Van Helsing Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

HOME | CATALOG | DOWNLOADS | LINKS | EDITORIALS | DISCUSSION | CONTACT

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | User List | Help/Instructions | Log Out | Edit Profile | Register
Night Shade Message Boards » Shepard, Lucius » Van Helsing « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bob K.
Posted on Saturday, May 15, 2004 - 06:49 pm:   

Review is now up at:

http://www.electricstory.com/reviews/vanhelsing.asp
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

richard
Posted on Sunday, May 16, 2004 - 07:29 am:   

Nice - I too just wasted five quid and two hours of my time on VH and came out not even annoyed, just slightly numb. I think the key is in Lucius's allusion to video games - the cardboard cutouts (appropriate! :-) ) are already in the game store windows. This wasn't a movie, it was the trailer for a game/action figure franchise. And there will be a sequel, oh yes, more than one...

What I find a little chilling is that there wasn't even an *attempt* to dovetail with the extant Dracula story - ie, that D escapes to fight another day, hence setting up for the Bram Stoker showdown years later. Ditto the fate of Victor Frankenstein. Clearly, in Sommers' world view, Stoker and Shelley's work is dead - no-one in the audience will know those stories anymore, he thinks. And sadly, I think he's probably right. No accident that in the film VH chooses not to know his past - such continuity and consequence would only dam up the flow of future action and (yawn) derring do. Good God, he'd have to almost have some characterisation then.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Sunday, May 16, 2004 - 08:25 am:   

Sommers' lack of respect for his source material is, indeed, repulsive, but what most amazed me about the film was his utter lack of comprehension of story,his inability to imbue the storyline any sort of logic and fluency of narrative. It's like somebody handed a moron 150 mil and said, Now, Steve, don't bother anybody, just go make a movie or something.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Luis
Posted on Sunday, May 16, 2004 - 02:01 pm:   

Five quid for a ticket. Jeezaz . . .

I heard from a guy who watched the movie last week that most people were leaving the theatre before it was even over. Personally, I'm not even going to bother. I thought it'd be a bad but fun movie, but now I'm not so sure about its entertainment value.

I will stay tuned for Lucius' reviews, though. Please promise you'll write about _I, Robot_ when it comes out! :-)

Best,
Luís
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Sunday, May 16, 2004 - 02:10 pm:   

Luis....

Van Helsing is a NO FUN ZONE. Several walkouts when I saw it, but not a big percentage. I would have joined them, believe me, if I hadn't had to review it.

__I ROBOT__ Ouch! More pain....

:-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Adam-Troy Castro
Posted on Sunday, May 16, 2004 - 08:11 pm:   

My own review of this dreck is posted in my topic; I am particularly amazed that Transylvania has two day months. A-TC
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Sunday, May 16, 2004 - 08:31 pm:   

Yeah, two-day months and really convenient weather. It's funny, I thought I was gonna have trouble finding 2000 words to say about this, but it was so execrable, it touched something in me and the words just flowed and I couldn't fit everything in. :-) I agree it was fucking loud, but it still pales for me beside DRACULA 2000, a film which, though less generally loud, had the loudest sound FX I've ever heard. Footsteps like the drums of Mordor and so forth.

Thanks for sharing....
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

adam-troy castro
Posted on Sunday, May 16, 2004 - 09:30 pm:   

I wanted to ask, would it have been SO hard to have Van Helsing find the Frankenstein monster because he's a smart, intelligent hero capable of tracking clues to their source? Or at least because SHEER LUCK is not an attractive element for action heroes? No; that would have taken a good five/ten minutes from all the swooping from heights. No, Van Helsing had to fall through some floorboards and land right on top of the guy. VAN HELSING: WITH THE HELP OF ROTTEN FLOORBOARDS, AND INCREDIBLE COINCIDENCE, HE SAVES THE UNIVERSE!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

adam-troy
Posted on Sunday, May 16, 2004 - 09:32 pm:   

Will also repeat, for those who didn't check my own review: this film, literally, made my wife throw up. Not the gore. Not disorientation from the action. The editing. Made my wife. leave the theatre. and throw up.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Sunday, May 16, 2004 - 10:30 pm:   

By the time they crashed down onto the monster, man, I had lost all hope for or concern with matters of plot and character and was pretty much into can-I-endure-this mode. This is the state of contemporary narrative in Hollywood--video game narrative. As bad as VH is, and it is monumentally bad, there are going to be other movies this summer that will be almost as bad or maybe even worse, and there have been movies in the past year, movies like LXG, that are in the ball park. It's the direction things are going. Continuity and logic are right out the window as far as being criteria for a shooting script. I saw a film treatment of PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN and one of the selling points was (I swear) that there would be no secondary plots and no depth of characterization in the script. It's really astonishing. Better keep the Mrs away from the multiplexes this summer... :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Adam-Troy Castro
Posted on Monday, May 17, 2004 - 07:27 am:   

BTW, Lucius: correction, you may want to make to your review: Velkan is not Anna's father, but her brother.

