Van Helsing!!!

hell, anything to keep Jackman from making another romantic comedy...

i'm actually rather looking forward to this myself. wouldn't mind getting my hands on a copy of the script

if it isn't packed with a bunch of CGI then I'll dig it

Heavy CGI is a gimmick that went away in 2000

although it was ok in Blade2....the vampires were good, but that one fight scene with the 2 before the lights was a bit over the top

sorry....I'm rambling

Sommers was filming The Mummy back in '98 in London. He came into the Tower store where I worked at the time to order some new fangled product called "dvd". I had to ask him where he lived for delivery purposes. He couldn't remember. He honestly forgot where he had been living for 3 months.

We laughed. He signed my Deep Rising CD. I thanked him. He thought I was a freak for recognising him and I went and saw his pictures.
It's an impersonal little relationship, but one of which I am fond.

I have to disagree. The Mummy movies ARE bad. But hey, whatever gets you through. I liked "Blast from the Past." *ducks*

Cushing Van Helsing this, Cushing Van Helsing that. Sheesh. Doesn't ANYONE have any love for Edward Van Sloan? Anyone? You...over there? No?

:grumble: damn kids with their new-fangled Hammer horror moves...back in MY day...murmur murmur...

I don't know, I dug the 'Mummy' films for what they were, a step above mindless action movies, but I don't dig this concept being turned into a CGI-fest. It's a great idea that I think would be done better as a darker, more subdued film.

Just an opinion. I'm sure it'll be fun if nothing else, and the goddamn wererwolf transformation better be done old school...

Goddamn right. Jack Muhfuggin Pierce glue-a-tuft-o'-yak-hair an' SHOOT style, G-money. That's what I'm talkin' about.

end this futile crusade once and for all. Peter cushing, the take-charge-windmill spinning-drive-a-stake-through your-sister's-heart juggernaut vs. doddering edward van sloan? Please. van sloan never held a hot brand to his neck to keep from being vampirized...of course, that's because van sloan was never careless enough to get bitten...

Besides, everyone knows dwight frye carried van sloan through that picture wink

as for a Van Helsing movie? Sounds cool, but i'd rather see a sequel to THE MONSTER SQUAD

Granted, Dwight Frye was and is the shizz when it comes to Renfield. But as you say, my man Ed never GOT bit, and there's a reason for that. He was too smart and wiley. Not to mention being Dr. Ruth's father.

You'll never drive Sloanie out of my heard. Not even with a stake.

s/heard/heart

or maybe...]

s/heard/hearse ? wink

That opening prologue where Van Helsing and a mob of angry villagers storm Castle Dracula in The Monster Squad is obviously where Sommers got the idea for this movie.

or else bela just didn't want any of his senile old-man blood polluting his mack-daddy carpathian veins.

van Sloan's blood probably tasted like brach's ribbon candy and geritol anyway

I'd like to see them hire Rick Baker and have him follow up on his wish from the Werewolf DVD and do a part traditional, part CGI transformation.

No. No CGI whatsoever. Let's see some old-school painful "Oooh I felt that!" Eddie Quist style transformations.

And our flammable friend has the right idea, this needs to be DARK. With someone older and more serious than Hugh Jackman.

I think the worst part of this project is the idea that it has to be all three monsters.

That so blows the wad. Set the concept up with Dracula...

Do the sequel with Dracula and segue into Wolfman...

Then do the third with Frankenstein - and a vengeful Dracula as icing on the cake.

Van Helsing has an arch nemesis - his name is Dracula. He should be the constant thorn in the side - and the through line. It's too early to stick them all together. Spidey should have taught Hollywood the notion of pacing.

That said, Sommers wil make a fun, enegetic film. If it's like the Das Mumy, it'll be a classic. If it's like the Das Mumy Returnen - it'll be fun crap that doesn't warrant repeat viewings. Either way, it'll be fine.

But, if it's like Deep Rising, it will be the reason the motion picture camera was invented.

I agree with most of the stuff up there, but actually I'm diggin' Jackman. This could be set in the "kickin' ass, takin' names" era of Helsing's life.

