sucks" , posted Sun 9 May 02:51
quote:
LOL That last spoiler bit was perfect, I didn't catch that one. But I thought the vampire bit was really flexible, also the bit with werewolves only being werewolves in direct moonlight. Cloud cover makes them human again, but not the roof of a castle.
The rules for werewolves actually became as funny as the Spider-Man rope acrobatics toward the end. Apparently werewolves are permanently in wolf form, even during the day... unless it's before their first full moon, in which case they're human... or it's before midnight on their first full moon, in which case they're human whenever the moon is out. And they have to obey Dracula... unless it's before their first full moon... or it's during their first full moon before midnight... or they just choose not. Y'know, whichever.
Spoiler (Highlight to view) -
This also brings up the fact that Van Helsing was just a really crappy hero. Apparently he had such a passionate hatred for Dracula that he could break one of the rules governing werewolves (must obey Dracula after midnight) and kill Dracula. But I guess his love for his pathetic damsel-in-distress love interest wasn't quite as passionate, because he couldn't break one of the other rules (must kill anything that moves) for her.
And the whole thing with Dr. Jekyll never went over well with me. Van Helsing knew that there was an innocent human being in Hyde's body and that the Vatican thought they could save him, but apparently chopping the guy's arm off and then murdering him was just too much fun to pass up. That whole "saving innocents" thing can be such a drag some times, y'know?
End of Spoiler
Some movies slowly rot in your head on the car ride home, becoming even worse than they were while you were watching them. But it's only every once and awhile that a film comes along that actually continues to suck harder and harder a full 24 hours later. I can't wait to see just how much I'll hate Van Helsing on Monday morning.
|
| CrazyMike 899th Post
Red Carpet Regular Member++
| "Re(6):Van Helsing sucks" , posted Sun 9 May 15:11
quote:
And I still haven't seen Kill Bill vol. 2 yet. Kind of slipped big time box-office wise,which kind of sucks. But I still wanna see it. Damn. I'm gonna make time for this one first.
On behalf of everyone, WILL YOU PLEASE SHUT UP ABOUT KILL BILL DOING BADLY AT THE BOX-OFFICE!?
The problem is people have these huge expectations about box-office crunchers now. "What, it ONLY made 30 million, geez, what a bomb!" Well I don't know about you, but if a movie costs even 25 mill to make, makes 30 million on the first weekend JUST IN AMERICA, then counting up the next couple of weeks and when it hits world-wide, I count that as a success.
As for the comment about fags and New York Minute, well this past week I went and saw a GOOD film, Monsieur Ibrahim with Omar Sharif. I thought it was a great film that did not rely on special effects or marketing. I think it is sad that there is a stigma against taking a chance on a low-budget or independent film.
Notice how I use the word film as well. I think there is a difference between a movie and a film, a movie is just that, it moves on screen and is eye candy; a film engages your mind @_@
|
| hikarutilmitt
185th Post
Regular Customer
| "Re(5):Blah, blah, blah..." , posted Sun 9 May 22:08
It certainly wasn't as good as I was hoping it to be, but it wasn't bad in what it tried to accomplish. I go to see a movie to be entertained. If a movie succeeds in doing so, it's good. I was entertained regardless of lack of development or story.
Did I go see it for the special effects? yep.
Did I go see it for monsters? yep
Did I go see it for Kate Beckinsale? yep x 50
Truthfully, following what little story there was wasn't hard.
Spoiler (Highlight to view) -
Van Helsing's name being Gabriel and being referred to as the left hand of God more or less told me that he was one sent to do God's bidding. That means, to me, that there's a reason why he's hundreds of years old, even older than Dracula himself, it seemed.