Not that it saves the story or anything, but getting this one point accurate might stave off the triumphant e-mails from folks who say things like, aha, you didn't even see it...!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Monday, May 17, 2004 - 07:33 am:   

Yeah, thanks, man. I think Gordon already caught that. Like you said, brother-father, whatever. DIdn't really make much diff. Nothing would have, I'm afraid.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bob K.
Posted on Tuesday, May 18, 2004 - 08:42 pm:   

I just found out that Stephen Sommers went to the same school I did: St. John's University in Minnesota.

Bob
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Tuesday, May 18, 2004 - 09:07 pm:   

This may well explain your incompetence in directing films. :-)

What, were you cruising the alumni site?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bob K.
Posted on Tuesday, May 18, 2004 - 09:25 pm:   

No, they sent out a class letter that had this blurb: "'Van Helsing,' a $148 million monster extravaganza, kicked off the summer movie season on May 7. The movie was written, directed and produced by Stephen Sommers '80, who is also famous for writing and directing movies such as The Mummy, The Mummy Returns, and The Scorpion King. For more information, visit the Van Helsing Web site."

I see they put "Van Helsing" in quotes but failed to give the other movies the same treatment. Maybe a Dracula fan wrote it.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bob
Posted on Tuesday, May 18, 2004 - 09:26 pm:   

I meant to say "ironic quotes."
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Wednesday, May 19, 2004 - 07:20 am:   

A $148 million monster extravaganza...wow. Is that a category -- Monster extravaganza? Not how I'd describe it.

So, Bob. What were the sports teams at St. John's called?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Wexler
Posted on Wednesday, May 19, 2004 - 04:41 pm:   

The Sleepy Worts.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Wednesday, May 19, 2004 - 04:49 pm:   

No, actually, it's the Johnnies. :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Iron James
Posted on Thursday, May 20, 2004 - 05:06 am:   

I loved Van Helsing from start to finish. It seems the crowd I saw it with loved it, as well.

I went back to see it a second time with my son, and again the place was packed. No walkouts at all, and a line waiting for the next showing.

Many we talked to had seen it more than once.

I though it was a fun movie.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Thursday, May 20, 2004 - 08:18 am:   

Well, IJ, as the British official says to TE Lawrence in LAWRENCE OF ARABIA, "Let it be noted that you have a peculiar notion of fun."
:-)
As for the film's box office...if you've read any of my reviews, you likely know my feelings regarding that subject. In my view, it was a bad video game iwth indifferent special effects and a complete lack of narrative. I don't ask much of a popcorn movie, just a modicum of logic, a dash of story, an ounce of character development. VH offered none of that.

But hey, whatever floats your boat....
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bob K.
Posted on Thursday, May 20, 2004 - 12:28 pm:   

"Monster extravaganza" -- seems an appropriate description to me. It was extravagant in its use of monsters, wasn't it? And while the mascot for St. John's was "the Johnnies," it was represented by an anthropomorphic rat creature.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Thursday, May 20, 2004 - 12:45 pm:   

Well, my description in casual conversation would be something more pungent, like--to paraphrase a famous Minz--it blew chunks. :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

T Andrews
Posted on Thursday, May 20, 2004 - 02:13 pm:   

Reading the reviews of Van Helsing has totally depressed me.
It continues to amaze me how these highly paid professional movie-makers can screw up what looks to me like a walk in the park. I mean, come on-they didn't have to create Frankenstein or Van Helsing, or the vampire chicks...better writers already did all that work for them. Plus, you add all the computer technology and cinematography that they are now capable of...how can they screw up? Or maybe that's WHY they do. They don't have to do much to put something together. I don't know.
I just know that I was soooo looking forward to this, and now I think I'll just wait til it goes to video. I hope, like Iron James, maybe just maybe I'll like it.
:-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Thursday, May 20, 2004 - 03:30 pm:   

Well, T, at least you're going in with a case of lowered expectations. You know it's not just me and ATC. Go to Rotten Tomatoes dot com where they print all the newpaper reviews a movie gets. Overall, it's got a 14 percent favorable rating.

