May 06, 2004
Van Helsing (2004)
[2 - OK]
I was happy to receive an advanced screening ticket to see the new action flick Van Helsing (2004) last week. I entered the theater with low expectations for the massively over-advertised (read as in over-hyped) flick and can honestly say I was not disappointed. The action was unrelenting, the editing quick, the plot thin, the lines cheesy, the acting questionable, the directing laughable and overall it was a quite a bit of fun.
As I am sure anyone with access to a television knows by now, Van Helsing is the steampunk story of a James Bond style vampire hunter going after the mother of all monster, Dracula himself, while trying to get the girl. The movie was originally set to be produced immediately after Francis Ford Coppola's fiasco Dracula (1992) with Anthony Hopkins was set to reprise his role as Abraham Van Helsing but the production was delayed (trivia time kids: the production company could not secure the rights to the Abraham Van Helsing character so they invented his 'younger brother' Gabriel Van Helsing). Along the way he gets to use various toys, have knockout fights with CG monsters and deliver little quips. The saving grace for this popcorn flick is the charisma and presence of lead actor Hugh Jackman best known for his portrayal of Wolverine in X-Men (2000) and X2: X-Men United (2003). Jackman shows great capacity as action-leading man and at times even some impressive acting skills leaving me to wonder if he has the range to handle a movie with a good script (I quite liked X2 but, as with the first X-Men movie and Van Helsing, Jackman's role is very limited). Helsing also gets a chance to romance his leading lady Anna; played by Kate Beckinsale who once again proves how incredibly hot she can look while fighting in a corset but does little else that is noteworthy in the movie. Beckinsale also strikes me as a talented actress that has not yet been given an opportunity to demonstrate her full potential. While her performance in last year's blockbuster Underworld (2003) was unremarkable I doubt many people will remember the superb job she did in the comedy Cold Comfort Farm (1995).
Writer / Director Stephen Sommers who is responsible for an uninterrupted line of hollow action flicks: Deep Rising (1998), The Mummy (1999) and it's sequels The Mummy Returns (2001) and The Scorpion King (2002) on the other hand leaves little doubt about his artistic quality (or lack thereof). If you can think of a tired Hollywood cliché to make fun of, you will find it in this flick. The fighting on the edge of the cliff/precipice/rooftop, swinging from ropes, kissing the girl before going into the breach and diving tracking shots of a character falling to his death can all be forgiven. The "car explodes as it falls off the cliff" cliché however made me laugh out loud. It is ridiculous enough to ask people believe that for some unexplained reason at the end of the chase scene, the sports car will suddenly burst into a ball of flames as it falls down the cliff, but to actually find an excuse to set the 19th century carriage on fire (a lamp atop the carriage falls over) AND then have it suddenly burst into a ball of flames as it falls was simply too much. Sommers, if you ever read this, I was laughing AT you, not WITH you during that scene. I noticed at least two recycled scenes (if they were not re-used from earlier in the movie then Sommers shot some very similar footage for the scenes), I really do wish they had done something (anything) to make Frankenstein's laboratory in Castle Dracula look slightly different from the way it looked in Castle Frankenstein and what the hell was up with those Jawa looking like Dwergis? Probably the most distracting symptom of "we don't care, it is a summer flick and will make money with heavy advertising whether we really try or not" symptom was the blatant special effects disregard for basic physics. Acrobatics and monumental fights aside seeing a 2 foot tall little daemon pick up and fly away with an adult person totally broke any willing suspension of disbelief I had managed to develop and made the CG monster look.. well, computer generated. This is really rather too bad because the movie is rather beautiful and most of the effects add rather than subtract from the total experience.
There is little else to say about the rest of the cast or the movie. Will Kemp (the wolfman) spends most of his time looking pained, I rather enjoyed Richard Roxburgh as Count Dracula (he played The Duke in Moulin Rouge! (2001)) and I was surprised by the humanity that Shuler Hensley put into Frankenstein's Monster. David Wenham adds a great deal of humor as Carl the fryer (he plays the role of side-kick, comic relief and Bond style Q all rolled into one), so much so that it was not until I looked his name up that I realized he looks so familiar because he played the brooding Faramir in The Lord of the Rings. Probably the most telling thing to say about Van Helsing is that as soon as the ride home we were so ready to forget the movie that the discussion in the car was centered on Jackman's role in X2. If you want a couple of hours of meaningless fun go see Van Helsing, then go out and do something worthwhile.
