Van Helsing (2004)

Van helsing is great action it a great fight scenes awesome ending fight werewolf vs vampire

When I first saw this film in a theater, I wouldn't have given it more than a 7 - but I liked it enough to buy the video, and on third viewing, 13 years later, I was blown away by its overall excellence: the photography is gorgeous, the plot original, the script first rate, the acting first-rate, the music rich and strong without ever overpowering the movie itself, and the combination of camp humor, action, and an unexpected ending (spoiler alert) make it for me one of my all-time favorite movies. If you like a mixture of humor and action, with spectacular photography and a rich score, this is for you. While The Mummy is okay, Van Helsing is far more original and well-done in every aspect - a camp action masterpiece. Much better than 90 percent of the movies I have seen in the last decade.

Stephen Sommers goes for broke with this big-budget monster mash, filmed in exactly the same vein as his MUMMY remake and just as disappointing. Things begin quite promisingly with a homage to the Universal classics of the 1930s but rapidly descend into inanity, as one hurried action sequence follows another with no logic, reason or plot to be seen at any point. The film is noisy, special effect-filled and totally lacking in characterisation or story, as superhero Van Helsing (renamed Gabriel – did they not have the rights to the character or something?) battles not only Dracula but werewolves and Frankenstein's Monster too (incorrectly called Frankenstein in one scene).The movie lasts for an astonishing two hours without offering anything new at all – you really will have seen everything that's on offer here. There are blatant rip-offs throughout and a lack of common sense on the part of the director that is really annoying – you can just picture him saying "let's have that woman fall off the roof and jump down a tree! cool!" Hugh Jackman is pretty wooden as the hero, but who can blame him given the material, whilst Kate Beckinsale does ridiculous rather well. Richard Roxburgh, an actor who I really liked in MOULIN ROUGE, is similarly awful as camp goth-vamp Dracula, whilst David Wenham, gives the best performance as the comic relief. The special effects are wicked, as you would expect given the budget – those werewolf transformations are particularly good – although the flying female vampires look a little too CGI for my liking. Sadly, the said effects don't save what is essentially a dog of a film.

Van Helsing (2004) is fun and pretty well made in different aspects. It has good acting throughout by all the actors, especially by Beckinsale and Jackman. Kate Beckinsale really is a great choice for the role she fulfills, she has the correct physical look/appearance, and she fits in all the other ways as well, good cast call. Hugh Jackman is obviously playing the main character here, Van helsing. Hugh also gives a fine performance, and he also physically fits the role, he's very stoic at times but then heartfelt at times when he needs to be, and he's strong/muscular, which of course is necessary with all the action scenes and maneuvers he must perform. Speaking of action scenes, the special effects and the actual fighting in this movie is all very well done, and I don't mean to say that it's the best thing in any action movie you'll see, but it suffices. I also really like the way they did Dracula's wives, seductive and menacing at the same time, which of course is the way Dracula's wives are supposed to be. I thought the plot was entertaining and I thought it was executed well. So all in all Van Helsing receives a seven out of 10 as far as quality goes.