Weekly Ketchup: Tom Cruise Signed to Van Helsing Reboot

Summary

This week's Ketchup covered a week almost entirely comprised of reboots of old familiar concepts. Included in the mix are titles like The Jungle Book (this time in live action), Little Shop of Horrors (a third time), The Dukes of Hazzard (maybe), Tarzan (this time in 3D), and Van Helsing (yes, really). All that, and there's an animated sequel for The Wizard of Oz, too. Back to Article

Comments

Slade U.

Slade Uppercut

Van Helsing wasn't a bad movie, to me. But, it'll be interesting to see what they do with it...

May 4 - 06:17 PM

David Gilmer

David Gilmer

I most heartily agree. It wasn't a bad movie, just a decent popcorn flick.

May 4 - 09:33 PM

Stepping Razor

Stepping Razor

I agree as well. It was a likeable, entertaining movie. But a Van Helsing movie with Tom Cruise in the lead sounds like an awful movie. It'll be just like almost every other big-budget Tom Cruise action movie. Tom Cruise's name will be played up bigger than Van Helsing. It'll be Van Helsing as played by Tom Cruise, not the other way around.

May 4 - 11:06 PM

Stefans Zvejnieks

Stefans Zvejnieks

Okay, now, while I agree somewhat, that they did choose him just because of his star power. And yes, I don't think it sounds like it'll be very good, but.... he was pretty incredible in the new Mission Impossible. Perhaps I'm saying this because the film was just a very solid movie all-around, I dunno.

May 4 - 11:43 PM

King  S.

King Simba

I disagree. While yes Tom Cruise's name will probably be bigger than the title, there's a good reason for that. While he may be known mainly for his action roles, he's actually managed to play a wide range of roles in films like Collateral to Tropic Thunder to Valkyrie.

Also, most of Tom Cruise's big budget action movies have been pretty solid. Out of all such films, the only one I really hated in the past couple decades would be Mission Impossible 2 (though admittedly, I've yet to see Knight and Day).

May 5 - 05:47 AM

Ken

Kenneth W.

If you get yourself in the right mood for it, then it's a pretty solid, campy homage movie. Even though the level of cheese is damn-near lethal, the concept alone is pretty cool, like "The Avengers" for Universal monsters.

May 5 - 05:36 PM

Meanne Sanchez

Meanne Sanchez

I thought so, too. There will still be room for improvements though.

May 6 - 03:32 AM

Valmordas

Val Mordas

You must be joking. Val Helsing wasn't just bad - it was fucking horrible. Hard to take anything you say from here out seriously.

May 6 - 04:53 AM

Superzone

Link O'Fett

Eh, I kinda sorta somewhat liked the Hugh Jackman Van Helsing movie. A little.

May 4 - 06:37 PM

This comment has been removed.

Epic Barney Funk

Barney Funk

Dang straight! That sounds wicked awesome! High Five!

May 5 - 11:39 AM

Meanne Sanchez

Meanne Sanchez

LOL at that :))

May 6 - 03:33 AM

Hugo Emanuel Melo

Hugo Emanuel Melo

lol as well. That would be a terrible idea... And I happen to have liked the campiness of Jackman's Van Helsing.

May 7 - 03:31 AM

This comment has been removed.

Jennifer Reid

Jennifer Reid

I personally found the humor to be what was wrong with the movie. I hope with the remake they will leave all of the humor out. It's rare to find anything decent now days that hasn't been destroyed because of the crap people call humor now days.

May 5 - 04:31 PM

King Crunk

King Crunk

A lot of interesting stuff this week; the Tarzan story is really the only truly horrible idea here, and while The Dukes of Hazzard was an awful show and just as bad of a film, the fact that Jody Hill is doing something with it and it is taking a lot of influence from Peckinpah films has my interest at least peaked.

Not sure why the film Rover was not put into the fresh ideas; Guy Pearce is awesome and Animal Kingdom was great, so I think it should be towards the top of the fresh developments.

