Van Helsing (2004) Synopsis:
Set in the late 19th century, Bram Stoker's fabled monster hunter, Dr. Abraham Van Helsing, is summoned to a mysterious land in East Europe to vanquish evil forces in the form of: Count Dracula, the Wolf Man and Frankenstein's Monster. Assisting him once he gets there is Anna, the heir of a long-running family committed to hunting down and destroying Count Dracula.
Van Helsing (2004) Movie Review:
It is obvious that the summer movie season is here with the arrival of Stephen Sommers’ Van Helsing. As most summer popcorn movies, the film has a load of CGI, an intriguing atmosphere, beautiful actors, and of course no brain or merit. As finesse and engaging a film as Van Helsing is, it is hollow, as its character of Dracula once states in the film.
Due to Sommers’ enormous success of his remakes of The Mummy films, he is given more liberty this time around with Van Helsing. He literally jumbles together a group of literary and cinematic horror icons to do battle. However, the authors who conceived these characters are rolling in their graves with the envisioning that Sommers displays. Not a elder scholarly professor hunting after vampires like Bram Stoker created him as, Van Helsing (Hugh Jackman) is now a James Bond type bounty hunter of monsters and other things of the abnormal for the Catholic Church in Rome during the 19th century. He totes tricky weaponry and gadgets that are provided by his inventor friend Carl (The Lord of the Ring’s David Wenham). Van Helsing is also an emotionally lost soul that is trying to rehash his past, which he has hardly any memory of.
After an aggressive altercation with another literary character, Mr. Hyde, the audiences learns that Van Helsing is hailed as much a murderer as a soldier for the church. Upon arrival from his last mission, Van Helsing is given orders to destroy Count Dracula (Moulin Rouge’s Richard Roxburgh) and protect a gorgeous gypsy named Anna (Kate Beckinsale) in Transylvania. Anna has her own reasons of wanting to kill Dracula as well, due to the fact he has wiped out her family, which were the only ones that knew the secrets to killing him. On top of wanting Anna killed, Dracula and his exotic brides (Elena Anaya, Silvia Colloca, and Josie Maran) have plans of their own for world conquering by the use of Frankenstein’s Monster (Shuler Hensley) to give life to their offspring. To also add to the mix, Dracula is using a werewolf to hunt down Anna and Van Helsing. Action sequence after action sequence ensues as the jumbled story unfolds, which has its own shares of twists and excitement.
Sommers loves the paint the screen with CGI and F/X imagery and with Van Helsing, he exhibits this in full force. Outside of entire characters CGI, The Wolfman and transformed gargoyle like vampires, Sommer’s of course has all out battles, landscapes, and sequence after sequence just totally geared to the spectacle of CGI. He also uses the effects of CGI to present the grizzly werewolf transformations, which in fact were done far better in other films, like An American Werewolf in London. Though over the top, the visuals and excessiveness of special effects are not what falters this film, it is the concepts, notions and missing pieces of Sommer’s script.
There is no other way to describe the screenplay for the film except as a mess, Sommers must think visually what he wants to show then he sits down and thinks about the way he wants to get to that shot. The script for this film is just atrophic, no plot, no pacing, he already had legendary characters, but he can not even get that right. The combing of literary characters was attempted last year in The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, in which Van Helsing is a far better film, but once again the liberties taken with the characters are embarrassing. It has already been mentioned that Van Helsing is nothing close to what Stoker created and Dracula is not smooth, sinister or even frightening, he is more a whiner. Frankenstein’s Monster is workable, but the whole idea of Dracula using him to bring life to his babies is hokey. Why didn’t Dracula and his brides just bite more people and compile a vampire army? The majority of notions of the film’s characters are also ludicrous. Not to spoil the film, the secrets of the werewolf will not be divulged, but the connections with Dracula just become absurd once they are revealed.
Of course there is bad dialogue and one adrenaline filled action moment after another, which is understood with a popcorn film, but there no substance at all. It is almost like the audience is eating a huge delicious bag of buttery popcorn, but it has no taste.
Hugh Jackman is a terrific cast as Van Helsing. Though not as forceful as his work as Wolverine, Jackman is still a fiery presence on the screen and is for sure now a prolific Hollywood star. Kate Beckinsale does not have much work with as the gypsy Anna, except once again donning tight pants and pulling out a sword on occasion, but she still calls for an ample amount attention. Richard Roxburgh serves up the worst performance ever as a Dracula, yes even worse than Gerard Butler's performance in Dracula 2000. Roxburgh plays the character more as an outburst mental patient than a character of seductive evil. Perhaps it was what Sommers wanted from him, but many of his scenes where he is suppose to be the anchor of the tone are really disappointing. As Frankenstein’s Monster, stage actor Shuler Hensley is stellar, but it gets pretty ridiculous when he starts swinging around Dracula’s castle like Tarzan. Speaking of Tarzan, during the climatic battle of the film, Hugh Jackman reflects that he would be a perfect choice for a new take on the character.
Van Helsing a huge blockbuster that is painfully loud and lacks filling or substance to make it a recommendable choice or even a guilty pleasure. Sommers’ has no sense of clarity or posture; he just goes for straight visuals. The Mummy films were agonizing choices to sit through, and though Van Helsing is dimwitted, it is still not unwatchable. Though the liberties Sommers takes on the literary characters is infuriating, if someone states that they can not be engaged in this film someway, no matter how poor or nutty it is, then they have no sense of summer at the movies.
Our Rating: 
User Rating: 
Log in to rate this movie
Van Helsing (2004) review written by: Bailey Henderson
7th September, 2008 
28th August 2008: George Clooney Up In The Air! 
