Talk:Van Helsing (film)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
This article is part of WikiProject Films, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to films and film characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start
This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Low
This article has been rated as Low-Importance on the importance scale.
This article, category, or template is part of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to horror film and fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Spoiler warning: Plot and/or ending details follow.

Contents

[edit] Whoa

That is one long plot. ARBlackwood

Agreed. This needs a MAJOR trim. This isn't a plot summary, it is basically the entire plot spelled out. I can spell out the plot in much less: 1) Van Helsing fights evil monsters. 2) He is sent to fight Dracula. 3) He eventually succeeds. That's too short, but come on. No need for excess. -JC 07:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I know this was said, but I'm adding my two cents. Does anyone know the plot well enough to discuss the highlights in four or five paragraphs? If it's not done in a week or so, I'll do it myself. Gary Seven 15:38, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

this isn't a plot summary, it's a transcription! if i find the time i'll be back with a respectful scythe. but very sharp. -- Denstat 10:01, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
so far so good. i've completed my first full edit of the plot and will take a break before returning. it is still way too long, although i liked the original plot contributor's dedication to a full transciption, and some of their prose. but a fansite?WP:NOT. Denstat 09:44, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
i keep chopping it back, but other editors keep adding material... the article has now been tagged as the overlong plot as being a problem, so please help streamline the plot even more! there was some lovely and accurate description removed, but it had to be done -- Denstat 09:23, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unsigned Question

Can anyone please tell me more about the relation between both Van Helsing, and Dracula? When did they meet before? What's his relation with the Valerious's? How did Van Helsing get hold of Dracula's ring? Also How come he told Carl that he remembers some ancient battle?

In short, What is it that Van Helsing cannot remember.

THank you.

I just saw it today. My understanding is that Van Helsing was "the Left Hand of God" a supernatural figure who fought evil. He acknowleged being thousands of years old. When they met, Dracula said that Van Helsing was the one who originally killed him and cut the ring off his finger. In the movie, Dracula was portrayed as being raised from the dead by the devil, so Dracula and Van Helsing are essentially counterparts - each a champion for a higher power. MK 05:53, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Van Helsing

Just curious... Most fiction has some truth in it. Is there any truth in the stories of Van Helsing?

In my opinion, I don't know if stuff like vampires and whatnot exist, as I'd be crazy to think it, but if there isn't some basis for the belief, then there's been a nation of crazy Romanians for hundreds of years, and that doesn't make too much sense either.Gnrlotto

of course there's some factual bits in these legends, there always is. and wikipedia just happens to be a fountain of knowledge, so why not look it up? try: vampire for the not very palatable truth behind the monster (the first ones where from serbia, btw. romanian ones are just more popular due to bram stoker; vlad tepes for the historical romanian noble; lycanthropy for werevolves and so on. it's really not that difficult.

There are creepy people out there. One such person bathed in the blood of her servants to "keep herself young." And the was actually a person named Count Dracula but I'm not sure if its pronouced the same.

[edit] Plot Hole?

The antidote was supposed to be delivered to Van Helsing before the 12th stroke of midnight, but the battle between Val Helsing and Dracula (which started on the first stroke of midnight, since that was when Van Helsing could actually turn into the werewolf form) was far, far longer than just twelve clock stroke gongs... It was at least a minute long, if not twice that, and there were invervals where it went to show what other characters were doing (presumably) at the same time... is that clock just HORRIBLY slow (such that the twelfth stroke of midnight is actually, like, five after midnight?), or is this a plot hole? -JC 07:03, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

A wizard did it... --- I think the scenes of the other characters occur during the battle,not between every battle scene. ---

It's called "Suspension of Disbelief"; It's something you're not supposed to notice. ---

And yes, the clock probably was horribly slow as well, given the technical context of the film.

Was this plot hole (or any other plot hole) addressed in the director's commentary or the novelization? Maybe he thought 12 strokes meant 12 minutes. Other plot holes include why did Dracula have a werewolf cure when he could just use a silver bullet. Or why Van Helsing could only turn into a werewolf at midnight when the full moon rises a lot earlier than that. Was it behind the clouds all night?

-- Given the nature of the source material, it's also possible that the battle took place at a vastly high speed. Thats just a speculation, however. GideonFrost 17:47, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comparisons to Wolverine

I can't help but notice that Van Helsing's character has some marked similarities to Hugh Jackman's other major character role, Wolverine- memory loss, older than he looks and knows, tormented by a fragmented past and of course becoming a werewolf with an apparent 'healing factor' (despite his intense battle with Dracula, at the end of the movie he is barely scratched) and sharp claws. Should this be added somewhere?

