(no subject)
Mar. 16th, 2005 10:11 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
which_chickMovie review. Roy said I'd like Van Helsing as a well-done and satisfying monster movie compilation. However, he'd rented it and returned it and I don't do movie rentals and WalMart didn't have a copy, so I figured I was out of luck, until I thought to check La's house. La, as long-time readers are aware, is the sort of person who loans me movies like Scorpion King. She's a Hugh Jackman fan, to boot. I called them up and Ash verified the borrowability of the movie, so tonight was Van Helsing at my house.
I am pretty sure this is not a good film, but it is a fun film. I had a good time, anyway. Let me count the ways...
The fx were really good. I frequently bitch and moan about the fx on films because they frequently suck. The fx crew on this movie did a really good job of making it fun to watch. I still have some issues with how CG humanoids are animated, but that's because I know what humanoids are supposed to look and move like. The morphs were really good, though, so bravo on that front.
The weather was cooperative and the landscape (not half of it real) of Transylvania was appropriately, possibly excessively Eastern European, with really good geography. There is probably some sort of license fee that one must pay to have a high speed coach chase, at night, through dense forests and along the side of a cliff, but it's still quite a lot of fun when it's well done. This was. Having the coach be on fire was a nice touch. There was thunder. There were torrential rains. There was lightning. It was all exceedingly atmospheric and I was well pleased. The castles were also damn fine. Full marks for an appropriately delightful setting.
Costuming was done with an eye towards period-flavored while being entirely flattering. This worked for me. I am not above watching a film to see people look pretty in clothing that flatters them. While I never thought spandex pants and a corset were proper gypsy wear, the girl what's wearing 'em looks damn fine that way, so no complaints from me. Yum. I'm not even going to complain about the impracticality of wearing heels all the time. She's also got a lovely rack, set off well by the peasant chemise she's wearing under the corset. (She's got a bolero jacket on overtop of that and I've seldom met a piece of attire more useless than a bolero jacket. It looks good, though.) Dracula has good hair and a really good coat. He's almost, but not quite, camp. This is good. He seems to be having as much fun being a vampire as can reasonably be expected, so I'm okay with that. He has an Igor. His Igor is very acceptable. He also has henchmen (the weird little guys), and I thought those were amazingly nice. Our hero gets a helpful friar sidekick, who is both amusing *and* helpful. Yay for that. If he were any prettier, I'd... well, we all know where I'd be going with that, I think. He dresses like a monk, though, and that's just not working for me. *sigh* (Too much time with Saiyuki has led me to expect very specific attire from my monks...) Finally, Hugh Jackman has really, really good hair. And lovely eyebrows. And he can wear a long frock-type coat with the best of 'em. The hat is just icing on the cake. Did I mention the hair? And the eyebrows? Should that not be a sufficient amount of full value, he runs around half naked at the end of the movie. Damn, he's a pretty man. (Full disclosure: I would have endured almost anything as long as it contained a sufficient amount of Hugh Jackman in a long coat. I'm not as hot for him as I am for Johnny Depp, but it's a near thing.)
As you might expect from the comment about coaches, there were horses in this movie. They were nice horses. Well-done horses, and aesthetically-enough filmed that I'm not going to make any snide comments about the (not period correct) cannon boots they were wearing while pulling the Van Helsing's carriage through the woods at ninety miles an hour. Too, while I know damn well that a coach-and-six cannot jump a chasm, it's pretty to think that they could... almost.
The plot... well, there is one. It's reasonably consistent, even. I'm not going to claim that it's an original plot, mind, but it's pretty good for a hack monster movie.
The dialogue the actors have to work with was actually pretty amusing. There were only a few lines that made me wince and the acting in this film was better than it really deserved.
The film's got an aesthetic, a consistent one, that adds to the whole of the thing. Having the opening bits be in black and white really worked for me, but even later on, the sets are coordinated -- while the movie isn't in a real historical period, it feels like it *should* be.
This is a good popcorn movie, a good action movie, an aesthetically satisfying monster movie. It isn't high art, but it's not trying to be high art. It's rather good at being what it is.
I am pretty sure this is not a good film, but it is a fun film. I had a good time, anyway. Let me count the ways...
The fx were really good. I frequently bitch and moan about the fx on films because they frequently suck. The fx crew on this movie did a really good job of making it fun to watch. I still have some issues with how CG humanoids are animated, but that's because I know what humanoids are supposed to look and move like. The morphs were really good, though, so bravo on that front.