A few words about the advanced screening:
Thanks to my friend Nick who slipped me the advanced screening tickets. I am glad traffic was light and we left on time because even an hour early the theater had a line that snaked clear around the building. The house was so full I am not sure everyone with a ticket got in. I am glad we got a seat but we entered late enough that my friend Michael and I had to watch the movie from the left row very close to the screen, which in a large theater means you have a hard time tracking fast moving objects on the screen. As I said to Michael on the way out "sitting that close probably does not matter if you are watching Lost in Translation, but it is a killer for an action film". Because of that (and once the hype and the crowds have died down) I may go see it again, this time from the center of the theater (though I am reluctant to pay to see Van Helsing again and reserve the right to change my mind). The sound also kept cutting in and out from 4 to 8 speakers, something most people will probably never notice but details like these tend to drive me nuts. As with Oak Tree in Seattle, I think Tigard Cinemas has just earned another warning to all movie watchers to not patronize a theater that cannot be bothered to deliver a movie with clear image and sound. At two points in the movie I saw a (rather cute) young lady walk around the side of the theater and scan the audience with a night vision scope. At first I thought she was recording audience reaction, but I quickly realized this did not make much sense since the flick would must have already been played to test audiences a few times and re-edited. It was Michael who guessed (accurately I believe) that she was on the lookout for recording devices.
Related posts on GeekRoar.com:
Geekroar.com Gallery :: Van Helsing Pictures
Film Roar: More Van Helsing Pictures
Film Roar: Van Helsing Pictures and Trailer
Film Roar: Van Helsing (2004) Web Site
Posted by Leopoldo at May 6, 2004 05:02 PM | TrackBackWow! You came up with the very word I used to describe this movie the other night... hollow. I too saw this at a free screening Tuesday, and was hoping it would at least rise to the level of my low expectations. So much for wishful thinking. I'm really beginning to think that it's impossible for Stephen Sommers to offer us anything more than rehashed scenes from much better films, dressed up in the latest CGI software. There is no denying that Sommers can paint a pretty picture, but he has no original storytelling ability. This is a film that really prompts the question: Does anyone in charge in Hollywood say the word NO? $160 million dollars was spent on this production (not including the advertising), and for what? This movie plays more like a 2hr and 25min trailer - all highlights edited together in a frenzy - than it does a movie. For the money they spent, you could have funded 16 quality small films that would only have had to grossed an average return of $30 million at the box office to be considered profitable. "Van Helsing" is going to have to come closer to $600 miilion to do this. By the way, I watched this from the center of the theatre... I doubt this made the experience any better. But, if you want to check it out again, and are reluctant to see your money go into the "Van Helsing" coffers, may I make a suggestion. Pay for a ticket to a film that deserves your money - maybe one you've already seen but would like to help out just a little bit more - and then sit down and see "Van Helsing" from a better vantage point. I did this recently for "Kill Bill 2" (I refused to be charged twice for what should have been 1 movie)... I sat back and enjoyed "Kill Bill 2", while giving a few more bucks to "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind." By the way, this idea was taken from Kevin (MST3K) Murphy's book "A Year at the Movies", and I've used it quite a bit in the past year.
Posted by: john on May 7, 2004 11:28 AMThat is an awesome idea! Thank you John, if I do go back for another screening this is exactly what I will do.
Posted by: Leopoldo on May 7, 2004 12:21 PMAll i have to say is, u cant trust critics worth a hoot. Movies are judged on personal prefrences, i personaly loved the movie. And recomend people to see the movie before commenting about it. See it before u nock it
Posted by: pissed off dude on May 8, 2004 07:54 AMHere that, Leopoldo, you're a critic!
Sounds about like what I expected. Anyone who expected more than just a popcorn movie wasn't paying attention to the trailers. Looks like it might almost be worth the admission to see Beckinsdale in a corset. Man, if she was an '80s sci-fi/horror queen we would have got to see her naked. Ah...The good ol' days.
I just saw a new trailer for Harry Potter and I'm so I excited I want to explode. This is the first one that may have a hard time living up to my expectations given how decent the last one was and the fact that Oldman is playing Sirius and who the director is.
Posted by: Nick on May 8, 2004 04:13 PM"Hear".