End of Spoiler
I actually rather liked what they did with the monsters. Dracula didn't turn into a puny bat and fly away and the wolfman didn't grow and retract hair in seconds. In a modern sense, it was more believable, if there is such a thing in monster films.
|
| threesixtee 792th Post
Red Carpet Regular Member+
| "Re(5):Van Helsing sucks" , posted Sun 9 May 22:51
quote:
4) Absolutely everyone, no matter how big or how frail, can fall fifty feet out of the air without being hurt and perform acrobatic tricks with ropes that would put Spider-Man to shame. By the end of the movie, this becomes absolutely hilarious.
Spoiler (Highlight to view) -
I love how anna could fall from the sky, land on numerous buildings and trees and whatnot, but when a werewolf tackles her onto a couch, she dies immediately.
End of Spoiler
in all honesty, I wasn't expecting anything great out of this movie (I learned my lesson from underworld...). I went for the cheesy special effects, explosions, and the hope that van helsing might call someone "bub" at some point.
|
| DarkZero 760th Post
Red Carpet Regular Member+
| "Re(6):Blah, blah, blah..." , posted Sun 9 May 23:55:
quote:
Truthfully, following what little story there was wasn't hard.
--insert hikarutilmitt's spoiler here--
Spoiler (Highlight to view) -
Errr... yes, the bit about Van Helsing being THE Gabriel was actually pretty obvious to everyone I know that watched the film. I never knew there was any question about that. The part where the plot doesn't make sense appears whenever you actually think about that little plot point. For instance, why did God send an angel down from Heaven to kill some guy named Dracula, who didn't strike a deal with the Devil until AFTER that angel murdered him? And why would he, unlike other angels, have no greater powers than immortality? And what sin did he commit that forced him to lose his memory of his time on Earth?
"Van Helsing, I am your father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate," would've provided us with a lot more relevant plot information than Dracula's conversation with Van Helsing at the end of the movie.
End of Spoiler
[this message was edited by DarkZero on Mon 10 May 04:18] |
| Dr Baghead 3011th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
| "Re(2):See the Movie for yourself and decide!" , posted Mon 10 May 11:32
quote:
Go watch the damn movie and decide for yourself, don't let others think for you.
Taking advice is good, but things get fucked up once you start thinking like "oh, they say the movie/game/book is bad, I will assume it is, and won't give it a chance".
But if 98 critics say the movie's bad there's a good chance you can assume it is and don't need to give it a chance.
I mean if there's a "Haunted House" at a carnavel right, and 98 people tell you "Don't Go In! It's Not Scary You Just Get Punched In The Stomach By Some Guy!" it's best to take their advice rather then waste $9 to get punched in the stomach by some guy! (end of moronic story!)
that being said, despite 98 critics hating this movie, I'll probably rent it on "Rent one get one free" day.
Also: Animated VanHelsing comes out Tomorrow, I might rent that... although I'm sure it's bad too.
|
| OYashiroForever 751th Post
Red Carpet Regular Member+
| "Re(2):See the Movie for yourself and decide!" , posted Mon 10 May 12:34
quote:
I agree with the tittle of this reply.
Go watch the damn movie and decide for yourself, don't let others think for you.
Taking advice is good, but things get fucked up once you start thinking like "oh, they say the movie/game/book is bad, I will assume it is, and won't give it a chance".
Okay... then go watch the Olsen Twins movie. What do you mean the Olsens suck?! Go watch the movie and see for yourself... oh yeah, that's right. It's only okay to pre-judge SOME movies. It's this kind of ass-backwards reasoning that ensures these $200 million dollar shitfests keep getting made. People think "Oh, the trailer was cool." or "Bah.. what do critics know?!" or "How bad can it be?". Pretty DAMNED bad.
If you like VH, more power to you, but don't be compelled to see some stinker just because Hollywood tells you it's your civic duty. I will be waiting until VH comes on HBO because after the Mummy Returns, I will never plunk down $10 for a movie by Stephen Sommers. See... THAT is making an informed decision based on facts and personal taste.
"Only two things are infinite the universe and human stupidity and I'm not sure about the former."
