[eyeteeth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by KR... Dracula - The Legacy Collection (Dracula / Dracula (1931 Spanish Version) / Dracula's Daughter / Son of Dracula / House of Dracula) (1931) Frankenstein - The Legacy Collection (Frankenstein / Bride of / Son of / Ghost of / House of) (1931) The Wolf Man - The Legacy Collection (The Wolf Man / Werewolf of London / Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man / She-Wolf of London) (1941)

Nice price with interesting selections. Some are of B-movie quality but the reasonable price should keep anyone from complaining. Dracula (1931 Spanish Version) is cool and superior to the Lugosi Dracula which doesn't stand up so well. I saw Bride of Frankenstein yet again last week and it always suprises me how good it is. Gorgeous cinematography, black & white so beautiful it makes me question the supposed superiority of color film. (I'm sure a B&W vs color is endlessly debated at movie forums as we debate tubes vs SS or analog vs digital

).

Excellent use of color in horror can be found in the UK Hammer studio films. They have their own flavour of beauty. The use of blood must have initially been shocking to viewers back in 1958. I like this Hammer Horror Collection (The Curse of Frankenstein / Dracula Has Risen from the Grave / Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed / Horror of Dracula / The Mummy / Taste the Blood of Dracula) and I'll probably get it at some point. I love the covers and wouldn't mind a few framed prints for the wall

.

 

[wallijonn]

The first VH commercial (I believe it was for food; a tie in) was way over the top for the 7pm crowd: it showed a woman unhinging her jaws and showing her 4" fangs before she is to plunge them into a woman's neck.

The second commercial was much more toned down and didn't show any action.

I loved the Frazier Mummy series, so I'll probably take a gander at this one.

 

[fyrfytrhoges]

kr, very cool, thanks for the heads up, if i were going to buy, that set is the one i'd get.

 

[eyeteeth]

The reviews are in and yikes they aren't favorable.
Reviews counted: 59
positive: 13 negative: 46

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/VanHelsing-1132255/

But nevermind I have a craving to see a werewolf and shall go anyway

.

 

[KR...]

I am not surprise, when I 1st saw the commercials I was laughing it looked so bad. My cousins taught it was an ad for a video game, when I told them it was a movie, they could not believe it, since the SPX were too terrible to be a real movie.

I ask my horror movie buff friends about this, and they had a lot worst things to say.

I love horror movies and I love these classic characters, but I do not want to see them in a crappy CGI brainless movie.

 

[fyrfytrhoges]

kr i agree wholeheartedly!

 

[chadbang]

Checked out Rotten Tomatoes and this movie has more pans than the kitchen of the Waldorf Astoria.

I liked "The Mummy" and "The Mummy II" largely on the strength of Brendan Fraiser as the hero (Although II really got too cheezy. I hate cute Victorian-looking flying contraptions that defy all laws of physics -- and pygmie mummies. Eeech.), but "Van Helsing" apparently has no characters (or plot) worth speaking of. Pity all these classic film characters are getting slayed by Universal Pictures who made all the original films. This sounds kinda of like a reversed League of "Extradornary Gentlemen". Another disappointment in the end although it started off well.

Meanwhile advance images from Star Wars Episode 3 have started to slip out. Like I care at this point.

Lucas has trashed that series.

 

[eyeteeth]

I'm just thinking about how far & few between really good horror movies are. Recent good horror films?:
Alien-1979
Evil Dead-1983
Silence of the Lambs-1991
Ringu-1998-(original Japanese film remade by Hollywood as 'The Ring' and ruined as usual).

 

[wallijonn]

Well, Abbott & Costello Vol. 2 came out last week and there were none of their monster movies. They'll probably be out in Volume III, which should have been released today.

They are probably better than the movie I just saw. I was always aware of the time while watching it. Will I buy the DVD when it comes out? Only if it comes out at $14.95. The movie was entertaining but not engrossing. There were two good twists: (spoiler alert), Dracula had to be killed by the Wolfman and Frankenstein was likeable. No one clapped when the movie was over. I was surprised to see so many children in the audience. I put this movie right there with Sean Connery's last film. 3.5 stars.

 

[vrao81]

Well I came back from seeing it tonight, and I didn't enjoy it much at all, save for a few action scenes. There's hardly any plot, and what plot there was was so poor I could hardly understand what was going on. There's lots of CGI and monster battles, so if you're into that sort of thing, you'll go ape.

 

[rsaavedra]

Went to see Van Helsing tonight with some friends. What's awesome about this movie is 1) Kate Beckinsale, and 2) The sound. Well, this is a theater I don't frequent a lot here, I now will start going more frequently, the sound at least in that theater felt incredible. At some point when the horses are pulling the carriots and the camera is kind of hovering above, I honestly suddenly felt as if something was moving and falling apart down the stairs right inside the theater, the sound was really so reallistic, and the surrounds were so well used in some points. The lightning flowing through the cables through the castle, when using Frankensteing as the "antenna", that sound was darn powerful and amazing too. Acting of Kate wasn't too great though, and that was what really made me go to his movie, not just her acting of course

But the sound of this movie, despite the lame CGI's and plot etc, I think is worth enjoying and experiencing.

 

[pedxing]

I saw the movie just to see how bad it was. It was really bad. I think the movie was as an exercise with blue screens and special effects, not so much about making a movie. Maybe it was designed for film majors about how not to make a movie. The plot made no sense and felt like the story was tacked on, trying to put glue between the action seens.

I wouldn't recommend this movie unless you really need to watch an action movie with a ton of special effects.

 

[usc goose]

through some strange confluence of events, i actually saw this movie last night. somewhat entertaining, but with laughably bad acting and writing through most of it. anyways, just my two cents.

edit: oh yeah, something i forgot to mention is that this might make an ok date movie since there's plenty of times stuff jumps out to try and scare you. your girl will need someone to hold on to. just don't try and take out a film geek to this one.

 

[eyeteeth]

I just saw it and like it from beginning to end. Of course I went forewarned and with realistic expectations.

It's not any dumber than other Hollywood summer blockbusters. About the same as a Jackie Chan or Will Smith action movie, or a James Bond film. All the same impossible to survive falls from great heights and fatal blows are withstood by the heroes. But there are moon drenched landscapes of forests, villages and impossibly fantastic castles. And lots of leathery wings, fangs and fur

.

 

[yblocgerg]

Saw this a few days ago, and it was indeed rather disappointing. Effects were good, and Kate Beckinsale is just gorgeous. Oh well thats what we get for $9.75 in NY these days

But that could be a whole 'nother thread.