Helsinger buy coke
Helsinger buy cokeHelsinger buy coke
__________________________
📍 Verified store!
📍 Guarantees! Quality! Reviews!
__________________________
▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼
▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲
Helsinger buy coke
Home New Radio Search. Open in Music. Van Helsing C. More By Steve Drive. One More Time - Single. Hardaway - Single. Colder Than Ice - Single. Super Trapstar - Single. Cream Baby - Single. Traphouse Kickin - Single. Select a country or region. Asia Pacific See All. Europe See All. Latin America and the Caribbean See All.
At Porter's Paints we create rich and beautiful colours, designed by our expert colourists. Crafted with a blend of fine quality pigments to create depth.
Helsinger buy coke
Menu All All. Sign In. User reviews. Hide spoilers. I don't understand all the bad press this movie got. In a way, maybe that's for the best. Like The Avengers movie which got similarly scathing reviews my expectations for Van Helsing were absolutely rock bottom. So it turned out to be a very pleasant surprise when I found the film to be fun, entertaining and quite enjoyable overall. People here are complaining about the CGI monsters. What's the beef? This is the 21st century. What do you want? A very well done CGI Mr. Hyde voiced by Robbie Coltrane, no less or some guy in a ripped tuxedo baring his teeth a la Spencer Tracy? Fire up those computers and bring on the CGI! Actually I found the CGI effects quite good for the most part. So I'll join the minority and say that Van Helsing is well worth watching. Jackman is fine as always and the rest of the cast holds their own. The plot is just fine as well. This is a monster movie, not The Usual Suspects. Pop yourself a big bowl of popcorn, sit back and enjoy the ride. How anyone can hate a film with such good humour and a sense of fun is beyond me. I can certainly reconcile myself with someone's DISLIKE of the film, and I would expect such people not to view if they have a good idea beforehand that this won't light their fire; but I can't understand those who claim to love this type of genre before watching who then precede to rip the film to shreds. The good humour mentioned in my summary isn't represented by a particular sharpness of script or a reliance on slapstick, but rather a general attitude pervading the film which smacks of those involved having a darn good time. In the case of director Sommers this manifests itself often in a threatened overdose of CGI, but when the effects are this good such profligacy where they're concerned is hardly a problem. The manifesto is clear almost from the start - find a wafer-thin premise with which to allot your ghouls enough screen time and then just let them loose in a suitably gothic arena. As such, Jackman's Van Helsing often finds himself relegated to the role of a bystander, so perhaps the fact that the film bears his name is a bit of a misnomer; however, like I said, we're pretty much in contrivance territory as far as 'plot development' goes, so it should be seen as just another brand name to hang a silly hat on. In this regard it may pain Jackman the most, since it leaves him still searching for a leading man role in the style of Crowe's 'Gladiator' to really leave his print indelibly 'X-Men' is an ensemble piece. His best moment actually comes before the main brawls begin - testing out various items of weaponary Inspector Gadget stylee! The lack of focus on the main character shouldn't perturb the audience too much though; if they prepare themselves for a monster royal rumble in the grandest tradition then they should find themselves leaving well satisfied. Howlin Wolf Jun 6, Permalink. Good stuff. Having watched the film more than once i must say that i think that the person who wrote the comment 'A Stupid and Extremely Disappointing Movie' is being silghtly childish. You cannot watch a film like Van Helsing with out taking it with a pinch of salt - it is a movie with vampires, werewolves and the frankenstine monster in at all at once for goodness sake. So you cannot go in to it thinking in a literal sense. You have to accept that it is not going to be some ground breaking epic and that it is just a bit of fun - but at the end of the day that doesn't matter, because if you go in with the right attitude and you enjoy it, then what does it matter that it is a bit 'off' in places. Silly but Fun. Hugh Jackman and Kate Beckinsale. Were it not for these two gifted performers, this movie would be beyond silly. As it is, the plot is almost pretextual for the special