Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I don't normally like these kinds of threads but my friend and I are in a debate on this.

Vs. thread..

Isn't the VS thread for "If so and so got in a fight, who would win?" ?

This is for which is the better movie.

I haven't seen grimm yet.

Van Helsing. Brothers Grimm sucked

sorry but brother's grimm was sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooo BAD.
van helsing is definetly better!

I voted for brothers grimm cause matt damonc ame out and he looked so hot plus van helsing used so much special effects and cgi my gawd

BROTHERS GRIMM, because Heath Ledger*drool* and Matt Damon*sigh* and i like the story line better..

Brothers Grimm over Van Helsing, no question. Van Helsing was awful. Didn't think much of Brothers Grimm either...

They both eat it.

I just watched Brother's Grimm the other night and it sucked major crack.
God, I don't see how Matt could have agreed to do this and then say in the end it's such a good movie and has a good feel and stuff like that. I guess you have to like a movie when you're in it. That's the only logical explanation for the abomination of a movie.

So of course my answer is Van Helsing. But I like Van Helsing by itself as a movie anyway.

is it comprehensible.....

I just realized I never posted my opinion on this.

Brothers Grimm was pretty bad. Van Helsing, I rather enjoy. So my vote was for Van Helsing.

Helsing Was good Because it had Hyde. Who doesn't love Hyde?

Both are contenders for a Razzie, but I'd take Van Helsing over Bros. Grimm just based on Hugh Jackman

Originally posted by DarkWizard
Helsing Was good Because it had Hyde. Who doesn't love Hyde?
Actually, that wasn't my most favorite part of the movie. The CGI wasn't great. I liked Hyde in LXG a lot better.

I rather didn't like League of Extraordinary Gentlemen that much either.

When yall mentioned hyde above, I was like Hyde's in Van Helsing, b/c the first thing that came to my mind was Hyde from LXG, but I remember now.

is it comprehensible.....

League OF Extraordinary Gentlemen was an excellent movie IMO. Good combination of various Novel Characters. Really something great to let my eyes feast on.

Really something mediocre to let my eyes nibble on.

And Connery rejected the xmen role and the lord of the ring role, b/c he didn't like those kind of roles, but then he saw how good they did and decided to finally give in, but to this role. He gave in 2 movies too late.

is it comprehensible.....

brothers grimm sucked the effects we re so bad and i dont like matt damon...i never saw van helsing

Just recently saw The Brother's Grimm and I must say, it sucked... a lot. The whole thing went by and by the time it was done, I was just like: "Wow... that was it?"

Van Helsing was so awesome. It had Count Dracula, Frankenstien, the Wolf Man, and even Mister Hyde. They should make a second one with the Monster from Black Lake (or whatever that guy was), the Headless Horseman, Jack the Ripper, and the return of Dracula. I'd call it Van Helsing 2: the Army of Evil Dead.

Van Helsing was uber gay.

The Bros. Grimm wasn't too far behind, IMO.


I'd pick Bros. Grimm.

I've seen both movies. Liked Van Helsing better.

Van Helsing.....Brother's Grimm is for children....

Van Helsing actually wasn't that abd of a movie.

Yes it was. It was downright horrible, lousy overproduced effects and the worst casting for Dracula in movie history.
Grimm was not Gilliam's best, but at least it wasn't such a cringefest as Van Helsing. What was Jackman thinking?

Van helsing tried to hard, Brothers Grimm didnt try hard enough. Van helsing certainly had charm, but i agree with queeq, in saying that it was overproduced. I know Sommers was going for a cheesy B movie, but this rarely ever works when you're using a mega-budget. I felt as though Sommer's was trying to remind me, every step of the way, that i was watching a cheesy movie inspired by old school paramount monsters. I enjoyed the creature effects and character designs. I thought hugh Jackman did an ok job. I dont think the movie would have even been watchable without him. By then end of the movie, i felt as though i just finished watching a dozen of poorly executed action scenes sparced with misplaced melodrama. With that said, its still entertianing for what it is.
As for the Brothers Grimm. I was very disappointed with this movie the first time i saw it. The second time that i made myself watch it. I found myself asking why the movie failed. The characters were cast very well. It had two marquee actors that did a fine job. The production seemed spot on. With great sets, wardrobe, effects and an interesting story concept. Lacking a well paced and realized script, however, the entire movie fell apart. I'm also thinking that the story was hindered by poor direction. Although the sets seemed sufficient and well detailed. I felt as though i was stuck on a movie set. The forest scenes felt enclosed and the town appeared to be no bigger than three houses and a dirt path.

Van helsing is probably more entertaining for its non-stopped eye candy, but i prefer Brothers grimm for the brother characters

And don't forget Monica Belucci... yummmy

Aye to that.

Brothers Grimm for me, although I've only seen it once, in fact, I've only seen Van Helsing once. Any Gilliam movie is fine by me.

Indeed.