Van Helsing (DVD)

...only one man to fear... Van Helsing.

*snicker*


Technicalities:

Hugh Jackman .... Van Helsing
Kate Beckinsale .... Anna Valerious
Richard Roxburgh .... Count Vladislaus Dracula
David Wenham .... Carl
Shuler Hensley .... Frankenstein's Monster
Elena Anaya .... Aleera
Will Kemp .... Velkan
Kevin J. O'Connor .... Igor

Written and ...
.../>
Amnesiac assassin Van Helsing is on a mission from the Vatican to destroy evil and a personal mission to regain his memory... as a result, his reputation wherever he goes is now oscillating rapidly between murderer and Holy Man. Traumatised by the fact that he is the one to "see these monsters return to the men they once were when they die", he undertakes a mission to destroy Count Dracula, with whom it seems he has some connection, ... more

Dracula. The Wolfman. Frankenstein and his Monstrous Creation.

They have only one man to fear... Van Helsing.

*snicker*

Technicalities:

Hugh Jackman .... Van Helsing
Kate Beckinsale .... Anna Valerious
Richard Roxburgh .... Count Vladislaus Dracula
David Wenham .... Carl
Shuler Hensley .... Frankenstein's Monster
Elena Anaya .... Aleera
Will Kemp .... Velkan
Kevin J. O'Connor .... Igor

Written and directed by STEPHEN SOMMERS (The Mummy)

Original music by ALAN SILVESTRI

Plot Synopsis:

Amnesiac assassin Van Helsing is on a mission from the Vatican to destroy evil and a personal mission to regain his memory... as a result, his reputation wherever he goes is now oscillating rapidly between murderer and Holy Man. Traumatised by the fact that he is the one to "see these monsters return to the men they once were when they die", he undertakes a mission to destroy Count Dracula, with whom it seems he has some connection, and protect that last of the Valerious clan, sworn enemies of the Count over generations, Anna and Velkan. Meanwhile Dracula is impatient to wipe out the pesky Valerious siblings, since he has something very special in store for the world...

Van Helsing opens with a set piece that really lays the tracks for the rest of the film to go merrily hurtling along... a black and white mob scene and flaming torches are borne to the Frankenstein castle where Victor (a cameo from Samuel West) is conducting his ungodly experiments, under the watchful eyes of a rather unexpected beneficiary whom Mary Shelley, it seems, left out of her version. The Monster is made, the crowd pursues, and the ensuing conflagration and destruction give way to technicolour as Van Helsing, who throughout the film will create a veritable chimera of his own, a respectful amalgamation of hero personas: James Bond, Wolverine, Indiana Jones, Spiderman and Dirty Harry, takes centre stage. In he strides (you can almost hear the spurs clattering, but, on second thoughts, that might be weaponry) and the ensuing battle with the first of his many victims gives you the directorial pitch of this little number in a nutshell: Sommers has combined the vertiginous sweeping location shots of Lord of the Rings with the rollercoasters swings and roundabouts of Spider-Man, creating a Jackson-Raimi hodgepodge but nevertheless something rather pretty to watch. And that rather sums up the entire movie: as a piece of exceptional film-making, it falls piteously short, but as a predictable, mostly enjoyable romp through gothic horror, action and comedy, it's certainly a pleasant enough way to spend a Sunday afternoon, as I did.

Let's look at the evidence.

Performance-wise, this is a slightly mixed bag, but the Australian triumvirate of Roxburgh (sole redeeming feature of League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and Moulin Rouge's irate duke), Jackman (X-Men's Wolverine) and Wenham (LOTR's Faramir... drool...) turn in a batch of solid and, in the case of the first and last, enthusiastically theatrical performances.

Roxburgh is a marvellously camp and surprisingly sexy Count, hamming up the accent to just the right pitch and retaining just enough sense of the power of the count to pull off the more beastly scenes. His scenes with his wives, the three resident batbitches, are often orchestrally hilarious. Wenham, who was sometimes lacking in gravitas in LOTR, proves that his talents lie in the other direction, exhibiting occasional genius comic timing, as the Q-like friar in charge of inventive weaponry who stumbles around with his twee accent, squeakily nasal tones and shuffling gait, delivering most of the exposition in a manner reminiscent of Buffy's Wesley Wyndham Price. Jackman, sadly, slightly lets down his fellows with a surprisingly humourless performance, but then his role as the amnesiac die hard (sound familiar to X-Men fans?!) doesn't really afford him much opportunity to stretch his acting muscles, which is a shame. He has to communicate too much through expressions, and the film simply lacks the depth to allow him to get away with that. But more about the clunky and disappointing script later.

