Van Helsing

Re: Van Helsing

haha. okay cool. Im sticking with my Carpenter avatar now. Hudson said he thinks it suits me. And So do I. John Carpenter is one of my biggest influences.
 
Re: Van Helsing

i don't know why but i always picture john carpenter 10 years younger than what i know him to be. it's odd.

i was OBSESSED with Halloween.
 
Re: Van Helsing

The funny thing is he always looked old. even 20 odd years ago. He seemed to get to this one age, then never get any older. a bit like sean connery.
 
Re: Van Helsing

The movie got extremely aggravating after Van Helsing got "separated" from his stake gun for the 3rd time while fighting the vampire vixens. ::)
 
Re: Van Helsing

Did you see Carpenters, Ghosts of Mars?  If you haven't, thank yourself, because you've saved 90 minutes to do something else.
 
Re: Van Helsing

Carpenter has been nothing but a disapointment over the years. I almost cant forgive him for 'Escape from LA'. Dude had the mad skills at one time but now puts out these lame attempts.
 
Re: Van Helsing

I am willing to forgive all. No matter what came since, when he was in his prime he was genuis. He created the slasher genre with Halloween. AOP13, The Thing, EFNY, BTILC all are outstanding films. heheh i like those abbreviations. Yeah he dropped off, but that is like saying a great sportsman, wasnt great, because he tried to keep playing as he got older. In his prime he was the man.
 
Re: Van Helsing

Agree 100%.  I still have faith in him, so I'll continue to check out his work.  Halloween was a classic and a trend setter. The Fog was wonderfully spooky and I saw The Thing three times. I guess he lost the spark of his early years.
 
Re: Van Helsing

To me the saving grace of the entire film was David Wenham (such a departure from his Lord of the Rings role). His "comic relief" and take on "Q" from the Bond films was the best part of the whole film - and the only thing that kept me from turning it off halfway through.
 
Oh - old thread resurrected.

You guys! Shame on you! This is where my dependence on dvxuser.com as a source of reliable information failed me :cry:

Because of this thread, I never checked out Van Helsing until I saw a portion of it last week on a fellow passenger's portable DVD player. I knew the film was partially shot in El Czecho, but I didn't realize that a lot of it was shot on a favourite castle of mine, named Pernstejn. I worked there as a tour guide back in 1981, and my wife and I took the whole party on our wedding day for a tour. We have a picture in front of that beautiful gothic gate that is the last fortified entry into the castle.

I found some shots on the net:

00019_06.jpg


00019_08.jpg


00019_10.jpg


_pernstejn03.jpg


pernstejn_let.jpg

Sadly, part of the castle caught on fire this spring. None of the main tract got hurt, but the damage was about $5 million... If you ever go to Czech Rep., this is a definite treat for anyone interested in medieval times. It has probably the best preserved gothic and early renaissance fortification system in Central Europe.

Needless to say, I HAD to get a Van Helsing DVD :happy: . It was not as bad as I expected, but probably only because I was emotionally attached and paid more attention to shots including my favourite location than bad animation and continuity problems.

Oh - and Kate: HOT HOT HOT!
 
Sorry XCheck

This film was so bad it hurt. That castle is amazing looking though. Sigh...

They don't make em like that anymore
 
I guess I'm the only one who liked it...

Of course I've never been a fan of "real" horror films so stuff like this I dig.

I'm also a big fan of Abbot and Costello meet Frankenstein so that should tell you where I'm coming from.

XCzech, it seems every time I've been to Prague over the past five years they've been filming one movie or another there....

matt
 
To be perfectly honest, Van Helsing was probably the worst $7.50 I've ever spent. Not only was it insultingly bad, it was too damn expensive!
 
Gills said:
To be perfectly honest, Van Helsing was probably the worst $7.50 I've ever spent. Not only was it insultingly bad, it was too damn expensive!
Heh! You haven't seen Rollerblade Killerbabes!

I don't know... going into a film not expecting much, and knowing I was going to have fun, at least I was not disappointed. I admit, I have to see it again to actually 'see the film', rather than 'I know where they shot this', to actually say anything about the film itself. Also, judging the digital effects, they may not be a big deal on a tiny dvd player screen, while they may have sucked big time on a large screen.

Anyway - say whatever you want about the film, just don't touch my castle! It's the coolest film location in the entire damn world! :thumbsup:
 
I just don't get it.....

Why was it so bad? It's a fluff fantasy movie, it's not supposed to be deep or anything.... You didn't find it fun?
 
MattC said:
I just don't get it.....

Why was it so bad? It's a fluff fantasy movie, it's not supposed to be deep or anything.... You didn't find it fun?
This is almost as heated as any 'political' thread. :grin: I guess I am gonna watch it again tonight to make up my mind.

MattC, I am with you... it was SUPPOSED to be cheesy, so what's the problem? Does anyone take vampire stories seriously? I guess the only thing that bothers me about films that are supposed to be "fluff fantasy" is that they shouldn't cost a gazillion bucks. Then again - reality is for free. Escape costs money.
 
It was terrible. Back to the Future is fluff fantasy, but it's also a great eighties film. There is such a thing as good fluff films, or rather good bad films. My biggest complaint was that it wasn't even really entertaining. Starship Troopers is fluff too, but it's entertaining.

I also didn't have a choice in seeing it, so that didn't help any. I felt ripped off. For 10.50 a movie you hope you're entertained.
 
Van Helsing wasn't even fun... it was just boring and tedious, like it was trying way too hard to be hip and entertaining and just couldn't get there.
 
Back
Top