Absolutely the reason they screw things up is too much mone. They don't think they need story. And, too, they don't care anymore. They know they can market the hell out of product like VH and get a big opening, then even if it falls off, they can earn out with DVD sales.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Adam-Troy Castro
Posted on Thursday, May 20, 2004 - 05:45 pm:   

Y'know, there are moments when epic scope works.

Was just watching moments of ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA on TV...and the crowded Manhattan street scene, with maybe hundreds of extras, and the fashions and street flavor of a long-ago time, were just gorgeous.

And there are moments when roller-coaster pacing works. Count me among the folks who love that nonstop series of cliffhangers in the middle of RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK.

And there are moments when CGI monsters work. There are. Really. 'Taint difficult to name a few even if you elect not to go the easy route and name Peter Jackson.

There are EVEN moments when totally nonsensical stories, with no point whatsoever, work.

Really.

There are.

It can be done.

We can all name movies we love, as works of art and even as guilty treasures, that testify to all these points.

However, throwing buckets of shit at the wall, in the hopes that some of it can stick, is not the way to produce a Jackson Pollock.

You got to know which way to aim.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Thursday, May 20, 2004 - 06:03 pm:   

ATC is right. Epic scope's not the problem. Lawrence of Arabia. 2001. etc. Hollywood these days makes bad smaller movies, too. The problem with moviemaking today is that it's controlled not by producers and directors, but by lawyers and agents. Packagers. Bottom line guys. They run the business the same way they'd run a business that made seat belts, and so, since movies aren't seat belts, you get crap.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

MarcL
Posted on Thursday, May 20, 2004 - 07:25 pm:   

I read a really enjoyable script a few years ago called SHERLOCK HOLMES AND THE VENGEANCE OF DRACULA, by the late Michael Valle. It had enough of a story to serve as a solid spine for a very entertaining big-budget monster movie. The cliched characters were treated with the right mixture of respect and humor. I think I was hoping VAN HELSING would have some of this unmade film's charm. Now I just dread to think what Valle's fine script would be turned into if it ever made it onto the screen.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Thursday, May 20, 2004 - 07:52 pm:   

Yeah, that's the problem exactly, man. Hwood gets a script, they love it, they can't get enough of it, and then they give it to some germ or the Socal version of an auteur to rewrite, to make it more "accessible." And the great script turns into shite.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Adam-Troy Castro
Posted on Thursday, May 20, 2004 - 09:19 pm:   

Which is of course why MOST of the movies I really, really love these days, turn out to come from outside the studio system. (I wanna see SUPER SIZE ME and that BLUE WATER thing.)

Audiences are at fault, too. Speaking to friends, recently, I ask them what movies they're really looking forward to. My friends say, SPIDERMAN 2, SHREK 2, STEPFORD WIVES, and so on....and I note that everything they WANT to see is a sequel or a remake. That's the stuff people get excited about. (And I'm not being a snob about this. I have a lifelong connection to Spidey as a character which has continued into my professional life, and yes, I want to see the film. But is it the film I'm *most* looking forward to seeing? Is it my ideal filmgoing experience? Not bloody likely.)

I will confess, movie I most wanna see this year is THE AVIATOR. Which may suck. But a movie that's about something, and sucks, usually sucks less than one that isn't about anything and sucks.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Thursday, May 20, 2004 - 09:42 pm:   

My problem with The Aviator is I don't think Scorcese's made a good movie for a very long time. I'm looking forward to seeing Last Life in the Universe, a Thai movie with a rep and cinematography by Chris Doyle, and The Intended, a thriller set in 19th century Malaysia with a Danish director and a mostly British cast. The next movies I WILLsee will be the Emmerich Ice Age flck and The Chronicles Of Riddick. Lots of potential for brain damage there.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

ml
Posted on Thursday, May 20, 2004 - 10:31 pm:   

Speaking of videogame narratives, as a creator thereof, considering that most of the most movielike games crib their moviest moves from movies, there's a horrible thing that happens when you try to extract something movielike out of the game. A cliche of a cliche of a cliche. Whatever is fresh and interesting in the gamespace does not translate well to movies, and you get something that seems as if it were based on a review of a game rather than the game itself...or diluted from a blurb from the back of the box.

