A Toothless Vampire Tale
Stephen Sommers' Van Helsing, the first big movie of the summer season, is an unmitigated monster mash of almost every adventure movie in the book from James Bond to Indiana Jones to the Universal horror movies that inspired it. Van Helsing will undoubtedly irk die-hard monster movie fans while appealing to video gamers and those besotted by Hugh Jackman.
The movie opens with a nice homage to the original Frankenstein, shot in glorious black and white and ending in a blaze of revenge. When the movie fast forwards a year and is transformed into color, it's immediately clear we're in trouble. It's 1888, and Paris is being terrorized by the maniacal Mr. Hyde. Enter the mysterious Van Helsing (Jackman), who not only destroys several priceless antiquities at the famed Notre Dame de Paris, but kills the computer generated Hyde in a surprisingly bloodless and less-than-compelling battle. Chased out of Paris by the authorities—Hyde transformed back to Jekyll, thus bringing a murder charge against our hero—Van Helsing makes his way to the Vatican to report in to his superiors at a super secret, James Bond-esque lair, replete with a nineteenth century version of Q Branch.
Van Helsing is given a new assignment in Transylvania where he is to protect the last members of the Valerious family, Anna (Kate Beckinsale) and Velkan (Will Kemp), and help them kill Dracula (Richard Roxburgh). It's when Van Helsing, accompanied by friar Carl (David Wenham), goes to Transylvania that the movie really goes down hill. Little in the movie makes sense, particularly for anyone who has a passing knowledge or affection for the horror legends writer/director Sommers has cut and pasted onto the screen. For instance, Dracula's nefarious plan is both needlessly complicated and kind of stupid—involving the animation of vampire progeny (with nods to Alien and Gremlins).
The biggest problem with the movie is Van Helsing. In the Bram Stoker source material—and in his earlier movie incarnations—the vampire/monster hunter is both a man of action and an intellectual who has devoted his life to ridding the world of evil. As Sommers has it, Van Helsing is a typical lunk-headed action hero who has no idea what he's up against. He simply faces off with a monster and starts shooting, swinging, slicing and stabbing with abandon, which makes the overlong action set pieces both rather boring and repetitive. Jackman is good in the role, which is essentially his Wolverine character from X-Men including that character's amnesia and claws—but he doesn't have much to work with. The entire character is built around his cool costume and gadgets, not a personality.
Besides the movie's dull hero and lame plot, which becomes so inchoate with characters conveniently learning information by osmosis and motivations so obtuse that by the end the audience will neither care about the twist the studio has asked to remain a secret nor whether or not Van Helsing succeeds in his mission.
Roxburgh's Dracula is the other big problem with the movie. Sommers has completely changed the rules surrounding the legendary vampire. He no longer can be killed by a stake to the heart or fended off with a cross (though all the other vampires in the movie can). There is only one way to beat him, and that will have horror fans howling. Roxburgh plays Dracula as an effete dandy on his way to The Rocky Horror Picture Show. There is none of the dark sensuality mixed with sophistication that has been a hallmark of the character for the last 100 years. Roxburgh's Dracula is about as menacing as Dr. Evil and about as campy.
The rest of the cast turns in laughably abysmal or campy performances. Beckinsale is saddled with a horrible Transylvanian accent. Kevin J. O'Connor's Igor, like all the monsters in the movie, is not menacing or craven enough. His makeup is atrocious, looking like something out of a grade Z horror flick. The only exception is Shuler Hensley's Frankenstein's monster. It is his performance that reminds why these characters were compelling in the first place. His monster is a grotesque with the soul of an angel, allowing him to give some nuance to his character—while suffering through the ridiculous end sequence.
Even though the plot and characters are ludicrous and boring, the point of Van Helsing is not to provide a thrilling movie-going experience. It is an exercise in marketing, designed to get bodies in theater seats and buying the product tie-ins. In that, it will likely succeed. But as a movie, it deserves a stake through its celluloid heart.
The movie opens with a nice homage to the original Frankenstein, shot in glorious black and white and ending in a blaze of revenge. When the movie fast forwards a year and is transformed into color, it's immediately clear we're in trouble. It's 1888, and Paris is being terrorized by the maniacal Mr. Hyde. Enter the mysterious Van Helsing (Jackman), who not only destroys several priceless antiquities at the famed Notre Dame de Paris, but kills the computer generated Hyde in a surprisingly bloodless and less-than-compelling battle. Chased out of Paris by the authorities—Hyde transformed back to Jekyll, thus bringing a murder charge against our hero—Van Helsing makes his way to the Vatican to report in to his superiors at a super secret, James Bond-esque lair, replete with a nineteenth century version of Q Branch.
Van Helsing is given a new assignment in Transylvania where he is to protect the last members of the Valerious family, Anna (Kate Beckinsale) and Velkan (Will Kemp), and help them kill Dracula (Richard Roxburgh). It's when Van Helsing, accompanied by friar Carl (David Wenham), goes to Transylvania that the movie really goes down hill. Little in the movie makes sense, particularly for anyone who has a passing knowledge or affection for the horror legends writer/director Sommers has cut and pasted onto the screen. For instance, Dracula's nefarious plan is both needlessly complicated and kind of stupid—involving the animation of vampire progeny (with nods to Alien and Gremlins).
The biggest problem with the movie is Van Helsing. In the Bram Stoker source material—and in his earlier movie incarnations—the vampire/monster hunter is both a man of action and an intellectual who has devoted his life to ridding the world of evil. As Sommers has it, Van Helsing is a typical lunk-headed action hero who has no idea what he's up against. He simply faces off with a monster and starts shooting, swinging, slicing and stabbing with abandon, which makes the overlong action set pieces both rather boring and repetitive. Jackman is good in the role, which is essentially his Wolverine character from X-Men including that character's amnesia and claws—but he doesn't have much to work with. The entire character is built around his cool costume and gadgets, not a personality.
Besides the movie's dull hero and lame plot, which becomes so inchoate with characters conveniently learning information by osmosis and motivations so obtuse that by the end the audience will neither care about the twist the studio has asked to remain a secret nor whether or not Van Helsing succeeds in his mission.
Roxburgh's Dracula is the other big problem with the movie. Sommers has completely changed the rules surrounding the legendary vampire. He no longer can be killed by a stake to the heart or fended off with a cross (though all the other vampires in the movie can). There is only one way to beat him, and that will have horror fans howling. Roxburgh plays Dracula as an effete dandy on his way to The Rocky Horror Picture Show. There is none of the dark sensuality mixed with sophistication that has been a hallmark of the character for the last 100 years. Roxburgh's Dracula is about as menacing as Dr. Evil and about as campy.
The rest of the cast turns in laughably abysmal or campy performances. Beckinsale is saddled with a horrible Transylvanian accent. Kevin J. O'Connor's Igor, like all the monsters in the movie, is not menacing or craven enough. His makeup is atrocious, looking like something out of a grade Z horror flick. The only exception is Shuler Hensley's Frankenstein's monster. It is his performance that reminds why these characters were compelling in the first place. His monster is a grotesque with the soul of an angel, allowing him to give some nuance to his character—while suffering through the ridiculous end sequence.
Even though the plot and characters are ludicrous and boring, the point of Van Helsing is not to provide a thrilling movie-going experience. It is an exercise in marketing, designed to get bodies in theater seats and buying the product tie-ins. In that, it will likely succeed. But as a movie, it deserves a stake through its celluloid heart.