Posted by: Nick on May 8, 2004 04:14 PMI personally found this enjoyable. I enjoyed the fresh style of this 'Dracula'; and overall, the film was artistic in many matters. I stress seeing this if you wish to see something lively and/or inspiring. I respect your opinions, tho'.
this show is quite good background soundtrack overall is good i give 4 out of 5
Posted by: jason on May 10, 2004 07:38 AMI agree with the others. This movie was worth my time and money. I thought it was good and not just because of the CGI. The characters were loveable and the monsters were beleivable. The Dracula story was good and I loved how they twisted things around and made it so that only a werewolf could kill Darcula. It was also interesting how they made each werewolf different. This movie was funny, scary, and sad all put together. If you are a critic like John and think KILL BILL is better than you have strange issues to deal with and should stop watchin movies.
Posted by: Werewolf on May 10, 2004 08:43 AMPersonally, I didn't think the movie was so bad. I thought is was a comedy really, seeing as I laughed most of the movie...well except the ending that wasn't funny. (It was to my friend however, and she nearly died fallig on the floor laughing at how "ironic" it was she explained later.)
I mean I was just happy to see Hugh Jackman in tight leather pants without a shirt...;op
I thought Carl was hiliarous as well as Dracula and I like the way he was potrayed.
But maybe when the DVD comes out, they'll add deleted scenes, cause I'm almost postive a lot of them were missing...
this was jus an overall terrible movie... i went in with five people, 3 of which were sleeping by the halfway point. the only thing that kept them awake was those terribly annoying screams from dracula's banshee women. the acting was terrible, the directing, script... honestly... if i ran this site, Van Helsing would be in the Stinker bin.
Posted by: neyoken on May 10, 2004 08:36 PMI think that is stupid to say...I bet anything that they were not sleeping...you are just saying that to make people think it is bad. This movie was packed with alot of interestin stuff and it was a lot of fun to watch. If you dont like this movie than you must not like anything at all because this movie was kick-ass.
Posted by: Werewolf on May 11, 2004 08:27 AMI allow people to post to the entries on GeekRoar.com provided that replies are respectful, that means no name-calling. Feel free to express your opinion, if you disagree with someone say it in a polite way or I will kill your posts.
Posted by: Leopoldo on May 11, 2004 09:32 AMI think the movie is a fun to watch definetely. The story is lack. However the director's style is like this. If you dont like the mummy / scopion king, you will not like this one as well. As the the CG, it is really amazing, esp when the human changed into warewolve, the effect is just much better than the Underworld. However the story plot can't be compared with Underworld. Cheers!
Posted by: someone on May 12, 2004 11:40 AMi spoke to my brother and a few other people that spent big money to watch it over the week... and not one good review was given about this movie. They all said it was terrible and "A big waste of mone.y" i kno my post probably won't make a difference to how these big hollywood directors and producers think, but from the way a lot of movies are being made these days... i really hope people use this terrible movie as an example that... no matter how much money u put into the CGI, sound effects, action sequences and trailers... a bad script and plot will ruin a movie that actually had some potential to be a decent film, and not be such a HUGE disappoinment. Its obvious that some people would enjoy the flashy explosions every 5secs and beautiful women wearing half-cut "i-cant-act-but-im-beautiful" blouses screaming their lungs out, but I, and im sure many many people walked out extremely disappointed from this movie. Im just posting this for people that want to use their money to enjoy their movie experience, and not waste it on such a poorly done film. There are just very few movies that i walk out with a "what the f*** was that?" expression on my face. Van Helsing and those movies in the "stinker" and "Pretty Bad" sections are some of them.
Posted by: neyoken on May 12, 2004 11:27 PMps. the choice of actor and script for the "Dracula" character was really REALLY bad. If the Dracula was more mysterious, intimidating, dark and...well... scary... instead of the melodramatic i-think-im-acting-well-cuz-im-yelling lunatic he was... maybe the film could've been at least entertaining, and not the joke it was.
Posted by: neyoken on May 12, 2004 11:35 PMTHE FILM OF THE VAN HELSING IS VERY INTERISTING...
IN THE SOUND EFFECT IS THE BEST.......
i thought the film was brillant as i like vampire
(can you release some more vampire things please)
Great film. Special affects rocked. Dodgy plot (well there wasn't really much of one) But woteva it's an ACTION ADVENTURE movie so that suggests alot of action doesn't it? Brilliant acting by Richard Roxburgh.