Valle did a treatment for our game, which he pitched to us, and it was quite unfortunate. He loved the game but didn't have anything interesting to bring to the (admittedly thankless) process of trying to turn it into a film. He had some of the sinister alien enemies reuniting with their families in a tender scene at the end. His producers LOVED it and didn't understand why we were totally turned off. I was disappointed because I liked his Holmes/Dracula script so much, I thought he would be able to achieve the impossible.

One movie comes to mind as being constructed totally like a videogame: DEEP BLUE SEA. It's constructed in levels. As the characters head for the surface, each exit is closed off ahead of them. They are diverted through increasingly tortuous paths, faced with electrified water, flooding rooms, and ultimately a water elevator with a shark in it. It was like watching someone else play a game. I know this "plot" describes countless s.f./suspense/horror movies, but this one emeged exactly that style of gameplay was at its peak. It felt like an example of a movie regurgitating half-digested game ideas that had been snatched semi-chewed from the jaws of malformed movies in the first place.

Then again...talking about popularity of sequels, this is most of the game industry right now. The thing I'm working on has a "2" in it. The game I'm most looking forward to in the near future is Thief 3. Games are unusual in that they tend to get better with iteration, but there is still the dearth of original ideas that I have gotten used to in every medium I've loved.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Thursday, May 20, 2004 - 10:48 pm:   

VH has a lot of video game in it, but not as clearcut as DBS. Levels. Walls that become mirrors that pass you through to other spaces. Etc. The Van Helsing Game may be kinda cool, actually. Maybe that's what Sommers had foremost in mind.

As for games, I know nothing. I think I might go to E3 next year, though. Get some magazine to pay my way and write some kind of whacked out piece. It looks like fun.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Marc
Posted on Thursday, May 20, 2004 - 11:03 pm:   

It's not. I went with a pack of friends last year, griped all the way down about how we had to change planes and would get there late, and we had an early flight back, we'd have no time at all to "have fun". After three hours, even the most hardcore of us decided to head back to the airport early. LAX was a calm, blissful paradise. I read a good description of this year's event that described it as sort of like putting your head in a pot and having someone whack on it with spoons and bats as hard as they could for hours and hours and hours. I'm sure reading your take on the event would be much more enjoyable than attending, so...go right ahead! (Actually, next year I probably will go.)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Friday, May 21, 2004 - 04:29 am:   

Huh! I know a couple of people who swear by it...but then they're probably mutants. At any rate, there are some things I've heard that make it sound like you could do some sort of interesting magazine piece and I'm enough of a freak that I like LA, so I think I'll give it a go.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

adam-troy Castro
Posted on Friday, May 21, 2004 - 05:57 am:   

Scorcese: agreed, he has not made a great movie for years, not since GOODFELLAS; his last really good one, flawed as it was, was CASINO, and both GANGS OF NEW YORK and BRINGING OUT THE DEAD were lumpy, unwieldy things. However, a Scorcese failure is a fascinating failure, and I remain able to root for him (much as I still root for, though at this point have given up on, Woody Allen.)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Friday, May 21, 2004 - 06:11 am:   

See, I'd go back even farther with Scorcese to find a good movie. I sort of saw GOODFELLAS as MEAN STREETS lite and the voiceover in CASINO ("we spent all night counting money" over footage of Pesci and DeNiro counting money, etc.) made me want to find Martin S and hunt him for sport. But whatever, the combination of Scorcese and DiCaprio just won't pull me in. I wish there was a Hollywood movie that I was looking forward to, but I just cant think of one.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dave G.
Posted on Friday, May 21, 2004 - 08:19 am:   

I think I'm the only person in America who liked Bringing Out the Dead. Not a great movie, not cohesive or compelling, but with some really interesting performances (Tom Sizemore, LOVED Ving Rhames' "resurrection" scene). I liked it for its pieces, sort of the same way I liked Masked and Anonymous.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Friday, May 21, 2004 - 09:08 am:   

Yup, you're the only person in America who liked it.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

ben peek
Posted on Saturday, May 22, 2004 - 03:55 am:   

actually, i quite liked BRINGING OUT THE DEAD. i even like the book (prefer its ending, though), and i thought the film was pretty faithful to that...

of course, i don't live in america, so the point still stands :-)

outside BRINGING OUT THE DEAD, i haven't liked a lot of scorcese's recent films, and i don't see it much changing if he's going to keep using dicaprio.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Saturday, May 22, 2004 - 05:09 am:   

...and, yes ben, there was one person outside of america who liked it. :-)

The Nicolas Cage factor was way too much for me.