May 4 - 07:55 PM

Premo Beat

John Noto

Agreed, I can suspend my tween vamp hatred for a new movie from the Animal Kingdom director

May 5 - 07:11 AM

Janson Jinnistan

Janson Jinnistan

You got in before me with the two best ideas, Rover and the Jody Hill deal. That latter one, it's worth saying, has not yet been determined to be a Dukes reboot, so there's some hope. Maybe the studio will realize that it just might be easier to sell an original southern-set action film than it would to try and convince people to watch another Dukes movie. Call it Green Acres Gets Furious, for all I care, as long as it's only a name you slap on the cover.

May 5 - 01:55 PM

Janson Jinnistan

Janson Jinnistan

I'm having a hard time focusing away from saying "Reinhard Klooss" in a variety of German voices and trying to resist the urge to tell a Cruising for Jackman joke.

The best news is hidden in the Rotton section, which would be David Machod's "Rover". His "Animal Kingdom" is becoming a cult favorite and, regardless of Patterson, Machod showed himself to be an impressive young director.

Some of the ideas aren't bad, but just boringly unnecessary, like "Little Shop of Horrors" and "Jungle Book". The '86 LSOH musical was a radically different take on the small Roger Corman film. If this is just a remake of the musical, CGI or not, I just don't think there's much to be improved on. I also think the live action JB from the 90s is fine, but this one is a little more intriguing because Kloves' two films are pretty incredible, but also very adult, so it's hard to see what his skills (after 20 years of being a script-doctor for hire) can bring to the story.

As much as I would LOVE to see a new Harry Houdini movie, there are some red flags over this. First is the script being written by an NBC stooge (what? will Houdini support charter schools and entitlement reform?). Second is the "Indiana Jones-Sherlock Holmes" comparison, which is nonsense. For those who don't know, Houdini provided intelligence to MI5 (the British intelligence service) on the Spiritualist movement (psychics and stuff) which actually included Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, making the Sherlock reference what I presume to be a perverse joke. The book posits this group's involvement in Houdidni's death, which isn't original but is disputed. Of all of the many books on Houdini to adapt (Kenneth Silverman's probably the best), this seems like a peculiar choice, added to the questionable way the already fascinating man is being molded into an action hero. Plus, whatever happened to the other project that was proposed last year that was supposed to deal with the Houdini-Doyle relationship (which actually wasn't entirely antagonistic)?

If I can, may I make a small suggestion to Seth and Evan. Remember "Dr. Strangelove"? The thing about 10 women for every male as means of repopulation? No offense guys, but that's quite a sausage cast you got there. Curve it up a bit. If Natalie Portman could do "Your Highness", I'm sure you could add a few more quality actresses for this rapture.

And I can't even hate on Jody Hill for the "Dukes" thing. It sounds like he was doing something original, but then the studio decided to slap the nearest available 'brand' on it. I guess Andy Griffith would have been a stretch. It's still a bad idea, but if Tarantino gets to do his original 'Southern', then we could use some more Peckinpah-inspired original Southerns to go with it.

May 4 - 08:37 PM

Todd Beaton

Todd Beaton

The Hugh Jackman Van Helsing was a good movie and I have been wanting to see a sequel for that for a long time....with Hugh Jackman. Whats with all this rebooting of movies, don't these people have any fresh ideas beyond a few key directors like Ridley Scott who ironically is releasing Prometheus soon but isn't a prequel. Go figure.

May 4 - 08:42 PM

David Gilmer

David Gilmer

I agree. I think The Amazing Spider-Man, though it looks pretty good, is starting a rather ugly trend: rebooting films released a few years back just to make extra $$$.

May 4 - 09:36 PM

David Gilmer

David Gilmer

I most heartily agree. It wasn't a bad movie, just a decent popcorn flick.