effects. The Eye Candy factor is high, though. Hugh Jackman as the tortured hero, filmed in the dark all of the time, makes us weak in the knees. Kate Beckinsale does magnificent physical feats while squeezed into a corset. The story: Van Helsing Jackman is essentially a bounty hunter of supernatural monsters, a job he took on at the request of the church as apparent penitence for sins he cannot even remember. As a reward for his centuries of service, he hopes to make his way to Heaven instead of Hell. Anna Kate Beckinsale is the last survivor of a family of Transylvanian vampire hunters. Her brother has become a werewolf and she is conflicted about whether he should live or die. Naturally Anna and Van Helsing team up to rid Transylvania of the evil vampire overlord. Van Helsing has a tool kit Batman would envy, and Anna maintains an arsenal of monster-killing weapons that would make a survivalist proud. Between the two of them, the monsters don't stand a chance. Put your mind on hold, suspend disbelief and intolerance for the occasional leap of reason, enjoy a slightly randy friar Van Helsing's sidekick , and go along for the ride. Van Helsing is a great Sunday afternoon video. Silly, lacking in plot, but good fun. It's big, it's dumb, it's cheesy as hell, but I found it to be enormous fun. This was made to be a roller-coaster ride and by that token it should be judged. Actually after the opening pastiche of the Boris Karloff Frankenstein movie, I thought this had the potential to be a 5 star movie. It was very atmospheric and had me hooked. However the film never really captures any sense of magic from there onwards. The main body of the movie does go on a bit, and it could have done with some attempt to create engaging characters. I felt Van Helsing did verge into this territory, but for the most part it's so fast paced this doesn't matter so much. The points where it does try to introduce plot are the moments where it really does fail. In fact there is too much going on that is never really explained, and I think it would've been better not to have bothered at all, than use the nonsense Sommers resorts too. For example the attempts at backstory to Van Helsing. Better to have one of those interlude chatty scenes you have in the Indy films, where it establishes he's a dude, rather than the poor attempts at angst and pathos. Really bad was the moment he gets upset over Frankie's Monster. What the hell was that all about? Hmm maybe I took that a bit seriously, but the movie knows what it is, why try be something else. I also thought that that masked ball sequence was a natural conclusion, the eventual finale at the castle felt like an add on, which lacked any real punch. Far better was Van's introduction to Transylvania, with the benefit of some neat angles and panning shots, the crossbow battle with the brides was cool. The coach chase was exciting without being exhilarating, but kept the flow going, so it's a shame some more bad plot gets thrown in, especially when it was involving the underwritten Velkan. That's the film's main problem - overkill of characters, with little space given to any of them to evolve. Finally a word on the CGI. I thought it was very good, especially the morphs that were used. The very first moment Drac starts to turn made me jump a touch, and when the vampires turns into their fanged, contorted state it looked pretty scary to me. The wolfman transformation, with the ripping flesh looked genuinely painful. At this point I was thinking the CGI was genuinely stunning. I'd have preferred the finale if it had just been Van vs Drac though, having CGI characters fight felt uninvolving, and Drac in snarly state was far better than the beast he turns into. This is a movie to genuinely switch of the brain and enjoy. At times there's too much going on and perhaps a bit too much swinging about for my liking, but it's an adrenaline filled ride. I'd probably give it 7 out of Axel-9 Nov 20, Permalink. It's Just Camp. I'm really baffled at the hateful negative response to this film. No it's not Oscar material, it's just good campy fun. I guess if you're looking for a summer action flick that takes itself too seriously, then you're out of luck with this one. I admit that the film runs a little to long, the chemistry between Beckinsale and Jackman leaves something to be desired, and the Frankenstein 'monster' though well-intentioned to give a nod to 'Young Frankenstein' is really annoying. But the entertainment spawning from the hokey fun that 'Van Helsing' is all about, makes these flaws so forgivable. For me, I'll take the