"Your denial is beneath you and thanks to the use of hallucinogenic drugs I see through you."
|
| Dr Baghead 3012th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
| "Re(4):See the Movie for yourself and decide!" , posted Mon 10 May 17:36
quote:
Only if you happen to agree with critcis and I never do. Heck, I'm willing to bet most people here don't usually agree with critics given how people on this Site loved the Punisher Movie and critics hated it. You are your own best critic. If a Movie peaks your interest see it for yourself and decide. Hell, everyone hates Pooty Tang but I personally loved it.
Yeah Critics CAN be wrong... but it's not like they're wrong 95-100% of the time.
I tend to agree with critics... I liked Kill Bill 1 and 2, I liked Spirted Away, I liked Hellboy, I hated Daredevil and the Hulk... the only times Critics have led me astray was Treasure Planet (they hated it, I enjoyed it) and X2 (how critics could like that muddled piece of crap is beyond me... I guess they liked Nightcrawler as much as me and were just more forgiving)
I've also noticed critics and nerd message boards are like water and oil and/or lemande mix.... if they hate a movie the critics are morons, if they like a movie it's all "HOORAY! our movie is validated!"... I'm not saying this board is like that but there are some where this is clearly the case.
ANYWAY!
Yes, you are your own best critic but that doesn't mean you should go see every movie on blind faith!
-If you REALLY want to see a movie, go for it! (I did with Treasure Planet!)
-If really don't want to see a movie, DON'T
-If you're on the fence read some reviews, movies are $5 to rent and as many people as you want can watch, they're $9 a person to see in a theatre... so if you're not sure the advice of a critic (or you could go by what other people on a messageboard say, but in my opinion their views are bit more bias then critics) is a great away to see if the movie is really worth the money or better saved for a rainy day/long weekend rental later in the year.
|
| ONSLAUGHT 2642th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
| "Mmmmhh..." , posted Mon 10 May 17:57:
I don't know why people in the USA is so dependant on critics... I mean, it's not like you're gonna lose 300 dollars anyway. How much does it cost a ticket to a movie over there? 5. 10, 15 dollars?
The point is, everyone and their mothers are saying "the movie stinks, don't see it" and automatically this becomes true for everyone, because "95% percent of critics don't like it".
So what? I liked the movie, and I would have never know if I had made the choice of not seeing it based on what other people say.
Just because YOU people think something's bad, it doesn't means you hold the universal truth, nobody does.
I like Van Helsing and I liked Devil May Cry 2. I love games that most people despise, and why? because I gave them a chance, no matter what other people said.
[this message was edited by ONSLAUGHT on Mon 10 May 18:02] |
| Hungrywolf 2766th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
| "Re(1):Mmmmhh..." , posted Mon 10 May 18:22
quote:
I don't know why people in the USA is so dependant on critics... I mean, it's not like you're gonna lose 300 dollars anyway. How much does it cost a ticket to a movie over there? 5. 10, 15 dollars?
The point is, everyone and their mothers are saying "the movie stinks, don't see it" and automatically this becomes true for everyone, because "95% percent of critics don't like it".
So what? I liked the movie, and I would have never know if I had made the choice of not seeing it based on what other people say.
Just because YOU people think something's bad, it doesn't means you hold the universal truth, nobody does.
I like Van Helsing and I liked Devil May Cry 2. I love games that most people despise, and why? because I gave them a chance, no matter what other people said.
I DID pay the $7.75 for the movie ticket and saw the movie. Based on what I saw I was warning people based on my opinion of the movie. I just want people to know what they are getting into before seeing this movie, because, other than the effects, it wasn't that great. I didn't read a review of the movie in advance, because I was sure I would enjoy the movie. However I didn't, at all. I just want others who are really hopeful about the movie to know ahead of time that it may not be what they think. From one friend to another, I'm just trying to save some people some money. But of course they are welcome to make their own decisions and go pay and see the movie. They should try to go to the matinee though so it won't cost them as much.
"no again my apoligizes for anyone i offend!!!!!"