  • maybe in hugh jackman's article in terms of the kinds of roles he chooses, but not here. -- Denstat 09:08, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Full moon

In the movie it's explained that after the twelfth stroke of midnight during its first full moon, a werewolf will become completely under Dracula's control and will also be stuck in wolf form permanently. Van Helsing was bitten by a werewolf and we're told the next full moon is two nights from now. That means nearly a whole month of time must've passed between the scenes where Dracula first tried to bring his children to life and the scene where Van Helsing gets bitten. When could this missing month have taken place? Although Dracula does seem to have moved all his equipment from Frankenstein's castle to his own castle so a considerable amount of time must've taken place but what the heck were the main characters doing during this time?

Driving the horse carriage to Budapest? Borisblue 06:05, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] put overall Spoiler tag up top

cleaned up this page a little and removed individual spoiler tags from sections. no need to add individual tags any more. :) -- Denstat 19:34, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] need cleanup of trivia section

here are my thoughts on what this section needs. it has three components right now: comparisons with source material, technical trivia, and casting/acting trivia. it has two main problems: citation and content.

a general "note" at the top is not adequate citation for wikipedia (see WP:CITE, and if citing the DVD, use the video citation method here). inadequately cited sources are also the article's main weakness, so any proper sourcing would go a long way to keeping some of these points from a purge, and bring up the article's quality.

as for content, it seems like comparisons with source material is notable enough to be developed into a sourced section of its own, maybe called (how original!) "Comparison with source material." it's quite different in tone than ordinary technical and casting trivia, and perhaps film reviews and essays are available to round it out.

anybody who'd like to go ahead with this proposal? please do! -- Denstat 20:41, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

created a new section with a long name, took some of the trivia material out to put in it. looks like the rest of the section is going to be cut out as part of WP as per the new tag to that effect -- Denstat 09:26, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Critics

There is no mention that this film got hammered by the critics for being somewhat rubbish...For instance:

movies: Reviews of the latest films.
Curse of the Vampire
Van Helsing, a feeble imitation of classic horror.
By David Edelstein
Updated Friday, May 7, 2004, at 7:09 PM ET
You don't have to adore traditional horror movies—both the American classics and the colorful British remakes—to loathe every second of Stephen Sommers' Van Helsing (Universal). But it helps. It helps to know the movies that this giftless writer-director is ripping off to appreciate how little he brings to the party. We live in an era rich in genre pastiches, but filmmakers like Tim Burton (Sleepy Hollow), Peter Jackson (Lord of the Rings), Quentin Tarantino (Kill Bill), and Guillermo del Toro (Hellboy) manage both to sample from their inspirations and soulfully transform them. Sommers, whose previous efforts were The Mummy (1999) and The Mummy Returns (2001), is a dim bulb powered by a giant studio trust fund. He makes empty but vulgarly extravagant special-effects fests: Donald Trump horror movies.

Colin4C 11:02, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

this is true, but a good critical response category would require some balance (i.e. several critical sources, etc.), WP:NPOV, box office figures, and probably citation of the film's fanbase. go for it! -- Denstat 19:37, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dracula age

I noticed that in the main article trivia the age of Dracula in the movie is labeled as "historical error", but Dracula in the movie is not connected to Vlad III. Can somebody correct this mistake? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.50.175.176 (talk) 14:46, 30 January 2007 (UTC).

you're right. this entire work of fiction is a pastiche and so the historical note you mention doesn't belong there at all. i'm deleting it. but in future, feel free to be bold. -- Denstat 06:29, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Sculpture

Can the author of this image Sculpture of Van Helsing, New York.

please clarify why it should belong in this article? It has no relevant illustrative purpose; it could be considered copyright infringement (I doubt the author made it himself); it's too large in comparison with the other, more relevant images; and it features bad composition quality.

Unless anyone objects, I believe this should be removed from the article. Vadigor 23:08, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

why don't you contact the author to ask? it's licensed under the creative commons license and User:RMajouji claims to have uploaded this pic by "Ramy Majouji," which seems fairly authentic. a google search reveals that someone who posts with this name also posts other photos on the net. to my eye it looks like a pic taken by an amateur, not a piece of studio PR. i agree that more info is desirable regarding the pic -- was it a sculpture from the premiere? does it belong at madame tussaud's wax museum? it certainly represents the main character of the film, but is it from the video game instead, et cetera? -- Denstat 07:30, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../v/a/n/Talk%7EVan_Helsing_%28film%29_d0d1.html"