van helsing

rosconey · « **on:** 20 Oct 2004, 10:24 pm »

watched it yesterday-very enjoyable

the lead girl (dont have it now cant check) is a looker

nice pace - better than average special effects(watched on my 30" wide screen)

Woodsea · « **Reply #1 on:** 20 Oct 2004, 10:32 pm »

I found it enjoyable in the theater. The girl is Kate Beckinsale

I just had to ponder the new story, but it was a fun romp.

zybar · « **Reply #2 on:** 20 Oct 2004, 10:35 pm »

Kate was in Underworld and Pearl Harbor to just name a few.

And yes, she is an absolute LOOKER!!

George

John Casler · « **Reply #3 on:** 20 Oct 2004, 11:25 pm »

Just picked it up but haven't screened it yet.

My biggest "pre" beef is that they threw Frankenstein's monster into a Dracula storyline???

So I am not expecting too much except Kate, and some great special effects.

Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #4 on:** 20 Oct 2004, 11:54 pm »

I worship the lovely Kate Beckinsale, but I though Van Helsing was a turd. That's funny, since I'm usually the guy supporting a "guilty pleasure" type flick that everyone else hates.

First off, the effects werehorrifying! I've never seen anything that so looked so manifestly fake. Why oh why must every action film have 90 minutes of CGI? Is it a new union by-law? The werewolf effects were laughable, just hilarious.

They even ruin scenes that didn't need CG stuff. Take for instance the ballroom scene. Everything looked decent, until you look up and see the oh-so-obvious CGI characters on the tightrope. Why'd they do that? It totally ruins the suspension of disbelief to see something so obviously phoney in a scene that otherwise passes muster. I also can't fathom why they always need to use CGI to create The Unimaginably Giant Lair. Did anyone else snort out loud during the scene on the one-mile-long-but-three-foot-thick bridge that had virtually no arches or support? When 75% of the bridge gets demolished, it still doesn't collapse!

WTF?

Mostly I thought the abuse of computer graphics was the flicks death knell, but the casting & script seemed weak. It had a pretty jumbled plot, all over the map. And a pretty bad ending.

I normally like cheesey bad cinema, but this one didn't do it for me.

zybar · « **Reply #5 on:** 26 Oct 2004, 03:45 am »

Watched this with the wife on Saturday night and she stayed awake for the whole movie (a sure sign of approval).

I too enjoyed it and thought it was a good purchase.

Was it chessy? YES

Was it easy to spot the CGI? YES

Did I care? NOPE

Weird how sometimes you can love this type of movie and sometimes you just never connect.

It certainly didn't hurt to have the lovely Kate in yet another corset.

George

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #6 on:** 26 Oct 2004, 04:52 am »

I didn't care much for the middle-ages version of "Q," either. Why must producers of films ostensibly set hundreds of years ago fill them up with technogadgets we couldn't hope to build now?

The "Wild Wild West" factor was a bit too high for me.

Will the luscious Kate Beckinsale accept a non-vampire role at all? She's signed on for Underworld 2, so luckily she's back in the pleather again!

bubba966 · « **Reply #7 on:** 6 Nov 2004, 05:15 am »

Quote from: Rob Babcock

I worship the lovely Kate Beckinsale, but I though Van Helsing was a turd.

I finally got around to watching it last week. And I can't say I agree with you on the turd bit.

Were you in a bad mood the day you watched it? Yeah, it wasn't a great film by any means. But it was decent entertainment if I do say so myself. And I'll pick it up some day when I get back to buying movies again.