Hungry Like the Wolf
|
| Dr Baghead 3013th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
| "Re(1):Mmmmhh..." , posted Mon 10 May 19:47
quote:
I don't know why people in the USA is so dependant on critics... I mean, it's not like you're gonna lose 300 dollars anyway. How much does it cost a ticket to a movie over there? 5. 10, 15 dollars?
The point is, everyone and their mothers are saying "the movie stinks, don't see it" and automatically this becomes true for everyone, because "95% percent of critics don't like it".
So what? I liked the movie, and I would have never know if I had made the choice of not seeing it based on what other people say.
Just because YOU people think something's bad, it doesn't means you hold the universal truth, nobody does.
I like Van Helsing and I liked Devil May Cry 2. I love games that most people despise, and why? because I gave them a chance, no matter what other people said.
I not going to argue about critics anymore... I liked DMC2 as well and maybe, just maybe I will like VanHelsing when I rent it.
I'm not going to spent $18 (for two tickets, I ain't going alone!) to see a movie I only sort of want to see, especially if a million-zillion-trillion-billion people are saying it's no good in theatres and that's my choice.
|
| Burning Ranger 757th Post
Red Carpet Regular Member+
| "My opinion on Van Helsing..." , posted Mon 10 May 20:26
...is very mixed. It is what it is. And for me, I thought parts were cheezy. At times, it was bloody annoying (like the James Bond-homage and the first fight scene that was reminiscent of The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen). Plus, theres the really cheesy Dracula portrayal... I mean from the previews, he would seem to be a badass. Not so... he's actually kinda lame. So were his brides. I guess the only monster I liked was Frankenstein... he was just too innocently cool.
And one other thing that annoyed me was the title character. He should have been named Belmont and all would have been fine. Instead, we have a character who only shares the last name of the good Dr. Abraham Van Helsing from the Dracula novel, and I can't even imagine how that character will tie into the novel (supposedly, the movie is a prequel to the novel). As a fan of Stoker's work, I was annoyed by this.
People I've spoken to liked this movie, much to the opposition of 'critics.' But I really do wish a better, smarter movie could have been made. Not just a simple "man vs monsters" movie.
Advanced Cyborg E. Branger AKA Burning Ranger
"Never underestimate the predictabilty of stupidity." -Vinnie Jones from SNATCH
|
| CrazyMax 338th Post
Bronze Customer
| "Re(1):Blah, blah, blah..." , posted Tue 11 May 00:29
quote:
Bitching, moaning and whining
Something said by a random guy on a random board:
If you fags want substance, watch New York Minute.
Van Helsing is just Wolverine running around killing various fictional beasties because he can. Nobody fucking said it would be the greatest story ever told
So yeah, Van Helsing rules.
Something I saw on the Yahoo film forum boards....
"If you like Van Helsing, you will never get laid! " <-- That cracked me up.
I've become really fascinated about how some people are taking the negative opinions people have for this film. It's like some people are personally offended that others didn't like the movie as much as they did. I don't think anyone's expressing their opinion about how little they thought of Van Helsing is some kind barrier from anyone seeing the film or liking it. It's merely people expressing their opinions for the benefit of others who may not have decided on whether or not to see the film.
No one on the site that I've seen so far has claimed to be a critic, so I've missed why the need for all the bashing of critics. It's always been about board members sharing their opinions of why they thought the movie didn't work.
Now what I haven't seen is any clear cut reasons why the film was good, and it should convince anyone else to plunk down their hard earned change. I've read why the film doesn't work, but part of the expression of one's opinion of others involves clarifying one's viewpoint of the film.
Those of us who didn't care for the film aren't stopping you from seeing the film, we're just throwing out the classic "Buyer Beware" warning. People would appreciate it if it was about a videogame, I don't see why they wouldn't appreciate it for a movie as well.
|
|
|
"Re(1):Van Helsing sucks" 
"Re(2):Blah, blah, blah..."