He's been cuttin' his teeth on low level monsters for a while, now he's really hittin' his prime. He's a little rough around the edges, a little grizzled. A veteran but not yet too old to kick some serious ass. I like it. I'm all for it. As long as they keep the tounge-in-cheek shit PG jokes to a minimum. Ungh. Enough already.

Problem is, that's part of what sucked in most of the audience for both 'Mummy' films...

He did deep rising? I love the ending of that movie.

I am looking forward to this.

PEACE OUT!

Although I thought Mummy Returns was a step too far down the road of mindless action and CGI money shots, I still dig Sommers because he obviously loves monster movies. Deep Rising is cool as hell, and managed to balance chuckles and gore remarkably well. The Mummy has got a bad rep of late, but I still think it's a gleefully silly ride through monster movie archetypes. And, when Imhotep is doing his thang, it's even quite sinister and scary. You know, for kids...

So the thought of Sommers bringing Drac, Frankie and Wolfie back the big screen does tickle my tastebuds. We know it's not going to be a "proper" horror film, and it won't even try to be as classy or iconic as the Universal or Hammer originals, but taken in the spirit of fanboy geek wish fulfilment it sounds like a helluva ride.

The only sticking point for me is Hugh Jackman. I love the guy, but just can't see him as Van Helsing - even a younger, more kick-ass version. I'd envisage the character as more like Johnny Depp in Sleepy Hollow, and go after Jude Law for the part, but then I suspect Sommers is planning a more "rollicking adventure" slant.

Either way, I dig the concept and pray it avoids the pitfalls of suck.

Cushing IS Van Helsing for me, and nothing could ever change that. I am interested in this forthcoming movie.

But I hope Sommers reaches back to his "Deep Rising" sensibility and doesn't use his own "The Mummy Returns" as inspiration.

Plus, Jason's right when he says they should pace themselves with the villains.

You see, I've got to disagree with that. The minute you make it just about Van Helsing vs Dracula, it becomes a Dracula movie. I see the point about avoiding the route that spoiled the Batman series - cramming in as many villains as possible and leading the franchise into a dead end - but I think this film works best with all three big monsters. We've had remakes and new versions of Dracula and Frankenstein, and although the Wolfman is woefully underused, werewolves are still making their appearances. I love the idea of returning to the days of "House of Frankenstein" and putting on a grand show of all the monsters and I'd rather see one film like that, than a drawn out franchise that methodically chomps it's way through the Universal Monsters back catalogue.

This, however, is the undeniable truth as handed down by Jeebus himself.

I'm confident this movie will be a wildly entertaining few hours, whatever happens.

but at least we're getting Law in another monster movie remake -- Mamet's take on Dr. Jekyl and Mr. Hyde, which should prove interesting in its own right.

besides, Depp's already battle some classic villains in the Headless Horseman, Jack the Ripper and Frank Langella.

Cushing was the ULTIMATE Van Helsing.

Frank Finlay comes a close second, and Nigel Davenport was pretty good too.

As much as I love Peter Cushing, I gotta mention here that Anthony Hopkins was fantastic in Coppola's Dracula. Nasty, scholarly, and bluntly funny.

The Universal classics House of Frankenstein and House of Dracula had all three bad guys, but Dracula seemed tacked on. His presence didn't really blend with the Laurence Talbot and Frank Monster storyline. Plus, John Caradine had a beard and a top hat... he didn't feel like Dracula to me.

Monster Squad used all the villains well, but that was definitely a movie aimed at kids. Much like Van Helsing will probably be. The House of Frankenstein TV mini-series was so god-awful, I probably shouldn't even mention it. Oops, too late.

Okay, I'm obviously outvoted, and I've been spanked before for saying I'm not as huge a Hammer fan as everyone else seems to be on this board. But take a look at Van Sloan's resume:

Boris Karloff's Frankenstein--IN IT.
Bela Lugosi's Dracula--IN IT.
Boris Karloff's Mummy--IN IT.

He was a character actor who had one character, the wise old doctor, and he played it well. (I could argue that Cushing was always the Cushing guy, and thus a character actor as well, but as I say, I've been spanked before.) Sloanie was great in those movies, not the action hero that Cushing was, but a wise, intelligent counterpoint to the evil intelligence to which he was the foil. The confrontation between Sloan and Lugosi in Dracula is one of my all time favorite Universal Monster scenes, b/c the acting is great, the body language from Bela is spot on, and Van Sloan's smarmy old-man "haha, Drac, I'm on to you now" tone is fantastic. He wasn't an action hero--Harker was the the action hero, and Van Helsing was his mentor, the man who exposed him to the supernatural and forced him into action.

