Van Helsing (2004)
7/10
How anyone can hate a film with such good humour and a sense of fun is beyond me.
7 June 2004
I can certainly reconcile myself with someone's DISLIKE of the film, and I would expect such people not to view if they have a good idea beforehand that this won't light their fire; but I can't understand those who claim to love this type of genre before watching who then precede to rip the film to shreds. The good humour mentioned in my summary isn't represented by a particular sharpness of script or a reliance on slapstick, but rather a general attitude pervading the film which smacks of those involved having a darn good time. In the case of director Sommers this manifests itself often in a threatened overdose of CGI, but when the effects are this good such profligacy where they're concerned is hardly a problem.

The manifesto is clear almost from the start - find a wafer-thin premise with which to allot your ghouls enough screen time and then just let them loose in a suitably gothic arena. As such, Jackman's Van Helsing often finds himself relegated to the role of a bystander, so perhaps the fact that the film bears his name is a bit of a misnomer; however, like I said, we're pretty much in contrivance territory as far as 'plot development' goes, so it should be seen as just another brand name to hang a silly hat on. In this regard it may pain Jackman the most, since it leaves him still searching for a leading man role in the style of Crowe's "Gladiator" to really leave his print indelibly ("X-Men" is an ensemble piece.) His best moment actually comes before the main brawls begin - testing out various items of weaponary Inspector Gadget stylee!

The lack of focus on the main character shouldn't perturb the audience too much though; if they prepare themselves for a monster royal rumble in the grandest tradition then they should find themselves leaving well satisfied.
45 out of 51 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed