Van Helsing

< Previous Trailer  |   Add to My Scrapbook  |   Next Trailer >
Van Helsing

66% Liked It
liked it

Van Helsing

David Wenham, Hugh Jackman, Kate Beckinsale, Richard Roxburgh, Shuler Hensley

Set in the late 19th century, Bram Stoker's fabled monster hunter, Dr. Abraham Van Helsing, is summoned to a mysterious land in East Europe to vanquish evil forces in the form of: Count Dracula, the W...( read more  read more... )olf Man and Frankenstein's Monster. Assisting him once he gets there is Anna, the heir of a long-running family committed to hunting down and destroying Count Dracula.

Id: 10894642

Do you want to see this movie?

My Friends Said...

Van Helsing Recent Reviews

Register or sign-in to see your friends' reviews !

Recent Reviews

Van Helsing Recent Reviews
  • phubbs1
    July 18, 2009
    phubbs1
    Such a cool idea, I love it, but they wrecked it. The start is great, in the village against the vamp brides and the black and white homage to Hammer at the very start was so good. The werewolves look amazing ( best since American Werewolf in London) but Dracula is sooo camp, Fra...( read more)nkenstein's monster is shit and eggs hatching into vamps?? what the hell! Beckinsale is white hot and Jackman is a good hero, but they just loose the whole film from the midway point, it gets so tacky, almost like a music video with Roxburgh as Dracula, and the whole Bond gadgets sideline is too much of a rip of.
  • stopitgoaway
    July 12, 2009
    stopitgoaway
    It's big, it's dumb, it's cheesy as hell, but I found it to be enormous fun. This was made to be a roller-coaster ride and by that token it should be judged.

    Actually after the opening pastiche of the Boris Karloff Frankenstein movie, I thought this had the potential to be a 5 s...( read more)tar movie. It was very atmospheric and had me hooked. However the film never really captures any sense of magic from there onwards.

    The main body of the movie does go on a bit, and it could have done with some attempt to create engaging characters. Plot and story are not always necessary for fun movies, but you do need characters with a level of interest to capture the mind, otherwise you tend to find yourself not giving a s**t. I felt Van Helsing did verge into this territory, but for the most part it's so fast paced this doesn't matter so much. The points where it does try to introduce plot are the moments where it really does fail. In fact there is too much going on that is never really explained, and I think it would've been better not to have bothered at all, than use the nonsense Sommers resorts too. For example the attempts at backstory to Van Helsing. Better to have one of those interlude chatty scenes you have in the Indy films, where it establishes he's a dude, rather than the poor attempts at angst and pathos. Really bad was the moment he gets upset over Frankie's Monster. What the hell was that all about?

    Hmm maybe I took that a bit seriously, but the movie knows what it is, why try be something else. I also thought that that masked ball sequence was a natural conclusion, the eventual finale at the castle felt like an add on, which lacked any real punch.

    Far better was Van's introduction to Transylvania, with the benefit of some neat angles and panning shots, the crossbow battle with the brides was cool. The coach chase was exciting without being exhilarating, but kept the flow going, so it's a shame some more bad plot gets thrown in, especially when it was involving the underwritten Velkan. That's the film's main problem - overkill of characters, with little space given to any of them to evolve.

    Finally a word on the CGI. I thought it was very good, especially the morphs that were used. The very first moment Drac starts to turn made me jump a touch, and when the vampires turns into their fanged, contorted state it looked pretty scary to me. The wolfman transformation, with the ripping flesh looked genuinely painful. At this point I was thinking the CGI was genuinely stunning. I'd have preferred the finale if it had just been Van vs Drac though, having CGI characters fight felt uninvolving, and Drac in snarly state was far better than the beast he turns into.

    This is a movie to genuinely switch of the brain and enjoy. At times there's too much going on and perhaps a bit too much swinging about for my liking, but it's an adrenaline filled ride
  • mrpopcorn
    April 27, 2009
    mrpopcorn
    "The One Name They All Fear"

    The notorious monster hunter is sent to Transylvania to stop Count Dracula who is using Dr. Frankenstein's research and a werewolf for some sinister purpose.

    REVIEW

    No d...( read more)oubt many a viewer will want to slow roast this piece of cinematic excess over a crackling fire, and perhaps maybe the director and cast as well. While Van Helsing may be no masterpiece, it is certainly a bit much to say this is the worst film ever made. Granted, there is more CGI here than there is actual cast, and it gets to be nauseating. The problem with CGI is that it just doesn't look real. You can tell that forbidding castle and those green-baby-bat-things and are fake. The only thing less genuine in this movie is Kate Beckinsale's atrocious Romanian accent, which simply grates on the ears. (I haven't been this offended since Dennis Quaid tried to do New Orleans in "The Big Easy.") Hugh Jackman's a poor actor, and this is rather poor material, so at least there's a match there.

