Van Helsing (2004)
Directed by Stephen Sommers
Written by Stephen Sommers
Starring Hugh Jackman, Kate Beckinsale, Will Kemp
Release Date May 7th, 2004
Published May 7th, 2004
When Universal Pictures decided to remake one of it's stable of classic monster movies, The Mummy, Stephen Sommers was a rather unlikely choice as director. Prior to that film, Sommers' only experience had come on a pair of low budget Disney family pics and the disastrous horror comedy (unintentional comedy) Deep Rising.
To the surprise of many in May of 1999, Sommers delivered one rollicking adventure flick that combined the classic mummy with Indiana Jones-style heroics. His sequel, The Mummy Returns however, was a completely different story. The sequel delivered what many had expected of the original, a big, dumb, loud, action movie with more special effects than real adventure.
Whatever your opinion of The Mummy Returns, there is no doubt the film was a hit. So it was no surprise that when Universal decided to revive a few more of their classic characters they would turn to their in-house blockbuster director to deliver a spectacle that would give the classic characters their fist blockbuster big screen treatment. The resulting film is Van Helsing, a 200 million dollar adventure that brings Dracula, Frankenstein and The Wolfman to the screen in ways fans of the classic characters could have never imagined. Whether that is a good thing is up to the individual viewer.
Hugh Jackman stars as Gabriel Van Helsing, legendary hunter of evil. Working on behalf of shadowy figures inside the Vatican, Van Helsing tracks down demons, warlocks and other evil forces that no one but he and the Vatican know exist. His most recent assignment was retrieve the legendary scientist Dr. Jekyll who sadly has been completely overtaken by his alter ego Mr. Hyde (Robbie Coltrane in voice only). The assignment ends badly, once again cementing Van Helsing's outlaw persona amongst everyone but his Vatican handlers.
After regrouping at the Vatican, Van Helsing is teamed with a Friar named Carl (David Wenham) to go to Transylvania where Count Dracula (Richard Roxburgh) is out to kill the last remnants of an ancient family of vampire killers. The Valerious family has hunted Count Dracula for centuries and now only Anna (Kate Beckinsale) and her brother Velcan (Will Kemp) remain. If Dracula finishes them off the family will remain in purgatory for eternity.
Count Dracula meanwhile is searching for Frankenstein's monster (Shuler Hensley) whose creation is linked to Dracula's ability to give birth to millions of Vampire babies (don't ask why, it doesn't matter). The monster is thought destroyed but hides out beneath the ruins of the windmill which villagers torched in an effort to kill him. Once Dracula finds him, it's up to Van Helsing and Anna to save him before Dracula can use him for evil. Deterring the rescue is Dracula's pet, The Wolfman, whose real identity makes killing him very difficult.
Stephen Sommers not only directed Van Helsing he also wrote the film’s screenplay and this is where the film gets into trouble. While Sommers certainly knows how to incorporate actors and CGI effects into a terrific action scene, his writing is more than suspect. His dialogue is full of plot-point-delivered monologues in which characters deliver backstory in entirely unnecessary speeches that stop the movie dead, if only for a moment, before the next bit of eye candy special effects kick in. Don't even try to make sense of Sommers' plot. He didn't bother so why should we?
Worse than that however are the liberties Sommers takes with the stories of these legendary characters. It's one thing to re-imagine Bram Stoker's aged Dracula hunter Van Helsing as a young stud played by Hugh Jackman, that is to be expected when your trying to turn him into an action hero. With the name change to Gabriel Van Helsing, it's usually Abraham, you could argue it's not even the same character.
It is however, the liberties taken with Count Dracula that are most disturbing. There is a reason why New Coke was a miserable failure. Why KFC does not screw around with it's 11 herbs and spices. Because certain formulas just work as they are and that is the case with Count Dracula. There is a reason the Count has been portrayed in the same way ever since Bram Stoker created him, it's because that is the most compelling and interesting way to portray the character.
In Sommers' take on the character in the person of actor Richard Roxburgh, the character is a laughable mess that lacks any of the menacing or seductive qualities that made Count Dracula an icon. Roxburgh can draw nothing but derisive laughter with his over the top performance, unarguably the worst Count Dracula ever brought to the screen.
Frankenstein is just as bad, although his look is not bad. Sommers' take on the look of the legendary monster is interesting with just enough of a nod to the original combined with modern effects. However, when the monster speaks he loses all credibility. Yes that's right. The monster speaks! Has there ever been a Frankenstein's monster that chewed scenery like Jeremy Irons on a bender? Well there is one now.
Is the Wolfman even worth talking about? Not really. There isn't much depth to the character or much of any take on the backstory. Though there are new twists on the Wolfman's ability, he is according to this film the only being able to kill Dracula, so that's new. Other than that however, the character of the Wolfman is nothing more than a CGI cartoon much like the Mr. Hyde character which receives an inauspicious death at the beginning of the film. These classic characters deserve better.
Amazingly Sommers, as I mentioned earlier, does know how to shoot a compelling action scene. There are a couple of really good action scenes that combine the best of CGI effects and pure adventure fantasy. However, there are far more effects that just pummel the audience with non-stop visual razzle-dazzle. It all grows rather tiresome, especially at the film’s climax. I can't forget to mention Steven Silvestri's film score that, much like the CGI effects, pounds on the audience begging to be noticed, not a good thing.
I really liked the first Mummy film from Stephen Sommers and Van Helsing has some of that film’s spirit, especially in Hugh Jackman's heroic appearance. Sadly though, too much of Van Helsing reminded me of The Mummy Returns which was also way too wrapped up in it's effects at the expense of it's compelling characters and the adventurous spirit of the first film. A little more adventure and a little less effects and Van Helsing might not make for a bad franchise blockbuster. As it is, Van Helsing is yet another disappointing big, dumb, loud blockbuster lumbering it's way toward a huge opening weekend at the box office.