And I won't even start as to whether Van Sloan was an action hero in Stoker's novel.

So go ahead and love your Cushing. Van Sloan is the man for me. I don't need another action hero. I'll take my wise old mentor.

"For one who has not lived...even a single lifetime...you are a wise man, Van Helsing."--BELA

I meant Van Helsing, naturally. Sleepy == Me. Need more coffee...

I have been arguing the relative powers of two gods. a useless endeavor. all hail van sloan and cushing

This movie is remarkably similar to an independent feature in production. It will be released summer next year, way before Van Helsing.

You should keep an eye out for it.

Your independent feature ?

Oops, the site is <a href="http://www.kanethemovie.com." target="_blank">www.kanethemovie.com.</a>

The main character is the closest you'll find to Peter Cushing in any modern vampire movie.

I'm sure Universal are quaking in their boots. Seriously, if you've got a movie to promote, do the right thing and send an e-mail to johnny@creature-corner.com. Get some proper coverage instead of this guerilla marketing shit.

Also, if you're going to promote a website, at least make sure it has something on it other than a "sign up for more info" button.

Hey cut me some slack here! What's wrong with a bit of shameless self-promotion? Why should hollywood get all the big covereage about their big budget version while we've been trying to get this thing of the ground for ages.

Jeez - you people complain about how Hollywood turns out this shit every year and then turn on the smaller man for trying to beat the system.

There's no pleasing some people.

And BTW, there is plenty of information on the site - or is it just too much of a challenge for you to find it?

*sigh* Should we go through the "shill vs. actual press" educational speech for budding filmmakers again, or should we just start ANOTHER shill-hating flame war? I really think we should post the generic "what the difference is between shilling and getting good press and why we hate the former" speech somewhere on the website so we can just point people to that. It would save time.

We're not saying you shouldn't try to STICK IT TO THE MAN!, Kane. We're just saying you could get some actual press from CC, probably, if you went through the channels. Which would look a lot better in the press kit than transcripts of message boards.

Oh shit, now he's done it.

Because there are rules. It would be nice if you respected the rules of this board. And not act like just because its the net. You can do what you want.

Maybe Doctor Whitehead was a little harsh. But there are proper ways to promote yourself and your work.

PEACE OUT!

That's the problem though, most of these sites aren't interested in posting the news.

Listen, I'm just a bit pissed because of my love for the genre and all I really wanted to do was raise the fact we had a similar project in prodction, before we're ineveitably accused of ripping off the idea.

It should be done here:

<a href="http://chud.nexcess.net/board/ubbhtml/ultimatebb.php?ubb=forum;f=28" target="_blank">http://chud.nexcess.net/board/ubbhtml/ultimatebb.php?ubb=forum;f=28</a>

Post #1: Post #2: Post #3:

Come on, it's not as though I'm selling some service to some crap product.

I was just saying that there actually is another film in development about the same Van Helsing character - the post was related to the rest of this thread since there was talk over how Hugh Jackman is not Peter Cushing.

And all I was doing was saying was 'well, this little movie is going to portray Van Helsing by being more like Peter Cushing'.

That's all.

You still told a fib and Blo's just calling you on it.

Did you at least check first?

I'll see how this is progressing in the morning...

No, I never submitted the news to the bigger sites such as this one until we had a press junket put together.

Listen guys, I apologize for stepping over the line, it's just we've been finding it hard to get the project off the ground and that Hollywood beat us to it. And, well, I read posts about how this new Van Helsing film is going to be ubercool and it pisses me off.

But (for some reason) I didn't expect to be flamed for my post right off the bat.

We see too many shills here and are sensitive to it. S'far as I'm concerned, if you stick around, learn your lesson, and contribute (in the correct forums) apology accepted. And don't worry about H-wood "beating you to it" if your stuff is good do whatever you can to get people to see it.

Ok, well off to a bad start I guess- not good!

Doctor Whitehead- I take it back what I said earlier on.