over-acting screaming Brides of Dracula, the silly homages to dozens of classic action and horror movies, the cheesy one-liners, and the not-so-convincing special effects. Isn't that what monster movies are all about? Bastard Out of Carolina Jan 10, Permalink. I saw it twice! This movie is very very very good. Screw what the critics say. This movie is very action-packed, in your face, has great effects and it's funny too. The way the brides transform from creepy bat monsters to beautiful women is really cool. And Richard Roxburgh is really cool as Dracula. I almost didn't recognize him as the duke from Moulin Rouge! The only part I didn't really like was Frankenstein's monster. He looked cool, I just didn't like his character. But other than that it's no big deal. Also, Hugh Jackman and Will Kemp are extremely hot in this movie! I expected not good, but never that bad. FelipeB May 8, Permalink. Double-O Van Helsing, Superhero. First a word of warning. There are a number of people who would be best advised to avoid Van Helsing. If you dislike cgi, if you're a purist, if you're looking for something 'realistic', or if you're looking for a slower-moving, understated film that's a deep character study, you'll more than likely hate this film. Set around the turn of the 20th Century, Van Helsing features the titular hero Hugh Jackman taking a break from his usual 'monster slayer' activities, which are commissioned by the Catholic Church, to pursue a grand plot initiated by Dracula Richard Roxburg involving the Frankenstein Monster Shuler Hensley , the Wolf Man Will Kemp , and the two last surviving members of a Transylvanian family that has long been battling the vampire. I actually like cgi, I'm not a purist, I love the genres--I'm not looking for realism, and I love fast-paced action-oriented thrill rides as much if not more than I love character studies. Dracula becomes a suave, scheming, mad scientist who looks like a romance novel hero. Frankenstein's Monster becomes much closer to Mary Shelley's depiction of an intelligent, loquacious, tormented, slapdash victim of a misguided doctor. And the Wolf Man, when wolf, becomes a cgi generated over-sized, super-agile, hyperactive beast. That should already turn off all of the purists. The look of the film is lush, with lots of unusual point of view shots, exotic locations and computer-generated environments. CGI is used extensively for the human characters in the film as well as the monsters--it's frequently employed to enable physics defying stunts and amazing, far-ranging 'computer camera' transitions. Van Helsing provides a good argument for such extensive digital assistance, as many of the visuals would be simply impossible to achieve through any other means and substituting some of the creatures with mechanicals, animatronics, special effects makeup and the like would have caused the film to go far over its already outrageous estimated budget of million. The plot, while not deep on characterization, couldn't be more full of events and action. Combined with the extravagant visuals and quickly changing, sprawling locations, the result is epic in scope. After the titles, we move into a color-filled world ala The Wizard of Oz while we're treated to a brief character-establishing scene of Van Helsing battling Mr. Hyde in the bell tower of Notre Dame. Sommers then quickly whisks us away to the Vatican, where Van Helsing receives his orders. This whirlwind beginning can be almost overwhelming--it certainly is visually--and it takes a moment to get up to speed and catch our breath, but once we settle into the town square of Transylvania, we're enraptured by the story and the pacing reaches a more sustainable level. Although fantastical at heart, the performances from the principle cast members help anchor the film in 'reality'. Jackman, Kate Beckinsale, Roxburgh, Henley and David Wenham all turn in nuanced performances that imply the depth of character that the film does not have the time to fully explore. The intense action throughout the film combined with the cgi and spectacular sweeping camera moves often gives Van Helsing a feel somewhere between a comic book film and a video game. That fact might turn some viewers off, but as innovative, suspenseful, exciting filmic art, this is years ahead of most other recent releases. In fact, the sophisticated technological wizardry and entrancing epic storytelling is somewhat reminiscent of the Lord of the Rings films, which makes me wonder just what other viewers see in those to enable them to consistently sit high on the IMDb Top list while Van Helsing