Released: 2004
Director: Stephen Sommers
Rated PG-13
Run Time: 131 Minutes
Cast:
Hugh Jackman: Van Helsing
Kate Beckinsale: Anna Valerious
Richard Roxburgh: Dracula
David Wenham: Carl
Kevin J. O’Connor: Igor
Shuler Hensley: Frankenstein’s Monster
When you hear the term, “classic movie monster,” what comes to your mind? Dracula, Frankenstein, The Invisible Man, or The Mummy? The answer is all above. These are some of the most memorable creatures that have been a part of cinema for the better part of a century. So…..what happens when somebody has the idea to bring all of them together for a movie? We actually have two answers for that: The Monster Squad and Van Helsing. The Monster Squad was released back in 1987 and featured most, if not all, of Universal Studio’s famous monsters. Based loosely on a main character in Bram Stoker’s story, Dracula, Van Helsing follows the adventures of the legendary vampire hunter. Is the film any good? As it is a Stephen Sommers film, the answer is a mixed bag. I’ll explain a little later.
Opening on the streets of Paris, the film follows the titular character Van Helsing as he hunts for a notorious doctor/monster by the name of Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde. Chasing the monster to a local cathedral, Van Helsing successfully eliminates the beast at the expense of a very old window. Later, as he returns to the Vatican, he’s given a new mission which involves him taking on the dreaded Count Dracula. Another reason is that a local family by the name of Valerious has sworn to never enter Heaven until Dracula has been destroyed. So, Van Helsing’s mission is two-fold: Destroy the master vampire and save Anna’s family with Anna being the last of the line. Taking a friar by the name of Carl with him to Transylvania, Van Helsing meets up with Anna and is promptly attacked by Dracula’s vampire brides. There’s also the side-plots involving werewolves, Frankenstein’s monster, Dracula’s children, blah, blah, blah. There is a word to describe Stephen Sommer’s Van Helsing: Bloated. I’ve looked at numerous reviews of this movie, and they all say the same thing: The movie is bloated.
Let’s get this right out in the open: Van Helsing is not a good movie. Not remotely. There is some really good stuff here, but I’m going to go through the bad stuff first. I hate to repeat using the same word, but the film really is bloated. I knew going in that I was going to be dealing with Dracula, Frankenstein’s Monster and werewolves. That’s pushing it, but the film also had the audacity to throw in Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde towards the beginning of the film. Yes, the film had to establish that Van Helsing is a bad-ass, but the film has so many monsters already, it just feels like Sommers threw in everything AND the kitchen sink. Had he focused on one or two plot-points, the film would have felt a bit more coherent. But no, Sommers wanted everything to center around Frankenstein’s monster, why he his so important to Dracula and why he was made. The story is just a poor excuse to have all these creatures on screen at the same time. I don’t think it would have been so painful if the performances weren’t so all over the map. The performances range from good, to bad, to HOLY MOLY!!! Richard Roxburg is perhaps one of the WORST Draculas I have ever seen. I remember reading a review that said Roxburg’s performance is so over-the-top that it’s still in orbit. I think that’s funny because the role that Roxburg played in his next movie, Stealth, had the last name of….Orbit. Not kidding. So, yeah, Roxburg was pretty bad in this. Kate Beckinsale also suffered in this one. I like Kate as an actress, I really do. I think she’s talented and beautiful, but give her a Transylvanian accent and she goes overboard. She wasn’t that particularly convincing. I’m not blaming just the actors for their performances, that comes down to the writing. That I can pin on Stephen Sommers, as he also wrote the movie.
If you can make it past all that, the rest of the film is at least fairly competent. Hugh Jackman is fantastic as Van Helsing. He brings a natural charisma and confidence to the character that defines Van Helsing as a character. Not only that, but Hugh had also come off of X-men 2, so was in top physical condition for the movie. He ended up doing a lot of his own stunts and that was fantastic. The actual opening of the film was very reminiscent of the original Frankenstein. The film literally opens up in black and white when Victor Frankenstein brings his monster to life. Aside from Dracula’s part in that, it ends up at a windmill much like Frankenstein. That was a pretty cool throwback. It also helps give the film its camp-factor. Believe me, Van Helsing is very campy. The secondary characters are fantastic. David Wenham is hilarious as Carl. I’ve liked Wenham ever since he play Faramir in the Lord of the Rings films. He’s a pretty good actor, and instead playing a tough guy like he does in 300, he gets to play a fairly nerdy kind of character. Wenham gives the character a very quirky personality, and is somewhat hesitant, but ultimately comes through for his companions. Awesome character. Kevin J. O’Connor is reliable as always. He plays Igor, Frankenstein’s deformed assistant. O’Connor has always been fun to watch no matter what he does. He gives the character an interesting dynamic and energy that makes him fun to watch, even though you don’t like him. Robbie Coltrane is awesome as Mr. Hyde. I don’t agree with the character’s inclusion in the film, but Coltrane makes him memorable regardless.
Another thing that works in Van Helsing’s favor, is that it’s not boring. It is action packed and an absolute thrill to watch. Yeah, it’s a CGI-fest, but most of the effects are really well done courtesy of Industrial Light and Magic. Some of the CGI isn’t as good as the rest of it, but the film moves at such a rapid pace that you don’t really notice. I will say this for Stephen Sommers: He knows how to film an action movie. He really does. He doesn’t rely on super closeups and shaky-cam techniques. He wants you to see what’s going on and the film is better for it. Van Helsing’s opening adventure in Paris is an absolute blast, as is the cart chase through a Transylvanian forest. It is genuinely thrilling. The sets and the artwork are an absolute marvel to look at. Dracula’s castle is especially creepy. Say what you will about the movie, but it is visually stunning. It has some fantastic special effects, and I really, really love the werewolf transformations. It’s suitably freaky and awesome at the same time. The music by Alan Silvestri is very over-the-top bombastic and helps give the film its campy feel. I’ve always been a fan of Silvestri’s. He’s one of those composers that is very reliable and creative.
It’s a funny thing: Considering the film was made for 160 million greenbacks, it actually made back double in its run world-wide. Domestically, it wasn’t a heavy-hitter, but combined with the intake from the rest of the globe, the movie made over 300 million dollars. That doesn’t equate to a major box-office bomb. Financially, it could have gotten a sequel, but Van Helsing got hammered critically. It’s too bad, I like the character, and I liked Hugh Jackman’s portrayal of Van Helsing, but considering how much people hated it, a sequel is not going to happen. At the end of the day, Van Helsing is not a terrible movie, but it’s an average one. It’s got a lot of action and great visual effects, and David Wenham is fun to watch, but Richard Roxburg’s peformance and Kate’s horrendous accent as well as the lousy story just bring the film down. 7/10 is what this one gets. It’s a rental at best.