Legacy Critiques: Van Helsing

Legacy

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Before I begin, I would like to state that my initial thoughts on this movie were not the best. The more of the previews I saw, the more I felt that Stephen Sommers would not do justice to what the movie’s concept truly was capable was. After seeing it… well, you’ll see.

Van Helsing, the newest film Mummy director Stephen Sommers, seems to be what the first Mummy tried to be. The first one was initially supposed to be all action, but due to some overly funny scenes, it turned into more of an action/comedy. His newest venture into the realm of classic monsters though is much more successful. Combining the ideas of the Werewolf, the story of Frankenstein’s Monster and the legend of Count Dracula completely reinvents common knowledge of the monsters. The movie provides deeper stories of the characters that we all recognize, and artistically creates a modern version of the classic monsters for younger audiences to appreciate in the world of special effects and CGIs; rather successfully, I might add.

In the title role, Hugh Jackman’s coy smile and calm bearing make Van Helsing himself an enigmatic protagonist. This isn’t Wolverine in a trench coat, but a much calmer and more believable Hugh Jackman. He comes across as an Indiana Jones for the 21st Century, complete with the leather hat and one shot that reminded me of the Tank Fight from The Last Crusade. Kate Beckinsale (from Underworld to this? Talk about a rut), provides a beautiful performance. I didn’t like her as much in the OTHER vampire/werewolf movie as I did in this. Her character, Anna, is a great balance to the cool thinking of Van himself, and she pulls it off masterfully. She also has some spots to showcase some emotion (which Underworld didn’t), and does so effectively and realistically. In the role of bumbling sidekick is David Wenham, as the nervous, but helpful Friar Carl. His light-hearted comments provide the coy humor that makes this movie truly enjoyable. Also, the humor in this movie is never brought to the forefront or distracting enough to take away from the action. I think Mr. Sommers learned from the original Mummy in keeping the action the focus.

Dracula (Richard Roxburgh) is portrayed quite well as the ‘hollow’ murderer we have grown to fear. Also, this Dracula’s conniving nature is brought forth on an extreme scale, increasing the tension as a whole of Helsing and Co.’s entire situation.

Shuler Hesley’s Frankenstein’s Monster is by far the most creative re-imagining of a character in the film. The tortured existence of the creature adds a new level to what is generally assumed about him, and in turns adds another great element to the story. The Werewolves are few and completely CGI. Primal fury and viciousness superbly brought to life by the wonderful people at Industry LightMagic. Story-wise, a new layer is added on them as well, which affects all many of the other characters within the film.

Overall though, it is an incredibly good movie. It’s a nice way to kick off summer, as well as provide some continuous fun. Stephen Sommers nailed this film, although he does use some action-movie clichés. (Do we really need a cliff to stop an escape?) The regenerating skin effect used oh-so-much in the Mummy movies shows up here numerous times. But he makes up for it though in an extremely satisfying ending that leaves a sequel available, but not mandatory. Either way, he effectively conceptualizes a new way to look at our nightmares, but keeps it fun the process.

Grade: A

In Summary: It’s a great film, full of the action, romance, humor and special effects to last you until the next great action movie comes out. Also, it has Hugh Jackman running around like Tarzan at one point. If your girlfriend doesn’t want to see it, drop that hint and should get you in.



[size=i]This as been another Legacy Critiques[/size]
 

Shaman

Well-Known Member
hmmm you working for Universal?? :lol:

Great critique...I am kinda doubtful about this movie...but I'm hearing good things from people who have gone to see it including this critique...so maybe I will give it a chance, I don't particularly like movies that are TOO unrealistic...even if it is fantasy/sci fi/horror....all the CGI effects make the movie look "fake"...but eh maybe I'll see what all the commotion is about...

So legacy, is this gonna be weekly thing? Like an update or something....I find your critiques very informative....


:wave:
 

Legacy

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Originally Posted By objr-
hmmm you working for Universal??

Great critique...I am kinda doubtful about this movie...but I'm hearing good things from people who have gone to see it including this critique...so maybe I will give it a chance, I don't particularly like movies that are TOO unrealistic...even if it is fantasy/sci fi/horror....all the CGI effects make the movie look "fake"...but eh maybe I'll see what all the commotion is about...

So legacy, is this gonna be weekly thing? Like an update or something....I find your critiques very informative....
Your doubts about the movie were where mine originated from as well. The clips of the vampires attack looks really fake, but in the context of the actual movie the pacing makes it a little more tolerable (actually a lot more tolerable). Probably my biggest peeve with the movie (which I forgot to comment on) was Dracula's little cronies, who look like a cross between Oompa-Loompas and Tusken Raiders. It was a little weird...

And yeah, whenever I catch a new movie in the theaters a critique is going to come up. I'll try and get a new up at least once a week, but with the whole military schedule (ready when they need you) I can't always gaurantee it.
 

disney_nutter

Active Member
i actually had high hope for this movie we have been waiting on it for the past ten years. the oringal comcept was to old hanibal to carry on playing him after his role in 92's dracula. But i did think half way through the film you knew how it was going to end but toher than that i found it very enjoyable, plus if you are a bloke and you dont think this is your type of movie all i can say is you will see the lovely kate becksale in a corset .
 