struggles to attain a slightly above average rating. This really is an outstanding film that at least deserves to be appreciated on a technical level, and should be easy enough to enjoy for its action-oriented storytelling prowess as well. BrandtSponseller Mar 10, Permalink. Fun and enjoyable fantasy adventure. Despite the inconsistent CG, some weak performances and some dumb decisions Van Helsing is still a fun and enjoyable fantasy adventure. It's well paced and well filmed and Stephen Sommer's direction is good, if a little too reliant on CG. The music by Alan Silversti is great. The Stephen Sommers Guide to Movie-making. The Stephen Sommers guide to Movie-making: 1 Ensure screenplay consists of little but a series of continual action sequences, none of which advance your story one iota 2 Assume that your audience will be indifferent to 'character development' and 'coherence' and ensure therefore that your screenplay contains neither. VincentElgar Nov 23, Permalink. It may have been corny, it may have have overused its CGI. But, hell, I loved it anyway! Yeah, I know this isn't a masterpiece of cinema and I can already tell half this nation's populace hates it despite a good run at the box office last summer. But still I went into this movie just looking for a good time that and am a huge fan of old school monster films and thats what I got. Plot: Helsing and his assistant, a frair named Carl, are sent to Translvaynia to protect the last of a gypsy family from being stuck in purgatory due to a curse Dracula put on them. In the process however Helsing must also stop Drac's plan of engulfing the world in darkness all the while battling his minions. Throw in a plot device involving Frankenstein's monster and you have a pretty cool adventure brewing. I'll admit for a movie that suppose to be about Helsing. They kinda dropped the ball on the story. There's way too much emphasis on the gypsy girl rather him and they don't flesh out his back story about his lost memory and his supposed history with Dracula. Also the movie has a few nonsense parts the talk with the creepy undertaker which kinda slows down the film a bit. But still the movie stays on a linear path and the set-ups up to confrontations are well done. Not to mention the confrontation themselves even if some are a little silly ballroom scene though a good homage to the Fearless Vampire Killers , the fight with the last bride, Igor and Dracula himself. Yes their CGI laden but I don't care, its a supernatural movie after all. So what better way to do them. The actors seem very comfortable with their roles and looks to be having a great time. Extra props go out to the dude who played Frankenstien's monster, I was really feeling for him. Easily one of the best characters in the movie. Add to that some excellent backdrops and clothes to which the film really draws you into its 19th century world. Yes the movie is full of flaws but it only for fun and only wants to entertain to which it success in spades. If you don't like it, well fine. But for all who love a good popcorn flick or a fan of old school monsters, you can look no further. Van Helsing is just the ticket for a simple good time. Good, but somehow not as great as it should be. I own it and have watched it every so often and I can never quite put my finger on what exactly is wrong with it. Obviously, I quite like it, but it always leaves me with the feeling that it should have - somehow - been so much better. The film was practically made for me - I love Hugh Jackman and he makes a great 'monster hunter. Then there are more monsters crammed into this film than Jabba the Hutt's palace. What more could I want? Um, I don't exactly know, but I'm not alone in my confusion. It was certainly given the budget and star-power to launch such a venture. However, it was - almost - a financial flop. It was sort of successful, but not enough to get a proper sequel there is a lower budget animated one, but that wasn't the original intention. Perhaps it's the overuse of CGI? Sometimes everything on screen starts to blur into one mass of animation. Perhaps it's that the characters are a little too indestructible to be believable. If you're a fan of 'old school' horror, i. It has a lot of charm kudos to Frankenstein's monster and Drac himself , but somehow falls slightly short of being the modern day classic it was meant to be. Great premise, familiar and well loved characters, awful movie. It is amazing to me how much of an enormous waste this film is. The art design is phenomenal, the shots are well placed and excellent use of lighting and