I liked MEAN STREETS a lot., TAXI DRIVER a little, and that's about it.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

adam-troy
Posted on Saturday, May 22, 2004 - 06:09 am:   

Urrm, I enjoyed BRINGING OUT THE DEAD. I do not think it quite worked, overall, but it was by no means a total abomination, and there were some parts of it that I found riveting.


So that's three.


My opinion of Scorcese is significantly higher than yours. I'm a nut on AFTER HOURS, for instance, and admire both GOODFELLAS and CASINO a lot more than you do.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Saturday, May 22, 2004 - 08:21 am:   

AFTER HOURS was, I'll admit, kinda fun. It's just not a movie I think of unless someone else brings it up. And I can't abide Nicolas Cage. Mike Figgis got decent performances out of him and Elizabeth Shue (which clearly demonstrates the value of a director, because neither actor's been close to that again), but he's turned in some of the most abominable performances in the history of film. BRINGING OUT THE DEAD wasn't his worst, but it wasnt close to the top, either. Some of his work is is a caractuture of acting. Howlingly bad. So, just can't get with that one.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

MarcL
Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 12:20 am:   

In spite of everything, I took my daughters to Van Helsing today. The 8 year old was mildly amused and kept her opinions to herself; the 11 year old thought it was COOOOOL! I enjoyed the fully modelled moonlit vistas (what used to be matte paintings), and certain of the other visuals. I'd say that if you're waiting till this comes out on DVD, the tactic will backfire. There's so little content that by the time it's been reduced to a TV screen, you won't be able to pick out the details you're likely to enjoy without the aid of a high powered microscope. It's certainly nothing you'd want to see for the characters, the story, or the continuity. I did see various Abbot and Costello hokey horror movies in the Saturday matinees when I was a kid, and I suspect that I would have enjoyed this a far sight more than I enjoyed those. Then again, matinee movies were primarily a reason to buy a huge bag of candy and shoot half of it at the screen while dodging whatever was coming at you from behind. There was none of that behavior at the multiplex today. This is truly a degenerate age.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 07:23 am:   

That's pretty much my take...though I think the Abbott and Costello routines (some of them at any rate) were more clever than anything in the VH script. But wthatever. The fact that one can compare a close to 200 million dollar (after promo) movie to something like those movies is a suffiicient indictment.. Also, you knew not to expect too much. Imagine, going to it with normal expectations -- that was rough. :-)

BTW, I hate cartoons. It's just a place where my brain won't go usually. But last week I watched an episode of South Park in which the kids go to see The Passion of the Christ.
Damn, that was funny. The protrait of Mel Gibson's whacko-ness was outstanding. I may have have become a fan.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 07:27 am:   

PS -- I guess what I'm saying, too, re VH, is that if you'd piy Abbott and Costello into the movie, they would have been more interesting than the characters played by Jackman and Beckinsale. Jackman has this big rep as an actor, but after two lame romantic comedies. VH, Swordfish, and the X-men...I'm not too sure. Hard to get a line on an actor who's best written role is Wolverine...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dave G.
Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 08:08 am:   

I think South Park: Bigger, Longer, Uncut was the single funniest movie, animated or live-action the year it came out. I can't believe a fan of politically incorrect humor has missed out on SP. Those guys are fearless, and get away with everything. Anybody who can air a spoof of Bugs Bunny-Elmer Fudd WB cartoons using Osama bin Laden and the South Park kids can do anything.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

MarcL
Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 08:29 am:   

Yes, I was going to chime in about SP:BLU. I haven't followed SP over the years, but not only was that movie a work of genius, it was also a fine musical in the classic tradition of movie musicals. It was the last thing any fan of South Park would have expected. I wasn't a huge fan until I watched that movie.

Another thing worth searching for is "Silence: The Musical," a short musical adaptation of "Silence of the Lambs." Brilliant. The guys who did it had the whole thing online briefly. Hey, it's back!

http://www.silencethemusical.com/index.shtml
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Adam-Troy Castro
Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 08:53 am:   

Re Hugh Jackman:

his best written role ON FILM is Wolverine.

He is an accomplished stage actor, having performed admirably in both OKLAHOMA and (currently) THE BOY FROM OZ; videos of his performances are available, and it would be a mistake to judge him by the relative flatness and sometimes awfulness of the opportunities he receives as a screen personality.

Watching Jackman in OKLAHOMA is like listening to Brent Spiner on the soundtrack album of 1776: you realize that these personalities of evidently limited talent are indeed crushed and imprisoned in the venues where we normally see them.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 09:07 am:   

Dave, I'll have to check the movie out.

