Van Helsing (d. Stephen Sommers, s. Hugh Jackman, Kate Beckinsale, Richard Roxburgh)
I so wanted to love this movie. Seeing the ads and early talk looked very good. I have liked Stephen Sommers movies (The Mummy films, Deep Rising), they may not be high art, but they have always been fun, add Wolverine, the lovely Kate Beckinsale, and Universal's most famous monsters, it appears like a slam dunk in the making. But somehow these things tend to disappoint. I'm getting ahead of myself about, let's slow down a touch.
This past Friday marked that start of the blockbuster season with the release of Van Helsing, an over the top special effects action spectacular. The basic idea here is you take Van Helsing from the Dracula mythos and face him off against Dracula, the Wolf Man, Frankenstein's Monster, and for good measure a cameo by Mr.Hyde. Sounds like fun, let's see if they were able to pull it off.
Allow me to begin with an overview of the story. Dracula is seeking a way to bring his children to life, since he is dead, he and his brides cannot have live children. The secret lies in Dr.Frankenstein's life giving machine. Of course, we can't let this happen, so Van Helsing is sent to Transylvania to put a stop to this. Very simple plot on which to hang numerous fight scenes with various CGI cast members.
The movie is a lot of fun, but there was potential for it to be so much better. As a big budget "fun" movie it succeeds, as memorable pulp cinema it fails. It has B-movie sensibilities with an A-movie budget.
Now for the good. First and foremost the opening sequence is spectacular. It is a black and white homage to the opening of Bride of Frankenstein. Wonderful set design and strong black and white work highlight this strong opening. It's a shame it wasn't a sign of things to come. Hugh Jackman is perfect as Van Helsing, giving us that loner hero with a sly sense of humor, combined with his genuine movie star looks and the ability to make some silly dialogue come off convincingly. The overall set design is beautiful, combined with excellent cinematography, the movie looks great. On a side note, they are developing a TV series for NBC based on these sets, they didn't want to tear them down! Shuler Hensley gives a great portrayal of the Monster, powerful and sympathetic, he stands out best amongst the monsters. I also feel the reliance on makeup and costume as opposed to overly extensive CGI was a good choice with this character, it allowed us to connect with him better. The werewolf transformations were good as well, especially when compared to those in Underworld. Lastly, Alan Silvestri's score was excellent, loud and heavily tied to on-screen action, it worked very well, so well that I stayed through the entire closing credit sequence to listen to it. Besides, the closing credits design was very well done.
Sadly, you can't have the good without the bad. Here we also have plenty of that to go around. First and foremost is Dracula as portrayed by Richard Roxburgh. He simultaneously creepy(good), and silly(bad). Particularly bad was his "lover's spat" with his brides and his speech about not being able to love, it was just awful stuff. The three brides spent too much time screeching while trying to be menacing. The CG was not terribly convincing, a fact I can usually overlook, but here it was too jarring especially with com many characters flipping between people and CG often within the same scene. Kate Beckinsale, while very pleasing to the eyes, had one of the worst accents I've ever heard and it hurt the character almost irreparably. Also, one of the strangest takes on Dracula ever is the idea of Dracula's offspring, for some reason they come in pod form with no explanation. Two more bad things to cover, I promise. First is the final battle between Van Helsing and Dracula, too much CGI. The battle is between two non-humans on screen and it just took me right out of the moment, it didn't look right and I couldn't connect with the battle. They should have relied more on the screen presence of Hugh Jackman, he was the star of the movie right? Secondly, and this really annoyed me, the faces in the clouds, if and when you see the movie you'll know what I mean, so I will say no more.
I want to spend a little more time on the story. I wish they had delved a little more into this idea of Dracula's offspring being in pods suspended from the ceiling. An odd concept by itself, but if there was at least a little explanation as to why this was? The thought of how this one family was personally tied to Dracula was not fully explained, just that since they didn't kill him they'll never rest, I wish there was a curse or something on top of that. Frankenstein's Monster, he just kind of pops out of a hole, where was he the rest of the time? Van Helsing himself as a man without a past, there were teases throughout, like his connection to Dracula, the parchment, being the left hand of God, working for the secret Church society. There were lots of interesting ideas that were never fully developed. Many of these things were good as well, since they kept you interested int he characters, but the lack of follow through was not so good. The only thing I can think of is that they are saving these things for the sequel.
I can honestly say that I enjoyed the movie, it was sloppy at times and had some serious flaws yet still succeeded on the fun factor. I would recommend seeing it for Jackman, the Monster, and the fantastic opening sequence alone, anything else you like will be an added bonus.
Mild Recommendation.
0 comments:
Post a Comment