    Nevertheless I have to give the devil his due. "Van Helsing" turns out to be good, campy, badly-acted fun. If our senses are overloaded with monsters, explosions, and relatively bloodless violence, at least we enjoy it. It's everything a campy movie should be: A fix of mindless testosterone injected straight into the cerebral cortex. If we've all turned into culture junkies then at least here's a good score.
  • AgentLexi2132
    December 31, 2008
    AgentLexi2132
    ''My life... my job... my curse... is to vanquish evil.''

    The notorious monster hunter is sent to Transylvania to stop Count Dracula who is using Dr. Frankenstein's research and a werewolf for some sinister purpose.

    Hugh Jackman: Van Helsing

    The Mu

    ...( read more)mmy(1999), Stephen Sommers showed us that he could make a film that had quirky characters, plenty of CGI, and was simply witty and humourous. The sequel was a typical overblown similar venture .
    The premise for Van Helsing must have seemed brilliant to film houses bosses, take the three biggest horror characters of the 1800's (namely Dracula, the Wolf Man, and Frankenstein's Monster) and blend them all together with a hero who, whilst originally was just a mild-mannered doctor, is now a kick-ass monster hunter. What could possibly go wrong? Well alot actually.

    The problem is that Van Helsing seems like a continuation of the Mummy series, just with a different story, location and a new set of players: 2D characters, massive amounts of dodgy CGI, and dollops of fun, mainly from David Wenham's friar. It's yet another step down for the director who, although has proved he's up for plenty of action, cannot put any life into it. Hugh Jackman appears to be the perfect lead for the role of Gabriel Van Helsing, but he never gets the chance to give depth to his character, as soon as he kills one set of baddies, he's off to kill some more. He can handle the action well (but we already knew this from the X-Men films), and could probably handle any real drama that should have been inserted into the film, but the director just doesn't seem to want us to know anything about any of the characters, he just wants to see them fight, which is not enough. I couldn't help but think that if things had been taken a little slower, the film could have been made that much more interesting, less would have been more in this case.

    Anna Valerious: Oh, my God! The Frankenstein Monster!
    Frankenstein's Monster: Monster! Who's the monster here? I have done nothing wrong, yet you and your kind still wish me dead!

    The film was also executed as a horror and action film, and yet there is not one moment that provides a genuine chill or cheap scare, although it is very dark(it's mostly set at night-time) Admittedly some of the action scenes and sets are convincing, and the film does have good production values, but once again it seems the budget has gone towards all the CGI, and not on the script or story. With each film, Sommers seems to include more and more monsters, as if he is trying to outdo his last film in terms of effects. This is a prime example of the "quality not quantity" adage, as the more CGI there is, the less real it looks. The action scenes quickly become repetitive and although start off original and good, end up being a bit of a bore. And really, how many times to we have to see the lead characters swing on a rope in front of a castle? It's just not necessary?

    Overall, it's a real shame that the film turned out this way. It really needed to be either a slower horror film, or an action film which did not feel the need to rush through at such a pace that the audience are afraid to blink lest they miss something. Stephen Sommers must learn how to do character development prior to this, action later, if he's going to keep a fan base going, simply relying on visual effects alone, just isn't enough for us anymore.

    ''Viscous material, what did I tell you!''
  • TheMachinist
    November 6, 2008
    TheMachinist
    "Igor: Please, don't kill me!
    Van Helsing: Why not?
    Igor: Well, um... I... um... uh..."

    It's fast paced, an CGI pumped scene comes after another and the movie looks pretty good for its age. But there are sooo many things that have gone terribly wrong, important things like:
    - th...( read more)e story
    - character development
    - dialogue etc.

    But somehow I was kinda entertained by the film, although mistake after mistake filled the big screen. Let's just hope that a sequel will never be made. One's enough...
  • hipito58
    December 18, 2009
    hipito58
    Universal is reviving its monsters. And they come back with a bang. If it is action and tragic romance you want, this is your movie. Being the fantasy fan, I of course enjoyed this one
  • beachpeach
    December 17, 2009
    beachpeach
    actually, this movie is completely unbelievable, all sensational action and imagery. But, it grew on me and it is one of those guilty pleasures. ")
  • sunshine8206
    December 13, 2009
    sunshine8206
    not strickly a vamp flick, but it is the main plot, good movie, some great effects
  • thieyisun
    December 13, 2009
    thieyisun
    Love it_< its perfect
  • jashneetasingh
    December 12, 2009
    jashneetasingh
    HUGH JACKMAN IS SOOOOOO FINE LIK DA MOIVE
View All Reviews

Opening This Week

Top Box Office

Upcoming Movies

New on DVD