MerHearted

Well-Known Member
I saw it tonight. Fun movie! I would give it 3 stars out of 4. Nothing really blew me away but it was very enjoyable, no complaints. It was much better than either of the Mummy films... by far. *thumbs*
 

Not For Sale

Active Member
Originally posted by Legacy
Probably my biggest peeve with the movie (which I forgot to comment on) was Dracula's little cronies, who look like a cross between Oompa-Loompas and Tusken Raiders. It was a little weird

I saw the movie last night and I thought it was pretty good. I actually said to my friend when we were watching it that the movie was like the Wizard of Oz on extacy (sp?). Those little guys were strange. Some parts were very bad it was funny though (at least to a 13 year old.) Like the part when the guy threw the girl the thing from the bridge while she was swinging (it makes sense if you saw it) it looked like a Mentos commercial. All in all the movie was good, but with a few loopholes.
 

Disney2002

New Member
I actually give "Van Helsing" an unconditional F

Once again, Hollywood fills the screen with plastic CGI, no plot, attrocious acting... and does so for a good 45 minutes too long.

My biggest complaint is that the movie repeated the same hyperspastic action sequences again and again. Nothing was impressive. It was just an assault on the senses.

How many times can characters be picked up by vampires and dropped again... just to be picked up... and dropped again?


The only thing that made the movie semi-watchable were the well conceive set-designs. The art direction served it's purpose, if borrowing a bit-too-heavily from Burton influences.


In my opinion, this does not signify good things for the summer movie season!
 

NemoRocks78

Seized
Legacy....great review. I'm glad to hear a positive review. I've been waiting for this one to come out since the first time I saw the trailer, and I'll finally be able to catch it tomorrow. :D
 

The_CEO

Well-Known Member
Originally posted by Disney2002
I actually give "Van Helsing" an unconditional F

no plot,


Were you asleep? I didn't see one plot hole.. Van Helsing was sent to kill Dracula. Maybe you missed that part. I gave it 9 1/2 outa 10. Sommers did a great job on this one just like all his movies.
 

Disney2002

New Member
Originally posted by The_CEO
Were you asleep? I didn't see one plot hole.. Van Helsing was sent to kill Dracula. Maybe you missed that part. I gave it 9 1/2 outa 10. Sommers did a great job on this one just like all his movies.

In my opinion, over two hours is not needed for something so bland. Perhaps I should have said "extremely poor plot".

SPOILERS _____ SPOILERS ______









Why did Dracula want an army of winged creatures?
- To give him something to do in a 2+ hour movie!

Why could only a werewolf kill the count?
- To create a reason for having werewolves in the movie!

What was Van Helsings true origin?
- Who knows... but isn't it more fun to just throw some seemingly random origin tidbits in that have no connection to seem like we know ourselves?

Huge pet peeve of all movies like this?
"What is this device for?" "Beats me, but I'll carry it with me knowing it must save our lives about 3/4 through the film"
 

The_CEO

Well-Known Member
Why did Dracula want an army of winged creatures?
He didn't want an army. He explained he wanted his species to live on. But only Frank could make them live forever. That was the hole.
 

Disney2002

New Member
Originally posted by The_CEO
Why did Dracula want an army of winged creatures?
He didn't want an army. He explained he wanted his species to live on. But only Frank could make them live forever. That was the hole.

Since when is 'Vampire' a species?

And why would the Frankenstein monster be the key? I thought hooking him in as part of the electrical chain was pretty lame... wouldn't it have made more sense to have figured out how Dr. Frankenstein made him, and go from there? It's like the monster was a capacitor or something.:brick:
 

Legacy

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Originally Posted By Disney2002-
Why did Dracula want an army of winged creatures?
- To give him something to do in a 2+ hour movie!

Why could only a werewolf kill the count?
- To create a reason for having werewolves in the movie!

What was Van Helsings true origin?
- Who knows... but isn't it more fun to just throw some seemingly random origin tidbits in that have no connection to seem like we know ourselves?

Huge pet peeve of all movies like this?
"What is this device for?" "Beats me, but I'll carry it with me knowing it must save our lives about 3/4 through the film"
1. The winged creatures were Dracula's kids. Who wouldn't want there children to be alive?

2. Yeah, your right there. But considering you already have vampires and Frankenstein's Monster you might as well go all the way, right?

3. Van Helsing was the guy who originally killed Dracula in the 1400's. Why he forgot all of that, who knows; but they do establish were he came from originally.

4. Carl didn't know that the sun could kill vampires. He brought it along just in case. (Why should you have a flash light in your car at all times? Just in case.)

Yeah, there are some plot holes. This movie isn't a Kill Bill or a Lord of the Rings, it's a Stephen Sommers film. As such it was a really good movie.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom