|
|
Post by keywolf on May 10, 2012 17:14:04 GMT -5
I... don't know what to say. 'Van Helsing' is apparently being remade, with Tom Cruise in the title role. For those that don't remember, Van Helsing was an underwhelming action movie that came out way back in the golden age of cinema, 2004. As far as I can tell this isn't some kind of bizarre joke. www.variety.com/article/VR1118053365Anyway, assuming this actually happens, I'm kind of conflicted. On the one hand, VH was a big dissapointment that I wanted to enjoy, so why not have another go? On the other hand, is it really considered normal to remake a movie that's less than 8 years old? And with Tom Cruise in the lead role, if anything it'll probably be even more mainstream and watered-down than the original.... |
|
Ian
Pack Member
"Even a man who is pure in heart..."
Posts: 100
|
Post by Ian on May 13, 2012 15:08:03 GMT -5
I thought this was a joke thread. I thought I was being given a taste of my own medicine. ;D I am all for re-makes of bad films (with potential) rather than re-makes of good films. >>On the other hand, is it really considered normal to remake a movie that's less than 8 years old?<< I think it is permissable if the film was terrible and a flop. They are not exactly treading on sacred ground.  Of course, this is not really a remake of Sommers's film. They are not remaking his script/vision/story. They are not basing their film on his or using it as some kind of template/sacred text to follow. "And with Tom Cruise in the lead role, if anything it'll probably be even more mainstream and watered-down than the original...." I cannot imagine anything being more mainstream and watered-down as the original. For me Sommers's 'Van Helsing' is about as risible as it gets. Let's hope this time around Frankenstein's Monster isn't a robot. Here's hoping there is a werewolf in this new version.  |
|
|
|
Post by Marcus on May 14, 2012 3:57:31 GMT -5
I agree if they are doing remakes, than it's better to remake a bad film than a good one, as long as they are doing it to make a better film, not just because they couldn't think of anything else to do.
To be honest I don't mind Tom Cruise - and I think the comedies he's done have been entertaining.
I'm hoping they'll only put in one monster for him to deal with rather than a bunch of them.
|
|
|
|
Post by ArcLight on May 14, 2012 12:01:50 GMT -5
The more I read about it, the more it sounds like Cruise is playing in a movie about a Van Helsing and the media outlets jumped the gun assuming any movie about a Van Helsing had to be a remake of the crappy Jackman film.
'Course it could end up being every bit the boring CGI crapfest the original was either way.
|
|
|
|
Post by Werewolf on May 18, 2012 17:28:48 GMT -5
WTF! How stupid is hollywood getting, they are remaking a film that is 8 years old! I suppose next year they will remaking the Avengers! I quite liked the original (in places) and i just don't see Tom Cruise in the role. I'd rather Hugh Jackman again. Stupid, stupid idea  |
|
|
|
Post by hawkeyepierce on May 19, 2012 5:22:29 GMT -5
I just don't get Hollywood anymore...remaking the flops now? bluhhh....
The concept behind 'Van Helsing' though, has great potential. The film that I loath the most is also the film I wish they would have gotten right the most, one of those great titles to what if about.
Still - I have little faith in a remake. 'Van Helsing' would make a great 80s / 90s blockbuster. If 'Star Wars' is a 40s SciFi serial and 'Indiana Jones' a classic cliffhanger adventure, there's no reason they couldn't do the same with 'Van Helsing' and the traditional film monsters. Sadly the 80s Blockbuster is superduper dead and buried.
|
|
|
|
Post by Werewolf on Jun 3, 2012 16:33:47 GMT -5
I think i might have more faith in it if they weren't considering Tom Cruise in the role. Perhaps Karl Urban instead?
|
|
|
|
Post by hawkeyepierce on Aug 24, 2012 9:27:51 GMT -5
And the ironic thing is, Hugh Jackman was one of the few elements I was okay with in the 2004 film. Can't the new Hammer Horror people do a monster hunter film with Jackman instead ?!
|
|
|
|
Post by keywolf on Aug 25, 2012 3:45:17 GMT -5
That's not a bad idea. He could be the new Captain Kronos!
|
|
|
|
Post by Werewolf on Aug 25, 2012 16:27:11 GMT -5
I like Hugh Jackman, I'd be happy to see him in any sort of horror movie. I'm sure Hammer would have made a much better job of Van Helsing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marcus on Aug 28, 2012 5:00:41 GMT -5
I always wanted Van helsing to be a more serious film. One without comedy. Going back to the old stylish horrors of suspense and gothic horror. But brought up to modern techniques and effects.
Instead we got an action film with comic and supernatural elements.
I want the monsters to be scary, not a characature (no idea if I spelt that right).
|
|
|
|
Post by Werewolf on Sept 15, 2012 9:18:58 GMT -5
Yeah i see what your saying Marcus and i agree, i like my monsters monsters...... But they wanted to make more money by making it accessible to young people and in the end it bit them on the arse. This was supposed to be the first of a series in films and due to poor box office it never went any further. Perhaps if they'd made it an actual horror film it might have gone further....
|
|
dryst
Omega Wolf
Posts: 36
|
Post by dryst on Sept 16, 2012 12:25:31 GMT -5
I had such high hopes for this movie when it originally came out. In fact, my father got the novelization right before I saw it, and I read that first... and in my mind, it played out a whole lot better than what I got on the screen a couple days later. Probably should have stuck with my imagination.
Oh well. If they can't make it dark and serious, they can still make it work... if they can at least have a little fun with it and be sure to recast Dracula, maybe I can mentally blend the two versions together and come up with something I'm able to digest. Maybe.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marcus on Sept 18, 2012 3:26:46 GMT -5
You ever read the dracula novel? I tried, but had a hard time getting into it. I think it was the style of doing it as a set of journals of the main characters. Which is silly (not the journal method, but me not being able to get into it cause of it) as it really is just like when a book jumps from character to character, and I don't have a problem with that.
|
|
dryst
Omega Wolf
Posts: 36
|
Post by dryst on Sept 18, 2012 10:44:54 GMT -5
Read it forever ago. The format was certainly different from what I was expecting, as I was pretty young and just thinking it was a simple fun story about the granddaddy of all vamps. Ah, youth...
Anyway, I'll probably revisit it someday if I can put a dent in my "to do" list. But I can sympathize with getting caught off guard by the way it was presented.
|
|