color and some of the best horror characters of all time. Yet, the script, acting and special effects are all equally horrible. Don't bother with this title. Or any other Stephen Sommers title for that matter. He has proved to be one of the most inept directors of all time. Van Helsing - Homages R Us. If you're a purist-any kind of purist-stay away from Van Helsing. But if you love the Universal horror films of the 30's and 40's or the Hammer films of the 50's and 60's and don't mind re-imagining them, then go. Check your brain at the door, buy a large popcorn and a soda and sit back for a fun ride. The film is a complete reworking of everything you think you know about all the big guys. Present for your enjoyment are Dracula, the Wolf man, Frankenstein's monster and a guest appearance by Mr. And of course, tying the whole thing together is our hero, Van Helsing yummily played by Hugh Jackman. Completely re-imagined in this new production, VH is now young, handsome, and virile and apparently as immortal and indestructible as the creatures he chases. Don't expect great resolutions or deep explanations here, there are none. Don't expect Academy Award level acting, some of the actors apparently phoned in their performances while others decided to take up the slack. The resultant scenery chewing is uneven, but never boring. The dialogue, not to put too fine a point on it, is absurd and sometimes unintentionally, howlingly funny. The makers of this film are clearly fans of the genre. The subject matter is treated with a loving sledgehammer. As the film progressed my companion and I made a game of naming all the classics represented. If you go, try it yourself. If the producers were intending to frighten us, they failed dismally; but if they only intended to entertain us they succeeded, if not brilliantly, at least admirably. I'm uncertain if they intended quite so much humor, but both my companion and I laughed out loud most of the way through. In addition to inside jokes, the film is filled with extraordinary visual images. From the opening encounter between VH and a startlingly oversized and athletic Edward Hyde, physicality is the order of the day. Everyone, including Van Helsing's friar sidekick is a magnificent specimen. Also, the cinematography is breathtaking. Both real scenery and CGI imagined are dazzling. I especially loved the castles Dracula and Frankenstein. I'd almost say that if the film had no other virtues at all, it would still be worth the price of admission for the incredible beauty of its backgrounds. However, the real star of the film is the you guessed it special effects. Transformation scenes abound. At any point in the film you are only moments from watching someone turn into something. And what wonderful things they are. Vampires don't become simple bats, but snake-jawed, full size harpies. The Wolf man sprouts saber tooth fangs as he rips the human skin from his body. Frankenstein's monster's flesh partially peels from his skull and is smoothly pushed back into place and Mr. Hyde morphs from grinning giant menace to pitiful human corpse. Not to put too fine a point on it, everyone-vampires, villagers, heroes, even horses and cattle go airborne sometime during the film. Dracula's three brides take the prize for most hang time. These ladies would be a wonderful asset to the Transylvanian Air Force with their dizzying dives, spins and barrel rolls. The camera gives us a bat's eye view of their deadly aerobatic ballet. When not in full flight Dracula and his wives walk up walls, across ceilings and carry on family quarrels while hanging from the rafters by their toes. Those characters that do not fly on their own power are lifted aloft and usually dropped soon after. The rest are climbers, scrambling up and down castle architecture like houseflies on speed. Interestingly, no one is ever seriously hurt or even has a hairstyle mussed. The scenes shift so rapidly that it becomes difficult at times to follow the story. Fortunately, the gossamer plot is as deep as a kiddie's backyard swimming pool, so it isn't too much of a problem. Only the barest bones are needed to carry us from one action sequence to the next. Although there is no nudity and not a cussword is uttered, the film is violent. Well, of course it's violent--and about as traumatic as a Road Runner cartoon. Still, it earns its PG rating. Leave the little 'uns home. The throbbing, pounding soundtrack keeps the attention even when not very much is happening. Is Van Helsing a great film? Absolutely not. Is it a good film? No, not really. Is it entertaining? And