May 4 - 09:33 PM

Stepping Razor

Stepping Razor

I agree as well. It was a likeable, entertaining movie. But a Van Helsing movie with Tom Cruise in the lead sounds like an awful movie. It'll be just like almost every other big-budget Tom Cruise action movie. Tom Cruise's name will be played up bigger than Van Helsing. It'll be Van Helsing as played by Tom Cruise, not the other way around.

May 4 - 11:06 PM

Stefans Zvejnieks

Stefans Zvejnieks

Okay, now, while I agree somewhat, that they did choose him just because of his star power. And yes, I don't think it sounds like it'll be very good, but.... he was pretty incredible in the new Mission Impossible. Perhaps I'm saying this because the film was just a very solid movie all-around, I dunno.

May 4 - 11:43 PM

King  S.

King Simba

I disagree. While yes Tom Cruise's name will probably be bigger than the title, there's a good reason for that. While he may be known mainly for his action roles, he's actually managed to play a wide range of roles in films like Collateral to Tropic Thunder to Valkyrie.

Also, most of Tom Cruise's big budget action movies have been pretty solid. Out of all such films, the only one I really hated in the past couple decades would be Mission Impossible 2 (though admittedly, I've yet to see Knight and Day).

May 5 - 05:47 AM

David Gilmer

David Gilmer

I agree. I think The Amazing Spider-Man, though it looks pretty good, is starting a rather ugly trend: rebooting films released a few years back just to make extra $$$.

May 4 - 09:36 PM

manwithoutfear19

Daniel Raimondi

bah i liked jackman as wolverine

May 4 - 09:40 PM

Stepping Razor

Stepping Razor

I agree as well. It was a likeable, entertaining movie. But a Van Helsing movie with Tom Cruise in the lead sounds like an awful movie. It'll be just like almost every other big-budget Tom Cruise action movie. Tom Cruise's name will be played up bigger than Van Helsing. It'll be Van Helsing as played by Tom Cruise, not the other way around.

May 4 - 11:06 PM

Stefans Zvejnieks

Stefans Zvejnieks

Okay, now, while I agree somewhat, that they did choose him just because of his star power. And yes, I don't think it sounds like it'll be very good, but.... he was pretty incredible in the new Mission Impossible. Perhaps I'm saying this because the film was just a very solid movie all-around, I dunno.

May 4 - 11:43 PM

King  S.

King Simba

I disagree. While yes Tom Cruise's name will probably be bigger than the title, there's a good reason for that. While he may be known mainly for his action roles, he's actually managed to play a wide range of roles in films like Collateral to Tropic Thunder to Valkyrie.

Also, most of Tom Cruise's big budget action movies have been pretty solid. Out of all such films, the only one I really hated in the past couple decades would be Mission Impossible 2 (though admittedly, I've yet to see Knight and Day).

May 5 - 05:47 AM

Stefans Zvejnieks

Stefans Zvejnieks

Okay, now, while I agree somewhat, that they did choose him just because of his star power. And yes, I don't think it sounds like it'll be very good, but.... he was pretty incredible in the new Mission Impossible. Perhaps I'm saying this because the film was just a very solid movie all-around, I dunno.

May 4 - 11:43 PM

Alberto Zeeky

Alberto Zeeky

Really? I mean aside from all the antics Cruise has done, he can still put forth a decent performance... but for Van Helsing?

I don't know if it's just me, but Hugh Jackman has that sort of charisma that takes what seems like to give character to movies that haven't got much going for them like Real Steel and Wolverine. Origins would've been a hell of a lot worse if Fox had somebody else in the role aside from Hugh. I even found he did a pretty good job when he hosted the Oscars a couple years back.

Not to mention, is anyone actually calling for a Van Helsing reboot? If they really want to proceed with Cruise maybe they would've been better off with a sort of spin-off like movie, set in the same world but not of the Van Helsing character itself?

Time will only tell, you never know if you're going to run into a pleasant surprise like a Rise of the Planet of the Apes, but right now it doesn't seem all too promising.

