Topic: Van Helsing

[Inccubus]

Like I said before in reply to some other post on this forum about Van Helsing, too many people take it seriously, I think. It's a satire. It's comic book fun. If you look at it as just some actors and a director and a couple screenwriters just having themselves a jolly good time, then it's actually a very entertaining movie. I LOL'ed so many times during Van Helsing. I usually can't stand Hollywood humor but I found the movie's jokes, of which there were indeed quite many, surprisingly enjoyable.

 I like Jorge's interpretation too. It really is CV1 as a film minus the Belmont.

If it was satire, they weren't clear enough about it. Had it been an indie movie, things might be different. But it was done with dollar signs in their eyes and the B-movienes seemed completely unintentional.

I swear to GOD I saw an early version of the trailer that had a cross boomerang in place of the razor Frisbee that was in the final cut. What more evidence is need to prove that the movie was not only intended to be campy but was also directly inspired by CV series if not CV1 itself? Hell the video game based on the movie specifically mentions Castlevania and the Belmont clan.

[Flame]

[KaZudra]

If the movie would have slowed down a bit so the Drama area can expand and overall took itself more seriously, the movie would have been super top notch and the Shitty CG would have been overshadowed on how good of a movie it would have been.

Hugh Jackman Looked the part, but the Dracula is just NO.

[Inccubus]

I'm starting to think you have no appreciation for camp. 

@Flame: LOL'd. 

[Jorge D. Fuentes]

I think people are too uptight these days.  Everything is black or white.  It's either awesome or it sucks, and there's no room for gray areas anymore.

I blame the interne--**cable modem dies**

[Claimh Solais]

I once before said Van Helsing sucked, but I realize I never specified why I thought so.

Simply because of Dracula's portrayal, and that the vampire's weakness  is a werewolf.

Dracula's portrayal was WAY too cheesy for me to take seriously. And the accent sounded forced rather than legitimate. The whole weakness thing goes against any type of mythology I've ever seen or heard of. Though honestly that part was at least original and actually gave Werewolves importance in something other than just Underworld.

Other than that, the movie was pretty good. I don't really hate on the CGI, though I will admit it could've been done better.

[Neobelmont]

Hugh Jackman for Trevor Belmont. WHO'S WITH ME ON THIS.

I would want to see him as Simon for some reason he just fits that role to me for some reason more than Trevor.

[Flame]

I just figure he looks more like Trevor.

Or just make an original movie Belmont.

[KaZudra]

I think people are too uptight these days.  Everything is black or white.  It's either awesome or it sucks, and there's no room for gray areas anymore.

I blame the interne--**cable modem dies**

that seems to be the case, black or white when the truth is many MANY shades of grey....
this is always a Critics Job as I was one and nobody cares unless you give it a thumbs up or Down.
Hell, I dislike a few Oscar winning movies like the Social Network and The King's Speech simply because the movies have nothing but talking where something more interesting could take place...
If I state if we all should get along, I'll be shot in the head by both sides....
I however will contribute that the internet should be a bad place and use words such as HATE.
this is the nature of the interwebs!

[Flame]

I thought I would get bored by The King's Speech.

I actually found myself pretty drawn into it. It was well made.

Another movie on the royal family, The Madness of King George, wasn't nearly as engrossing. THAT was actually kinda boring, if only because it felt drawn out. Stretched.

Of course, its apples and oranges really, ones about a King with a somewhat rare condition that makes him mad, while the other is about a King with a speech impediment. the eras are totally different too.

[TheouAegis]

Camp can be fun. I'm no fan of a lot of campy movies, like Tokyo Gore Police (the last campy flick I saw), but I love Sukiyaki Western Django. Takashi Miike has some fun campy films and SWDj is one of them. The difference between that and Van Helsing though is SWDj was obvious camp and an obvious homage to spaghetti Westerns. Yet, in defense of the statement that some people just can't handle camp or enjoy camp or whatever, even good movies like SWDj are hated on by most people. Although I did show it to one friend that doesn't care for camp and doesn't like Japanese movies but he said he enjoyed SWDj. But from what I read on Rotten Tomatoes about it, a lot of the criticisms about it were the English language usage and corniness of it [SWDj] (one person even was furious because he thought it was sacrilege for the Japanese to make a Western, which is downright hilarious to read if you know anything about spaghetti Westerns). In other words, the same criticisms are basically used, although in different words, for Van Helsing. People didn't like the hammed-up accents or the corniness because they were probably expecting something serious and when their expectations weren't met, rather than enjoying the film for what it was, they just shut it out completely and didn't bother watching the movie as a form of entertainment from that point on.

[Inccubus]

I agree totally.

[crisis]

We appreciate the plug guys, but both the game & movie still sucked