maybe, just maybe, that's enough. DannyJane May 8, Permalink. Monsters mix from Universal. The film is a monstrous cocktail : Dr. Jekill and Mr. Hyde , Frankestein, werewolf , Dracula ,Igor. The starring is Van Helsing Hugh Jackman , the monster hunter. The first fight with Mr. After that , he is assigned by Vatican to track down Dracula. He's helped by an action woman Kate Beckinsale and an assistant friar David Wedham who provides him anything gadgets as 'Q' in James Bond's serials. The film is spectacular , the action-packed is fascinating and computer generator effects specials FX are overwhelming though excessive. The movie mingles monsters action , suspense, terror , gore , rip-roaring, tongue-in-cheek , a little bit of humor and is amount bemusing but the plot is ridiculous. An under appreciated movie. I watched this film in cinema when it was first released. I enjoyed it but it wasn't until ten years later when I rewatched it that I thought this is a good Vampire Movie for the time it was made and is very action oriented unlike most vampire movies which are usually slow burners. This movie changed the pace for once and gave the action it promised I would recommend watching this movie to anyone who enjoys Monster movies heavy on the action and low on the dialogue. Sometimes it's nice to watch a movie and not think for a while so enjoy. Darkside-Reviewer Mar 7, Permalink. Stylish but Cartoonish. Not deep. This is an action adventure horror thriller. Van Helsing is the stylish vampire hunter. Hugh Jackman has very little to do here apart from looking good and saying one-liners. The movie has too much action and a very loud background score. The background score and the yells from the demonic characters get irritating after the point. It does not scare you and the CGI looked very cartoonish to me. It did not look real at all. It did not convince me to believe in the storyline and I kept watching a CGI led action fest on screen and got bored terribly towards the end. I was waiting for the movie to get over. Somebody deserves to be staked for this Five minutes into this film I was already squirming in my seat. I've never walked out of a movie before, I think it's foolish to judge a film unless you have seen it in its entirety. Van Helsing almost had me running for the door. Many people have pointed out that this was only intended as a summer blockbuster, a no brainer with big SFX, lots of one liners and plenty of merchandising possibilities. That's no excuse for this pile of poo The Mummy had the same pitch as this movie, including the use of an old Universal monster. I liked the Mummy. The Mummy was good. The Mummy was fun. The Mummy was a well put together movie, its characters were pretty much one dimensional but everybody liked them. It had none of Van Helsing's frankly sloppy plot devices. A couple of cases in point: 'Ooo, we're all going on a werewolf hunt' 'Right lets plan this all real careful, like. We got the cage we got the bait we got our rifles. Anything else? But I tell you what, lets not put silver bullets in all of our rifles, lets just put them in one measly little revolver so that Beckinsale can almost get crushed by the falling cage as she runs to grab it. He's Romanian. The Gypsies come from Romania. Lets be really clever and give the count Gypsy earrings and a pony tail! Wow that'll be really authentic and won't make him look like a god damned idiot in any way shape or form! These are just two criticisms out of the many that I could level at this film but frankly i don't want to spend any more time discussing it! Please save your money don't go to this movie and don't give them an excuse to make a sequel. It would be a terrible terrible thing to inflict on the world. Awesome adventure, great monster movie! When the credits rolled on this one, I nearly couldn't contain myself. This is a fabulous film with fantastic special effects, good acting, a strong story, and a first rate soundtrack! Van Helsing's search to find Dracula and complete his mission is not only bold daring, but full of great creature moments and awesome action. David Wenham Lord of the Rings does a great job as the comic relief Friar who aids Van Helsing and Anna in their fight against Dracula and the other creatures they face. The only thing that I didn't care for was the fact that Frankenstein's monster seemed too human, and able to carry on conversations. He actually seemed to care. But that wasn't such a big deal. I found the film completely entertaining and loads of fun! Not as bad as they say Partly because I'd heard in so many reviews that