Beckinsale, clad impractically in her admittedly sexy Romanian dominatrix gear (as if Keira Knightley didn't memorably demonstrate the inability to breathe properly in a corset!), is surprisingly good, given that she is the character who undergoes the biggest emotional arc in the shortest space of time, and there isn't really room for realistic character development. She manages to not be annoying, and to occasionally be positively funny, for quite a long time, and evidently all that running around in PVC in Underworld prepared her well, since her fight sequences are slickly and impressively executed. Admittedly she has no chemistry with Jackman, but since neither of them are half as interesting as the baddies, who cares?

Unfortunately, Van Helsing suffers from that terrible imbalance whereby it isn't sure how seriously to take itself. On the one hand there is deliberate humour, comedy accents (I'm assuming Beckinsale knew she sounded like a comic peasant from the Old Country... if she didn't, would it be cruel to let on?), stumbling friars and a lot of camp, gothic silliness (like Roxburgh's haircut, for one). On the other hand, there seems to be a genuine attempt to make Van Helsing a brooding, wounded hero, master of the pregnant pause and dynamic sex god. Sadly, the final result is something close to vaguely moody bloke with a hat, who gets upstaged so regularly it's a wonder he remained in the title.

Most of this is down to the horribly, unnecessarily complicated, clunky script. The dialogue is hideously unbalanced; it begins in a typically stilted and formulaic style, with no surprises and utter action film predictibility (not even, in fact, as warmly funny as Sommers's script for The Mummy) and then towards the end whirlwind chunks of complex and indigestible exposition are hurled at the audience. The plot is far too ambitious, creating implausibly stupid links between bats, beasts and Boris Karloff and thus breaking the cardinal rule for silliness: if you want us to swallow the ridiculous, pepper it with the realistic. Oh, and try not to leave in gaping holes, like dodgy phases of the moon and a clock that takes a REALLY long time to chime twelve... Apart from that, the characters aren't allowed room to breathe... Van Helsing is supposed to be on a mission to recover his memory, but seems rather uninterested in his history when it is finally presented to him and Anna has to undergo a series of traumatic events but is only left for a second at a time to wear a sad expression just to remind us that, possibly, we might want to feel sorry for these people some time... no rush. The most unforgivable sin, however, is the attempt to make amends for this in a rush of emetic sentimentality at the end, ruining what was potentially a rather unexpected denouement.

Moving on.

The special effects are, again, a mixture of genius and disappointment. The batbitches have interesting harpy-costumes for their transformation from beautiful seductresses into hideous vampire beasts... not particularly scary, but effective. The Wolfman transformations are grim, but unimpressive and Dracula-as-beast is a terrible let down, as these things usually are. We are, of course, immersed in a time where almost nothing is new, but if Peter Jackson can still make his Orcs creepy third time round, I think we deserve better than CGI rubber batsuits. I won't say much about a chronic bit of CGI at the beginning of the film, not wishing to ruin the plot, but let's just say it brought back nightmare echoes of League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. The Monster is also so-so... it's more his heavy-handed dialogue that ruins the effect than anything else (I rather liked his part-mechanical brain). Having said all that, the spikily, creepily gothic sets and costume design were beautiful and enjoyable, as were a few brief forays into panoramic vistas which made the cinematography seem worthwhile. And the squelchy exploding batbeasties (you'll see) are fun too.

The very worst thing about the movie, however, is the awful theme music. Bombastic LOTR-esque melodrama is underscored with the most awful hillbilly guitar twanging... it's like listening to a requiem along side Dolly Parton (or The Wonderstuff's Golden Green). Presumably the point is to big up the Western angle and bring out Hugh Jackman's mild physical resemblance to Clint Eastwood while at the same time making a nod to East European folk music, but it is, in fact, appallingly, hilariously, distracting and utter musical tripe.

Saying all of that, what I have to say next may or may not surprise you. I rather enjoyed it. Yes, it was badly made. Yes, it was stupid. Yes, it's hard to drool over David Wenham when he has a Betty Boop 'do. Yes, it was overly long, the plot made little sense and the central performance strayed (despite the talent of the leading man) towards the wooden. But there are worse ways to spend a Sunday afternoon, and if you're going to see something like this, it might as well be in the cinema for the full impact. It's pretty, brainless (take or leave the comma) and I even laughed a little. There are funky weapons, like the much-trailered crossbow and stuff gets blown up.

Certificate: 12A
Length: 132 minutes

The rating has been quite hard to decide on, since it really was quite a bad film - I would usually give 2 for this kind of result, one for effort and one for prettiness. But, hey, it's a consumer opinion and I had a good time - usually grounds for a 4. A fence-sitting 3 it is, then.

Thanks for reading.
Alex
xxx

www.vanhelsing.net

PS For anyone who has seen it, or doesn't care about massive spoilers, there's a very funny list on why this film is appalling on the imdb.com message boards, do take a look!!

 

...less