The weather was cooperative and the landscape (not half of it real) of Transylvania was appropriately, possibly excessively Eastern European, with really good geography. There is probably some sort of license fee that one must pay to have a high speed coach chase, at night, through dense forests and along the side of a cliff, but it's still quite a lot of fun when it's well done. This was. Having the coach be on fire was a nice touch. There was thunder. There were torrential rains. There was lightning. It was all exceedingly atmospheric and I was well pleased. The castles were also damn fine. Full marks for an appropriately delightful setting.
Costuming was done with an eye towards period-flavored while being entirely flattering. This worked for me. I am not above watching a film to see people look pretty in clothing that flatters them. While I never thought spandex pants and a corset were proper gypsy wear, the girl what's wearing 'em looks damn fine that way, so no complaints from me. Yum. I'm not even going to complain about the impracticality of wearing heels all the time. She's also got a lovely rack, set off well by the peasant chemise she's wearing under the corset. (She's got a bolero jacket on overtop of that and I've seldom met a piece of attire more useless than a bolero jacket. It looks good, though.) Dracula has good hair and a really good coat. He's almost, but not quite, camp. This is good. He seems to be having as much fun being a vampire as can reasonably be expected, so I'm okay with that. He has an Igor. His Igor is very acceptable. He also has henchmen (the weird little guys), and I thought those were amazingly nice. Our hero gets a helpful friar sidekick, who is both amusing *and* helpful. Yay for that. If he were any prettier, I'd... well, we all know where I'd be going with that, I think. He dresses like a monk, though, and that's just not working for me. *sigh* (Too much time with Saiyuki has led me to expect very specific attire from my monks...) Finally, Hugh Jackman has really, really good hair. And lovely eyebrows. And he can wear a long frock-type coat with the best of 'em. The hat is just icing on the cake. Did I mention the hair? And the eyebrows? Should that not be a sufficient amount of full value, he runs around half naked at the end of the movie. Damn, he's a pretty man. (Full disclosure: I would have endured almost anything as long as it contained a sufficient amount of Hugh Jackman in a long coat. I'm not as hot for him as I am for Johnny Depp, but it's a near thing.)
As you might expect from the comment about coaches, there were horses in this movie. They were nice horses. Well-done horses, and aesthetically-enough filmed that I'm not going to make any snide comments about the (not period correct) cannon boots they were wearing while pulling the Van Helsing's carriage through the woods at ninety miles an hour. Too, while I know damn well that a coach-and-six cannot jump a chasm, it's pretty to think that they could... almost.
The plot... well, there is one. It's reasonably consistent, even. I'm not going to claim that it's an original plot, mind, but it's pretty good for a hack monster movie.
The dialogue the actors have to work with was actually pretty amusing. There were only a few lines that made me wince and the acting in this film was better than it really deserved.
The film's got an aesthetic, a consistent one, that adds to the whole of the thing. Having the opening bits be in black and white really worked for me, but even later on, the sets are coordinated -- while the movie isn't in a real historical period, it feels like it *should* be.
This is a good popcorn movie, a good action movie, an aesthetically satisfying monster movie. It isn't high art, but it's not trying to be high art. It's rather good at being what it is.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-03-17 11:34 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-03-17 11:41 am (UTC)As you might have inferred, one of my favorite bits is when the coach falls down a cliff and *bursts into flame*. Because, you know, all horse-drawn coaches have gasoline tanks which rupture and spill over hot engines when they fall off cliffs...
There were two things that bugged me about the movie though.
Firstly, the movie for a long time seems intent on covering every single cliched vampire movie scene - but they miss the hero-dramatically-rips-aside-heavy-curtain-letting-in-daylight scene. Very dissapointed. Don't know why the left it out - they got almost every other cliche covered nicely.
Secondly, it was a very "American" film. By which I mean, unsubtle. The main plot points were covered, then re-capped by someone in words of one syllable or less, just in case you missed the action. However, despite this, there was one thing left only eluded to - it was never made explicit that Van Helsing == The Right Hand Of God. It was implied quite strongly - but no-one ever out and said "Van Helsing! Your first name is Gabriel! You're an angel made flesh - you're the Right Hand of God! It was you who.." etc, etc, etc.
This bothers me: I don't feel that it was particularly neccessary to have someone narrate this, as it was clear to any thinking person watching the film. However, so were a lot of other things that were explicitly narrated. Why did this one detail get omitted? It's not consistent..
And now, I'm going to bed.