Van Helsing

[roguem]

I finally got to see "Van Helsing" last night, and I honestly don't know what to think. There was stuff I liked, and there was stuff I didn't like... I might have to say that this is my least favorite Hugh Jackman film.
Stephen Sommers has come a long way since his "Huck Finn" years, and I think he's become a little to fond of CGI effects. Now, you would expect effects from a movie such as this, but at some times I felt they were overdone.

Anyways, I don't expect people to like it to be honest, Camelia hated it, and I could feel that through the entire movie. Benedicte who had joined us seemed to like it though. Thing is, I went to that movie expecting it to suck major quantities of ass, and therefore got better than I expected. Camelia expected it to be fun, and was therefore disappointed. I won't be watching this film with first-timers, if they want to watch it, they'll have to seen it before. I often notice if people don't like films while we're watching them, and I would actually like to see it again in piece and quiet, just to see if I get a different perspective.

I've always had problems with movies where stuff mainly happen in the dark. Even the days in this movie is dark, and that usually brings me down. This movie uses mostly gray and dark gray tones, and I can't really remember anything brighter than that.

I liked the premise of the movie, and the idea behind it, I just don't feel like they realized it as well as they could. It's good as a homage to the old movies, but I'm not sure it does them justice.

Hugh Jackman delivered a great performance, as always.

I really liked David Wenham's character, just things he said and did. He's comic relief and good at it.

Kate Beckinsale... seriously... she does good, but I don't really see the point in her character being a woman other than being a love interest for Van Helsing, and saying "Oh, my God" as often as possible.

Richard Roxburgh, I'm not really sure what to think of him as Dracula, I had a hard time buying it to be honest.

In some ways this movie reminds me of "LXG", but the difference is that "Van Helsing" will probably end up in my DVD collection. Basically because of Hugh Jackman and David Wenham, and the fact that there were some sequences I liked, and some of the dialog was good.

The character of Van Helsing has quite a few things in common with Wolverine, which is probably another reason why I'll end up buying it. I alway like Hugh Jackman in parts like that, am just sad that the movie wasn't better.

Of my friends, I expect Isen might find it enjoyable for some of the same reasons I did. beluga  on the other hand... I expect she won't like it. Only time will tell.
Camelia claims she liked "Underworld" better, me on the other hand, think "Van Helsing" is a work of art compared to "Underworld". I also like it better than "Spiderman" and "The Hulk". Basically the winning points for me is that I liked some of the characters and bits and pieces here and there basically.

If you're able to enjoy a movie just because of one actor, you probably will like it, I had two actors to keep me occupied, so I got into it.

Tell me what you think, because I'm still not a hundred percent sure. The jury inside my head is hung on this one.

 

Stuff from other reviews that I agree with:

Unfortunately, the story is told in fits and starts, parts of it even backwards. The narrative structure is a mess. Which is probably the reason that some of the audience fail to even notice the coherent story. Seriously.

What I was feeling during most of this movie was: Rewrites galore. We have here a movie that starts out as comedy, and then gets more and more serious as it progresses, ending up as a tragedy! It seems to me that the script was originally serious and tragic, and then sometime in the production process some Hollywood executives decreed that no-one could take this seriously, so it had to be turned into a tongue-in-cheek comedy.

Van Helsing was not quite as i expected, but then neither was Kate Beckinsale's last monster-duelling exploits in the wasted opportunity that was 'Underworld'. Van Helsing fares much better, largely due to the charisma of Hugh Jackman (X-Men's 'Wolverine' as if you didn't know). The CGI is indeed fantastic, with seamless transitions from man to beast and back again, but what i wasn't expecting was the fact that the writer seems to be working from a checklist of cliches, and not just horror/sc-fi ones. Everything is thrown into the mix here, cheesy lines galore (which Jackman gives a certain tongue in cheek style to, i must admit), and enough movie homages - obvious and obscure - to keep many film fans glued for a second viewing.
Overall, slightly scary, slightly camp, slightly ridiculous, but definitely a good night's entertainment.

Only through browsing the IMDB message boards did I come to realize that David Wenham (Faramir in Return of the King) is so popular (and deservedly so). Here, he plays Carl, Van Helsing's sidekick, a semi-comical role absolutely different from Faramir, giving us an opportunity to see the talent of this actor.