Mark, thanks for the url. Checking it out, too.

ATC, yup. That was the point I was making -- I suppose he's good. I remember being shocked when Tony Curtis did THE SWEET SMELL OF SUCCESS and showed he could act. One thing that always messed me up was the fact that David Hedison, the guy who played the Captain on TV's Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea, came to Hollywood with the rep of being the best actor to come out of the Broadway theatre scene since Marlon Brando. Jackman, though, is probably making too much money to ever care about acting again.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

R.Wilder
Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 09:17 am:   

The South Park movie kills. Funniest shit ever.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dave G.
Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 09:51 am:   

Oh, come on, you mean you didn't simply melt over Hedison in THE FLY? "help meeeeeeee...!" :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 10:18 am:   

Did you?

I thought it was pretty cool when Vincent Price smashed it with a rock!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dave G.
Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 12:09 pm:   

Absolutely. Of course, that was back in the day when he was "Al" Hedison. Once he became "David" Hedison, it was all downhill. You know those "David"s. Nothing but shallow pricks, the lot of 'em. :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 12:40 pm:   

Lessee...There's David Halberstam. Yup. Shallow pirck. David Caruso. SP. David Bowie. Probably SP. David Foster Wallace. Yup. Too clever by half. Does not feel deeply.
David Cronenberg. Well, maybe not...still, he's worked in Hollywood, so you gotta say there's some SP in him. David Duke, Davy Jones, David Eisenhauer. Check. Dave Duncan...hmmm. Exception that proves the rule. David Brinkley. Dead, doesn't count. Dave Mustaine, David Frost, Diamond Dave. Check again.

Maybe you're right. :-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dave G.
Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 12:47 pm:   

I would disagree with you only on David "the new Shatner" Caruso, whose stylized renderings of Horatio Caine on CSI Miami are so rib-tickling it is my new guilty pleasure.

Don't forget David Hockney, Dave Meggett, David Byrne, David Carr, etc. Gawd, we're a mess.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 12:51 pm:   

Dave "The Hammer" Schulz.

That kind of seals the deal, huh?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dave G.
Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 02:14 pm:   

Lucius, I hate to differ with you on a matter of such great importance, but if you are talking about the grappler, wasn't it "Dr. D" David Schultz?

He was always one of my favorites. Not only did he bitchslap John Stossel (one of my top ten TV moments), but he also worked as a bounty hunter and was responsible for some of the best moments ever on both the Morton Downey show and Vince McMahon's Tuesday Night Titans.

I would exempt the Good Doctor from my blanket condemnation of all things Dave...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 03:18 pm:   

I was referring to Dave "The Hammer" Schulz, the chief goon of the Broad Street Bullies back in the 70s....
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

ben peek
Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 07:48 pm:   

i would say that hugh jackman's best film role was a small film called ERSKINVILLE KINGS, by alan white. it was done before he took the role in the x-men movies, and i think i heard somewhere that this is what landed him the role. could be. at any rate, jackman is utterly fantastic in it. nothing he's done since has been as good.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 08:04 pm:   

That was one Australian movie that didn't make it across the water, far as I know. You ever hear of an Aussie film called Danny Deckchair? It's been getting good notices at the festival. Quirky romantic comedy.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

ben peek
Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 10:03 pm:   

yeah, it was out last year, sometime. it's got miranda otto, hasn't it? anyhow, i thought it was a kids film--i was definately under the impression that it was a 'fun for all the family' kind of film, and good, but only in that way that all your family can watch it at the same time.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Monday, May 24, 2004 - 10:13 pm:   

Well, I haven't seen it, but people seem to be liking it over here -- It's apparently a romantic comedy with a surreal edge. Guy hitches some balloons to a deckchair and goes for a sail, winds up in the back yard of a meter maid (Otto). That's all I know, except that it's getting good reviews in places that don't usually give bad movies good reviews. Thanks.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dave G.
Posted on Tuesday, May 25, 2004 - 06:32 am:   

Sorry, Lucius, I had blocked that era of hockey out of my mind. Brought back too many memories of underachieving Rangers squads. Guess I should have known you weren't a mat aficionado.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lucius
Posted on Tuesday, May 25, 2004 - 09:07 am:   

Nope. Not a wrestling fan. Except for NCAA wrestling...

Add Your Message Here
Post:
Username: Posting Information:
This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Password:
Options: Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message
Action:

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | User List | Help/Instructions | Log Out | Edit Profile | Register