Topic: Van Helsing
We're back!
Man, I missed this show. This is a fun one.
Teague Chrystie
I have a tendency to fix your typos.
I have a tendency to fix your typos.
Re: Van Helsing
I've only seen a few minutes of this movie. I had to turn away before my eyes and ears started bleeding. 
This is rare for me, but I'll be listening to this one without watching the movie alongside. Welcome back!
Re: Van Helsing
I've also seen probably 10 minutes of this. I guess I have a reason to watch it now. Also looking forward to the Mummy eventually, that is a guilty pleasure, and I will be disappointed if you don't dedicate atleast 10 minutes to swooning over Rachel Weisz in that movie. Cause Dayum.
- Jimmy B
- Great Scot!
- Offline
Re: Van Helsing
Oh, they do a bit of Weisz swooning, if I recall correctly. It was just last night but it was late and I was sleepy. So, I forgets.
- Dave
- Australian Correspondent
- Offline
Re: Van Helsing
Is this on the iTunes? Friends in you head, and What Are you doing, movie both draw blanks.
- Rob
- Member
- Offline
Re: Van Helsing
I believe the Weisz swooning consisted of a stray comment when she's chained to the slab toward the end, and, if I recall correctly, some mention of how she may look more attractive now than she did then. This is totally true. Rachel Weisz in her 40s is hotter than Rachel Weisz in her late 20s. Beats me how a person does that.
- Invid
- Member
- Offline
Re: Van Helsing
The old Down in Front RSS feed still works, and that's what you'll get if you click on the RSS icon at the top of the page. The new episode showed up for me just now.
I write stories! With words!
http://www.asstr.org/~Invid_Fan/
http://www.asstr.org/~Invid_Fan/
- Zarban
- Member
- Offline
Re: Van Helsing
Jimmy B wrote:
Oh, they do a bit of Weisz swooning, if I recall correctly.
Uhh, that may have been me. Cause... yeah.
Trey Stokes said on the commentary rather than wrote:
Zarban doesn't even know what our podcast is called.
Mama always told me "If you don't have anything nice to say about the name someone has chosen for their podcast...."
- Doctor Submarine
- Normal Person
- Offline
Re: Van Helsing
If you're looking for a name for Frankenstein's monster, in the book he calls himself Adam, because he's a fan of Paradise Lost.
"The Doctor is Submarining through our brains." --Teague
Re: Van Helsing
Zarban wrote:
Jimmy B wrote:Oh, they do a bit of Weisz swooning, if I recall correctly.
Uhh, that may have been me. Cause... yeah.
That explains why my computer was having trouble...
God loves you!
- Snail
- Just Another Movie Enthusiast
- Offline
Re: Van Helsing
Mike, it wasn't Tiny Toons... it was Animaniacs.
"Life is about movies; anything else is a bonus!"- Me 
Re: Van Helsing
I can have my guilty pleasures of movies that I feel are bad but still enjoy, however.... I just can't really like this movie. It's just too over the top with some things yet tries to take itself a little too seriously. I have not seen Battleship to zero my scale of what "bad" might be, but I don't need to. This was my 2nd viewing of the film and glad to let it be just that. It's just not fun.
Anyway, glad to have you guys back! Yesterday, I was all giddy watching the broadcast.
Last edited by Asturon (2013-05-07 05:39:00)
- bullet3
- I Know Regular Expressions
- Offline
Re: Van Helsing
For what its worth, I'd rewatch Battleship before I rewatched Van Helsing, at least Battleship has a goofy fun 30 minute climax to payoff the shitty rest of the movie, Van Helsing mostly operates at the same level of incoherent but boring WTF
Re: Van Helsing
'scuse me lads, but it was Richard Roxbororoughghghg that married one of the witches, not the director... no?
/Z
- Trey
- A Grizzled Old Dick With Stories To Tell
- Offline
Re: Van Helsing
Could be. I make shit up sometimes.
- BigDamnArtist
- "I'm Canadian, you can trust me on this.
- Offline
Re: Van Helsing
I hadn't seen the movie before this. I was barely even watching it when I was listening to the comm. And by about the hour twenty mark I was ready to throw in the towel on the whole shabang.
Eesh.
And no, I have absolute zero desire to ever actually watch this movie...ever.
ZangrethorDigital.ca
- Zarban
- Member
- Offline
Re: Van Helsing
So, what is really wrong with Van Helsing? I mean, I can point to specific things I don't like, and the panel did as well, but what's the bottom line? Is this script just too much of a mess to save?
To me, it's got about three movies' worth (or a whole TV season's worth) of monsters and villains and crazy happenings. I can't imagine how anyone read a script like that and gave it the green light. It must have read like a story made up by a breathless 8-year-old.
