Tom Cruise is Van Helsing?

[Sawyer]

The writer already confirmed a few weeks back that it would have a stronger element of horror, as opposed to what the last few have been.

 

[Tanin]

Why must it even be called a remake... Just make a movie about a mummy or Van Helsing.

 

[Matt Mortem]

I'm going to remain optimistic about this. I like Tom Cruise, but I don't know if he's right for Van Helsing. Nevertheless, I'll hope for the best.

 

[Daniel Thompson]

Why must it even be called a remake... Just make a movie about a mummy or Van Helsing.

Because the general audience will just think its a remake/reboot anyways. When people think of the Mummy they think of the Brendan Fraizer films not the original film that came out in the 1930s. When people think of Van Helsing they think of the Hugh Jackman film from 2004 not the original films from the 60s/70s.

 

[JAK®]

Am I the only one who kinda liked Van Helsing?

 

[Avenger]

Am I the only one who kinda liked Van Helsing?

Nah, I thought it was decent, too. Certainly nothing amazing, but watchable enough. That was mostly just due to Jackman's sheer charisma carrying the movie though, IMO.

That said, I don't really want to see a direct Van Helsing reboot. My ideal solution would be to do a remake of The Mummy starring a new cast of characters, and then have the main characters (basically new versions of Rick and Evelyn) adventuring around the world and encountering other famous Universal monsters. Maybe in the second movie they're in Wales, where they encounter the Wolf-Man. Then maybe in the third movie they wind up in Transylvania where they have to fight Dracula. And so on. I think that could be fun.

 

[Octoberist]

The original Van Helsing I guess could be viewed as a guilty pleasure or if it's on TV I'll watch it but by all means is it not a good movie. It's only brightside is it's concept but there are too many problems that prevents it from being why it could have been.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Terrible idea. After the failure of the Mummy sequels, Van Helsing, and the Wolfman remake, the public has soured on the idea of something like this. There needs to be a lot more time to flush the poison out of the system before attempting this again.

 

[Destructus86]

hahah...i'd probably watch it. I'm easy when it comes to Tom Cruise in a film =P

 

[dark_b]

Tom Cruise is back with a big movie(M:I4) and he is a good action actor. with the right tone and director this could be a fun movie. story is not important.

 

[Sawyer]

Tom Cruise is back with a big movie(M:I4) and he is a good action actor. with the right tone and director this could be a fun movie. story is not important.

orly?

 

[dark_b]

in a Tom Cruise action movie where he is kicking ass? no we dont need it. like we didnt need it in M:I4. entertaining,funny and full action every 10 mintues.

 

[Rocketman]

Call me crazy, but... this sounds cool. Tom Cruise deserves another series besides Mission: Impossible, and this could be a good launching point.

And after this news of them wanting to reboot BOTH The Mummy and Van Helsing, I can't help but wonder if Universal is planning to do a cross-over series like The Avengers.

You can do a whole continuity of Universal Monster Movies that are in the same shared universe, and Van Helsing could be at the center:

- Dracula
- Frankenstein
- The Mummy
- The Wolfman
- The Creature from the Black Lagoon
- ^^Van Helsing^^

Apart from Wolfman, Hollywood is itching to bring all these characters back, and Twilight is certainly helping their greed.

Combine Twilight's success, The Avengers' success, and you've got Universal seeing $$$ signs.

I welcome this idea, and I think Cruise is a cool choice.

 

[Majik1387]

Universal is beating me to the punch.

 

[Kurosawa]

No one is topping Peter Cushing's Van Helsing...or his Frankenstein, for that matter.

 

[Majik1387]

Well of course no one can top Cushing, but the characters and stories are still ripe to redo.

 

[Kurosawa]

Absolutely, although I think it would work best as a gothic horror piece based around acting instead of a summer blockbuster movie. Then again, I always thought Hammer's take on the monsters was better then Universal's.

 

[Majik1387]

Yeah, Hammer's take definitely played a heavy part in my version of the Universal Monsters universe.

While I like Universal's take in the originals, it was too slow paced and not horror enough if that makes sense. Hammer's films were tense and had the horror I was looking for.

Then Hugh Jackman's Van Helsing came out; While I don't hate it, the movie was full of miscasting from Jackman to Beckinsale to the actor who played Dracula(can't remember his name), the basic plot was alright but the writing made it really hard to endure. It also went way too action adventure-y without it looking good. Ican sometimes watch it if it's on FX or something, but it just annoys me a bit too.

 

[terry78]

While there are iconic takes, the mere fact that they are as iconic as they are means they're always going to be rebooted, redone, etc.

 

[Daniel Thompson]

It would be awesome if the universal monster movies were more horror then action. Can make things more refreshing in the horror movie genre and continue from what cabin in the woods left off. A crossover idea is cool you can have Van Helsing eventually take on all those monsters at once with help from other monster hunters. Also add the Invinceable man to that list, he was a badass universal monster character.

 

[bubbadoom]

...as long as they get Rick Baker to do the creatures...

 

[Rowsdower!]

in a Tom Cruise action movie where he is kicking ass? no we dont need it. like we didnt need it in M:I4. entertaining,funny and full action every 10 mintues.

The story was good in M:I4. It might not have been the deepest movie, but it was brilliantly paced and there was enough intrigue that it satisfied my typical spy movie requirements.

When you just center a movie around Tom Cruise kicking ass and don't take time to write a script... you get War of the Worlds.

 

[Majik1387]

Nah, Cruise didn't really kick any ass in that movie.

 

[Rowsdower!]

Well, he did kill Tim Robbins in cold blood.

But yeah, he was more passive there. Still though, it was an example of how bad an action/sci-fi movie can be when the story is just pure garbage (despite the fact that it was based on a sci-fi classic, starred the biggest actor in the world and was directed by one of the greatest directors of all time).

Everyone involved in that movie should feel ashamed of themselves. It was atrocious, given the level of talent of people involved and what they are capable of when they actually try. And to think, Cruise derailed and nearly destroyed his career while doing publicity for it. Glad he's back on track now and making good movies again.

All that said, I'm not sure Van Helsing is a good move for him. At the very least, call it something else because I don't want to ever be reminded of Hugh Jackman's Solomon Kane rip-off and that Left Hand of God nonsense.

 

[Wolfwood]

Absolutely, although I think it would work best as a gothic horror piece based around acting instead of a summer blockbuster movie. Then again, I always thought Hammer's take on the monsters was better then Universal's.

While I liked Hammer's films, I saw the Universal ones first so that instantly imprints them with a deep feeling of nostalgia.

I really do hope this turns into a Gothic horror movie, that'd be just delightful.