Posted by: Claire on May 18, 2004 08:40 AMthe film was great i saw it twice and i cant stop doing it . sound effects were wonderfull, graphic of "Van helsing " too .i liked Richard Roxburgh ,in the film he was reallly scary (Count Vladislaus Dracula )i hope that Stephen sommers with his command will create new part of Van helsing ,it would be wonderfull.Dracula's revenge time is near !!!!
Posted by: samo on May 19, 2004 01:10 PMI'm going to see Van Helsing for the third time next weekend. I loved it. It's my favorite movie. But, you know, to each his own. I think that people should go see the movie and decide for themselves and the people who try to get them to not go are very selfish. It's there choice and their money, don't ruin the experience!
Posted by: me on May 22, 2004 01:08 PMi like this movie alot. it is very adventurious. i had a crush with van helsing after seeing the movie.
anyway good luck as your movie is a sucess
hey guys Van Helsing was a kick ass movie ... hugh jackman looked so damn fine but then again when dosn't he!... but i really got to admitt the movie wouldn't have been the same without Kate Beckinsale ... she looked amazing!! ... there's just soething about a in a tight oufit with an badass attitude that is just so hot ... and Kate pulled it off!! ... but then again Kate looks good no matter what!! ... I can't wait until her new movie "THE AVIATOR," comes out, it sounds like it's going to be awesome ...
~peace out~
FAITH
Posted by: FAITH on May 27, 2004 11:51 AMI enjoyed the movie. It did have some..ehh..questioning parts..like the exploding carriages..but other than that I liked it.
Posted by: CJ on May 27, 2004 08:58 PMThe movie was alright, I think that Underworld was a lot better than the movie Van Helsing. I think some of the graphics in Van helsing were pretty cool, but I think there was more action in Underworld; which made it a totally better movie.
Posted by: holly berry on June 2, 2004 09:08 AMMy friend got the movie for my father, and usually I watch every movie that people talk about, and that are respectively were in the movie theaters, but this time I seriously didn't feel like watching the movie, why so ever. I've heard that the movie's pretty good, and actually I read good critis, anyway...I am not sure, but I doubt Van Helsing is a good movie.
Greetings.
is van helsing pure breed werewolf
Posted by: erol on June 20, 2004 11:55 PMThis is the best movie i have ever seen, i've seen it 4 times and it gets better every time i do see it, the characters are great the actors are great and the special effects are mad!! LOVE IT, Dracula is so HOT and Van Helsing and Princess Anna Velarious are the best, GREAT MOVIE!!! and anyone who says this movie is bad and that Underworld is better, thats wrong, Van Helsing has much better special effects and alot more action so there!!!!!
Posted by: I'M A VAMPIRE ( i wish) on June 26, 2004 02:24 PMHeyy, I came upon this site while I was searching for something about Van Helsing. No offense to those who disliked the movie, but this has got to be one of the best. Of course, like everyone would say, it IS my own opinion. I`d only like to ask that you don`t exactly give this movie a horrible review. You have some people thinking that it`s too..lame to watch. Those who have not seen any of Stephen Sommers other movies would not know that he "rehashed" some scenes. The effects were great, costumes wonderful, the acting is extremely superb, and although at points the movie can be pretty loud, it`s adding to the excitement of the movie. Alan Silvestri did an amazing job with the background music, which is partially the reason that caused me to go back to this movie so many times. I do intend to continuing watching it, regardless of your description of the movie. And by the way, the carriage did NOT explode mid-air. The Bride that was searching it discovered stakes inside, and immediately lifted up into the air to escape. Had you actually paid attention, you would have noticed that she gave the carriage a thrust, forcing it to the ground, causing it to blow. I hope I didn`t offend anybody... Considering I`m just thirteen. If you have any response to what I have said, I will be coming by every now and then just to read comments..I am quite amused. Once again, I am sorry should I have offended someone, and I do realize I have gone off topic and taken advantage of the fact that it is my own opinion.
Posted by: audacious on July 2, 2004 08:55 AMI`d like to apologize for my mistake of not noticing the lamp had fallen on the carriage.
Posted by: audacious on July 2, 2004 09:32 AMI liked Van Helsing and I like the directors style, I mean I love The Mummy and The Mummy Returns, but I have to say The Scorpian King sucked. Van Helsing is rather like League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, which is a class film, with the oh so fit Stuart Townsend in.
And I read one of your posts, about if it was an 80s film you would have got to see Kate Beckinsale naked, how pathetic. Is that all guys think about? Sex and naked women? How shallow if it is.
