Fifty-fifty

Rating: 5/10 (22 July 2006)

Hum. I don't know what exactly I think of this film. I have two opposing opinions, exactly, but they coexist well enough for me to give Van Helsing five out of ten. So here's my split- personality opinion: The Pros: Well, number one is Hugh Jackman. He's very into the character--you can tell he believes in it, and that makes Van Helsing believable, even if he seems a little out-of-period. Whatever. I don't care. Also number one for ... aesthetic reasons. In addition, the actual "monsters" are very close to their originals. Finally! A Dracula who has all the seductive power of Bram Stoker's original; a Monster who converses intelligently (instead of pained Irnghs) and seems very soulful-also close to Mary Shelley's original. Hyde, well, whatever. I didn't like the book anyway. The Cons: Believability for the HUMANS. I stress humans. Supernatural monsters can do whatever they want, because they don't adhere to our rules. So if Frankenstein's monster wants to wrestle a flying bat-bride of Drakula, fine by me. But, please. Anna falls down, hits every branch in a huge tree, lands on her back, and isn't hurt? Must be the corset and those dominatrix boots ... Actually, I realize most of the problems in this film stem from Anna. If she weren't there, and they swapped her with her brother ... that would have been much better. Also: the ending. Lord. Can you think of anything sappier than dead people's faces floating around in the sky, smiling down on Van Helsing??? I think this is what they should have done: Obviously, the Creature has the ability to give life. Moved by his experience with these people who see beyond his inherent ugliness, he decides to submit to the pain one more time to give life to the one who died. This would thus cut the horrid sun-smiling scene. Urgh. But of course, that's my opinion--and I'm not paid millions of dollars to write and direct movies. But whatever.