Check your brain at the door

Rating: 2/10 (9 May 2004)

*MINOR SPOILERS*
What do you get when you take a woeful script, an incoherent story and a bucket load of special effects? Why, it must be Van Helsing!
In the interest of fairness, I'll start with what I liked about this movie. The visuals is striking and the production design outstanding. Every set is suitably moody and atmospheric. The special effects are the real star of the show, no surprises there, and are beautifully done. I suspect, however, that this has something to do with the fact that virtually every scene takes place in near darkness and that hides a multitude of sins. The action is also outstanding- the stunt work is well done and there are a couple of great set pieces.
However, this is not enough. Much has been made of how bad the script is and unfortunately it is truly appalling- the actors founder with characters lacking any depth or chemistry. Hugh Jackman and Kate Beckinsale have both been better. Kate's career has been on a steady downer since Pearl Harbour- does this girl have a thing for overblown, special effects laden tripe where she gets to wear tight costumes or what? And as for Hugh, there were a couple of points where I got the feeling he was going to nod off and go to sleep. His job was to look surly, wield impressive weapons (Freud would have a field day here) and occasionally come out with the sort of droll one liners that would be better placed in the next Die Hard movie. A mysterious guy with an anger management problem and no clue about his past? Gee, Hugh, where have we seen THAT before.
The supporting players fare no better. David Wenham is wasted in the standard 'sidekick' role, Richard Roxborough chews scenery as Count Dracula and the less said about his brides the better- all three of them act from the cleavage and are about as frightening as a clown at a kid's birthday party.
I could go on- the story is all over the place and the finale leaves several loose ends untied. Van Helsing's burning quest is to find out his origins. He doesn't. This can mean only one thing- a sequel...or even worse, a franchise. Yeesh.
There are too many gaps in the plot, too many developments left unexplained. Why is Frankenstein's monster so critical? Where exactly do the werewolves fit into to it all? Yes, this is a monster movie, but too often things just seem to be inserted because they look cool rather than them having any relevance to the plot. It all slaps of sloppy film making. It's similiar in many ways to The Mummy, but unlike that movie, this is seriously lacking in humour. The fun quotient just isn't there.
'What do you expect, it's only a popcorn flick' is the defense I've heard most often. I'm sorry, but no. I've seen enough examples of good popcorn flicks to know that some things are inexcusable. Even action fans deserve good dialogue and a story that makes sense. Pirates of the Caribbean is the example that most readily jumps to mind. Even though there were several plot gaps there too, you were having too good a time to really notice.
Save your money. Rent X-Men and Underworld, make it a double bill and call it a night.