I mean one of the reasons I went to see the film is because Hugh Jackman is fit, and it was nice to see him with his top off. But some guys just seem to think that we women are objects that you can watch naked. Not many women like that, some do such as prositutes and pole dancers, but then they are just cheap and easy. But you know, there is a brain behind the body. (Sorry if I seem mean, just it it really peeves me off when all guys are interested in is sex)
I loved the music. I like peruvian style music, which is the closest to what it is.
Anywho, overall I thought it was a good film. But we all have our own opinions.
Posted by: Vampire Blood on July 18, 2004 04:06 AMIts awesome. I have no words to explain how I feel after watching this movie. Even now I want to become a Dracula with lots of POWER.
The Devil's Power......
HA-HA-HA-HA-HA
it is a beautiful film, and the way they talk is fantastic.
Posted by: lana on October 20, 2004 11:18 AMI think this movie rocks!
Posted by: Mike on October 22, 2004 06:57 AMI don't know if any body is going to read this anymore, but.
I think this movie rocks!...
And I think that the only reason people would talk trash about a movie is because they don't know how much work it takes to make a movie...
Do you all know how much time it takes to render a CGI scene?...
Well for a movie as big as Van Helsing, it could be very time consuming, Trust me I know this stuff....
My major is DIT "Digital Imaging Technology"..
Second of all, I read something about the 19th century carriage exploding when it hits the gorund....Made me laugh out loud some body said...
Nonsense?...I don't think so....
What if Van helsing put some gun powder inside along with the stakes and set it off?...."Tink a little!"
I think this movie Rocks...
They did an amazing job with dracula....I think they needed to do something different...People gets tired of silver "STAKES and a CRUSIFIX" being the only way to kill Dracula...
The brides were HOT!...
And so was The Valerious chick..
Please stop making bad coments about a movie if you are not a certified CRITIC...
I think people should watch a movie and understand the concept first, and then make coments...
The locations are great weather CGI or not, they look great....
Vampires attack during the day others say...
Well Let me ask you something...Did Dracula not attack at sunset in "Bram Stocker's Dracula" towards the very end?...He did!...
So please quit complaining about it....
I know people critisize movies just to have something to talk about, but if someone gave you the choice of watching an old monster movie, and a modern movie, I know what your choice would be...
Please wake up, the time of hairry masks and simole outfits has come to an end...
Do you want a bad example?..."Captain Cronos Vampire Hunter" I bought the DVD, and not even my little sister liked it!
Van Helsing rocks!
Mike
"Shoshino75@hotmail.com"
we NEED more wolfman/dracula pics!
I loved this movie! Fantastic sound and visuals. The Brides were my favorite. I want to see them in other movies. Apparently there was a scene that didnt make it to the movie, and I really want to see it. It's Marishka and the other bride talking about the werewolf...did anyone see this scene?
Posted by: Ted on January 24, 2005 08:28 AMThis is the movie I tend to pop in the DVD player before I go to bed! I like movies that are full of action and involve creature like characters. Im also a big fan of CGI cause I am a designer myself and this movie sure did hit some high points with that in mind. Plot? not really but who needs a plot full of action right? I dislike people who put movies down that the plot is a little bad but the hard work put into CGI is there, if I can beleive it could be real looking then its good. Overall you should see this movie to judge it for yourself. Don't wanna write too much or have I already? lol
Posted by: Nautilus on January 31, 2005 09:08 PMIsn't it funny how when a movie like Van Helsing gets trashed by critics, audiences usually love it, but when audiences hate a movie, the critics love? It is very rare that you find a movie that both critics and
audiences love. With that said, I think Van Helsing was a great movie! I don't normally watch vampire movies, but Van Helsing is an acception. I loved Richard Roxburgh's portrayal of Dracula. You kinda feel sorry for him. At the same time, your glad you don't have to worry about finding someone to bring and sustain life to you dead children. I thought the brides were a little whiny but you can understand what they are going through. The special effects were awsome and David Wenham was a great comic relief. Hugh Jackman is not one of my favorite actors, but he was exceptionally hot on Van Helsing!
van helsing is my fav film.i have a thing for vampires and dracula and i thought that richard roxburgh the man who plays dracula is very nice looking.
Posted by: robyn adams on June 28, 2005 11:48 AMI loved it! It's one of my favorites! Vampires, werewolves, what more could a person ask for? The plot was twisting, a thing that I dig. Awesome movie!
Posted by: Hige on July 30, 2005 08:25 AM