May 5 - 01:20 AM

Rati P.

Rati Pachulia

Hugh is talented actor and he was good in Van Helsing and overally that movie was pretty good flick + Kate Beckinsale was gorgeous. Hugh must play in more serious roles, see what he did in The Fountain - Excellent performance. As of Cruise, when i first heard him playing Samurai in The Last Samurai and also Valkyrie i thought about miscast, but what we got was First great and second good movies, with Tom playing nicely his roles, so i don't know, maybe he can be nice Van Helsing too.

May 5 - 03:28 AM

Sidhant Mishra

Sidhant Mishra

i belive timur bekmembetov[wanted,abe lincoln:vampire hunter] is da r8 one 2 direct van helsing..

May 5 - 05:11 AM

Sidhant Mishra

Sidhant Mishra

coz his muvis hv a inteligent way f potryin action scenes,...[dat includes his collaboratin cinematographer too]

May 5 - 05:13 AM

Sidhant Mishra

Sidhant Mishra

coz his muvis hv a inteligent way f potryin action scenes,...[dat includes his collaboratin cinematographer too]

May 5 - 05:13 AM

King  S.

King Simba

I disagree. While yes Tom Cruise's name will probably be bigger than the title, there's a good reason for that. While he may be known mainly for his action roles, he's actually managed to play a wide range of roles in films like Collateral to Tropic Thunder to Valkyrie.

Also, most of Tom Cruise's big budget action movies have been pretty solid. Out of all such films, the only one I really hated in the past couple decades would be Mission Impossible 2 (though admittedly, I've yet to see Knight and Day).

May 5 - 05:47 AM

King  S.

King Simba

Just a minor correction, Van Helsing wasn't a flop. It made 300 mil WW on a budget of 160 mil. Given that studios keep around half of the total that's enough to break even. Granted, there's still the marketing to consider, but the DVD sales/rentals plus whatever merchandising they probably got out of the film was most likely enough to cover that. It simply was the performance that encourages a sequel, especially when the reviews were so weak.

On a side note, it seems like any film Stephen Sommers got involved in is getting a new version. First The Mummy and now Van Helsing and Jungle Book. Yeah, I know he was just remaking/adaptating classic source material, but still it seems kind of a strange coincidence. I'm half expecting next week's article to bring news of plans to make another version of Huckleberry Finn. As for Van Helsing and Jungle Book, I cautiously optimistic about both, as Tom Cruise has one of the better track records around, while Steve Kloves did a pretty good job with the Potter films, though admittedly it helped that he was working with really strong source material.

Not much to say regarding the rest of the news, though I'm surprised why Dorothy of Oz is labbled fresh and Patterson's new movies are labbled rotten. Dorothy of Oz sounds like it'll be one of those mediocre B-level animated movies. At least Rover has an accomplished director behind it. Yeah, I know Pattinson doesn't sound like the first actor you'd think of for the mentioned roles, but hey a lot of accomplished actors got their start as pretty boy hearthrobs (Leonardo Dicaprio, Tom Cruise, John Travolta, Johnny Depp, etc)

May 5 - 06:16 AM

Janson Jinnistan

Janson Jinnistan

Can't say I feel so bad about Sommers getting his catalogue updated. He was fairly mediocre. The best thing about Van Helsing were the Universal tie-in box sets for each monster. But even those could be improved on, even if it was the first disc release of the Spanish Dracula.

May 5 - 02:07 PM

What's Hot On RT

Cosplay Gallery
Cosplay Gallery

See over 350 Comic-Con Costumes!

The Hobbit
The Hobbit

See the final movie's trailer

Weekly Ketchup
Weekly Ketchup

Read the Comic-Con revelations

RT on DVD
RT on DVD

Noah, The Other Woman and more

Find us on:                     
Help | About | Jobs | Critics Submission | Press | API | Licensing | Mobile