this movie was awful, and party just because it was one of the biggest flops of the year, I didn't have very high expectations of this one. Perhaps that's why I enjoyed it so damn much. This movie follows the story of Doctor Gabriel Van Helsing, who we all know from Bram Stoker's Dracula as an ageing professor who takes on the evil count. In the opening scene of the movie we see Doctor Frankenstein, under the supervision of Dracula, bringing his monster to life while the torch-wielding peasants are already storming his castle. These scenes pretty much set the tone of the whole thing. The plot has absolutely no internal consistency, but when the film looks this good, how much does it really matter? The acting unfortunately isn't that great Hugh Jackman isn't really given a whole lot to work with as far as his Van Helsing character is concerned, and for the most part he simply gives his 'Wolverine' performance all over again, especially towards the end. Kate Beckinsale is a fine actress and has the perfect face for Gothic horror, as best shown in Underworld, but here with her silly Transylvanian accent and looking like Catherine Zeta Jones, it just doesn't work. Probably the most memorable performance comes from David 'Faramir' Wenham, who provides most of the comic relief as Van Helsing's bible-bashing sidekick. Many directors have said that if an effect can be achieved physically, often that's the best route to take. And here, the computer-generated stuff is at times very distracting as rather than being involved in the plot you're sitting there thinking, 'Oo, doesn't that creature look good? It's unfortunate that this wasn't the box-office hit it was clearly intended to be, but if you're in the mood for a big, stupid, fun action movie that makes no sense and has absolutely no point to it, this one is as good as any. Teknofobe70 Apr 5, Permalink. I compare all horrible movies to this one. Quite possibly this is the worst movie I've ever seen. Sometimes I'll see very bad movies and I'll say to my friends, 'It was almost worse than Van Helsing,' and they get the hint. I actually saw this in theatres thanks to a friend of mine, and at some points the entire audience would burst out in laughter at parts that weren't supposed to be funny. I personally left the movie before the end because I was so bored. The plot and blending of different stories together just doesn't do it. I actually hated it and found myself in an awful mood the rest of the day. Trust me on this one as someone who loves movies, don't waste part of your life watching this film. You'll be asking for those 2 and a half hours back. Fun, geddit? You want fun? It's fun. I think it fairest to watch a movie more in terms of what it means to be, than in terms of what I think it should be. But I digress. Stephen Sommers wanted to ramp up the action, the looks, the story, and the plain old zing-bang-pow. In that, he succeeded admirably. The action sequences are fast and fun, the movie's got bags of eye-candy, the actors do just what they're supposed to do. You want creepy? See Alien again. You want atmosphere? See Mimic, or Sixth Sense, or Halloween. Yes, I wish it had had some more humor. See Hellboy. I could have lived, happily, without the friar's hypocrisy. And the makeup on Igor was so incongruous, so 70's-throwback, that I thought it would end up as a plot-point. It didn't; just incongruously bad makeup. But my oldest son and I had a great time BibChr May 7, Permalink. What in the world What in the world were they trying to do with this movie. It was a great idea, and good action, but the dialog was absolutely horrendous. I won't even get started on the incredible amount of errors in this movie. Needless to say I was extremely disappointed in this movie after looking forward to seeing it for some time. I can only hope that we will not see a sequal to this mistake. Or at least get a new writer and director who can actually do this good idea justice. BigLitz May 11, Permalink. More from this title. More to explore. Recently viewed. Please enable browser cookies to use this feature. Learn more.
Helsinger buy coke
Play S.O.D.A. on SoundCloud and discover followers on SoundCloud | Stream tracks, albums, playlists on desktop and mobile.
Helsinger buy coke
Helsinger buy coke
Percy Jackson meets Dracula in this action-packed monster hunting series! With the perfect combination of humour and heroism, Max Helsing will keep readers.
How can I buy cocaine online in Vientiane
Helsinger buy coke
Helsinger buy coke
Helsinger buy coke
How can I buy cocaine online in Tangier
Helsinger buy coke