Van Helsing seems to have been written by the same screenwriter who wrote The League of Extraordinary Men. That movie had a lot of characters we are all familiar with (Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, the Invisible Man, etc) as the good guys. Van Helsing, on the other hand, has werewolves and vampires as the bad guys. This film may be better than League of Extraordinary Men. But its flaws don't allow it to be a good movie either.

The film relies like many other American offerings too much on special effects; it seems every transition is loaded with action like the race with 2 six-horse coaches or Van Helsing shooting his rotary-magazine crossbow. The CGI power comes a bit, I suspect, from the dark frames, where more precise detail can be ignored and the background mattes overwhelm like dark drapes.

Hope that helps a little....

After reading ome of the reviews I see that some people are dissapionted by the ending, I liked it tho...

Comments

Why wont I like it?

[beluga.livejournal.com]

Why? Why?

;-)

I know I'll get annoyed by the over-use of special effects..

But don't say I wont like it until I tell you. Then you can jump around and yell "I *knew* it!"

xx

Re: Why wont I like it?

[roguem.livejournal.com]

I know you. I will be stunned if you find one thing you like. I'd love you to prove me wrong though.

View the film as a goody bag, where you have lots of gross stuff on to, and when you finally get to the bottom there's the candy you like. Best explination I can come up with.

[elvea-aure.livejournal.com]

Am going to see Van Helsing tomorrow. Rather curious myself. Oh well, it's got Hugh Jackman AND David Wenham, so it can't be all that bad. ;)

[roguem.livejournal.com]

Will be curious to hear what you thought about it. I loved Hugh and David.

[elvea-aure.livejournal.com]

Guess what? At the last moment we decided to see Secret Window instead, and see Van Helsing later. -_-"

Secret Window was really good though. ^_^

[roguem.livejournal.com]

Am gonna see "Secret Window" with my friends when I get home, looking forward to it. :)

[elvea-aure.livejournal.com]

It really rocked. ^_^

[roguem.livejournal.com]

hmmm, maybe I should see it tonight. Could always watch it again if i like it. :)

Have to see what the evening brings.

[tygerx.livejournal.com]

hmm.. well that's still good to know. I read a scathing review in the paper today and was like oh that's just one critic. But seems others are feeling it's a letdown too. Of course the fact that HE'S in it will mean I won't be all that disappointed, heh. Just can't go wrong with that. ;) But i'll have to see for myself. I remember being let down by LXG, that it looked real good in the trailer but the story was not satisfying. I love the monster/vampire/gothic stuff too so I dunno. And actually Underworld wasn't too bad to me, but sure it did have room for improvement.

Hopefully will see it soon enough. I've been dying to see Hugh again on the big screen and if you say he's kinda Wolvieish here then good enough for me :)

[roguem.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I loved the parts where he was a little Wolvie.

And there was on second I loved. The 10 seconds surrounding when he turns away from the big clock and says "one". towards the end.

I have a thing for "the psycho look", he's sooo good at it.

[tygerx.livejournal.com]

oohh.. psycho look. yes yes yes. Really is nice when someone appreciates the same things you do, lol! ;)

well i'm seeing it tommorrow.. with or without my friends! i'm not waiting for the weekend, but i can see it again with them. :P

[roguem.livejournal.com]

Lets put it this way, you get to see him without his shirt, you get the "Psycho look" and he even growls, if that ain't enough to keep you happy I don't know... :P

Nice to know I'm not the only one who appreciates that stuff. Heh

:-D

[tygerx.livejournal.com]

Actually just hearing about it made my day!! Hoo-hah!! lol..

oooh growls... *rawr* :> Shirtless Hugh is always good! Was that shirt ripping scene actually him or the wolfman?? I gotta know..

Yes I require my friends all be freaks.. ;)

Re: :-D

[roguem.livejournal.com]

You're in good company with another freak then. ;)

As you now know, the shirt ripping scene is indeed Hugh, and it's all goooooood.

Re: :-D

[tygerx.livejournal.com]

mah-velous!

Yes i saw! :o And I had you in the back of my mind too during those scenes! I was like god dammit.. she knows what I like... :P

His lil 'Tarzan' loincloth bit was pretty good too! heh

Re: :-D

[roguem.livejournal.com]

Hehe, sick minds think alike. ;P

Loved the loincloth... basically loved Hugh.

Re: :-D

[tygerx.livejournal.com]

heh heh, that's right!

yea he could wear a Glad garbage bag and still look hot.. ;>

Re: :-D

[roguem.livejournal.com]

Oh, yessssss.