- Xtroid
- Member
- Offline
Re: Van Helsing
CHUD LIST: THE WORST CGI IN HISTORY DAY 9
Re: Van Helsing
Zarban wrote:
. I can't imagine how anyone read a script like that and gave it the green light. It must have read like a story made up by a breathless 8-year-old.
THIS. This is what it feels like. It's like a kid just decided to combine everything he/she thought was the only chance to make an epic adventure so everything got thrown in.
- bullet3
- I Know Regular Expressions
- Offline
Re: Van Helsing
That's the biggest problem, yes. On top of that, I think it's really ugly visually, I actively dislike pretty much all the creature designs, costume choices, and cinematography. It all looks ultra fake and computery, like I'm watching a high school production of Van Helsing at times. This is basically the same approach Sommers had to Gi Joe, except where that approach works when its essentially a bunch of action figures and gadgets blowing each-other up Saturday morning cartoon style, this kind of tone absolutely does not jive with a gothic horror setting. I think this hobbles it from square one, because while the James Bond setup is sorta fun, I actually think it really doesn't work in a monster movie setting. This should be a deliberately paced, atmospheric horror movie, Van Helsing as played by Anthony Hopkins or Christopher Plummer, instead of an Indiana Jones style hero.
Last edited by bullet3 (2013-05-07 17:26:13)
- Dorkman
- Member
- Offline
Re: Van Helsing
Zarban wrote:
So, what is really wrong with Van Helsing? I mean, I can point to specific things I don't like, and the panel did as well, but what's the bottom line? Is this script just too much of a mess to save?
To me, it's got about three movies' worth (or a whole TV season's worth) of monsters and villains and crazy happenings.
I think this is exactly the answer to your question. There is simply too damn much going on to engage meaningfully with it. It's like every character always has three goals pulling him or her in three different directions, with no really meaningful throughline for anyone, and no tension can be built because to juggle all these threads the movie has to essentially change the subject every couple of minutes, particularly at the climax when things start happening all on top of each other.
You save the script, IMO, by making the story about dealing with ONE monster, and Van Helsing just has to incidentally wade through some other monsters along the way because that's the world he inhabits. As Trey said, it's the attempt to create the Grand Unified Theory of Classic Monsters that sinks it.
- Seth_Brower
- Member
- Offline
Re: Van Helsing
Can I just say, as I listen to this, that even as a friend of everyone, and someone who's been on a few times it is still an odd feeling to realize I just got name-checked on a podcast that gets disseminated to the entire internet.
See what I've worked on recently here:
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2869151/
And ways to get in touch with me at:
http://www.google.com/profiles/SethBrower
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2869151/
And ways to get in touch with me at:
http://www.google.com/profiles/SethBrower
- Invid
- Member
- Offline
Re: Van Helsing
You're lucky. The one time I was quoted on the show, in the Blair Witch commentary, Dorkman couldn't remember who wrote what he was quoting
I write stories! With words!
http://www.asstr.org/~Invid_Fan/
http://www.asstr.org/~Invid_Fan/
Re: Van Helsing
Dorkman wrote:
Zarban wrote:So, what is really wrong with Van Helsing? I mean, I can point to specific things I don't like, and the panel did as well, but what's the bottom line? Is this script just too much of a mess to save?
To me, it's got about three movies' worth (or a whole TV season's worth) of monsters and villains and crazy happenings.
I think this is exactly the answer to your question. There is simply too damn much going on to engage meaningfully with it. It's like every character always has three goals pulling him or her in three different directions, with no really meaningful throughline for anyone, and no tension can be built because to juggle all these threads the movie has to essentially change the subject every couple of minutes, particularly at the climax when things start happening all on top of each other.
You save the script, IMO, by making the story about dealing with ONE monster, and Van Helsing just has to incidentally wade through some other monsters along the way because that's the world he inhabits. As Trey said, it's the attempt to create the Grand Unified Theory of Classic Monsters that sinks it.
I think the panel summed it up quite well when they said that Sommers basically went "I want to do all the classic monsters" rather than taking them on one at a time like he did with "The Mummy."
That is Van Helsing's greatest downfall-it really doesn't know what it wants to be when it grows up.
God loves you!
- AshDigital
- Member
- Offline
Re: Van Helsing
If we are nominating directors to re-boot Van Helsing
I would nominate my main man from Mexico… Guillermo del Toro
... for tribute!
---------------------------------------------
I would never lie. I willfully participate in a campaign of misinformation.
I would never lie. I willfully participate in a campaign of misinformation.