Why VAN HELSING Deserves A Second Chance
Roger Ebert was right. In amongst the resounding cacophony of negative noise, one man stood strong against the tide engulfing Stephen Sommers’ 2004 film. He simply states at the end of his review, ‘Van Helsing is silly and spectacular, and fun’.
Throughout the back catalogue of defences I’ve scribed for films, they all could fall within this three-word spectrum, but the Hugh Jackman-led flick has suffered the worst in the decade of its existence. However, a re-evaluation is in need for this mad, bad, sometimes beautiful, and always bizarre, CGI-infested film.
The gang’s all here for this Monster Mash, with the Wolf Man, Dr. Frankenstein (and his Monster), Dracula, Igor, vampires, Mr. Hyde and Van Helsing present. The notorious monster hunter is sent to Transylvania to stop Count Dracula, who is attempting to bring his countless offspring to life, by unlocking Frankenstein’s Monster’s secret to life.
From the onset, Van Helsing is full of grandiloquence. Fresh from the Mummy franchise, Sommers employs his CG talent/lunacy to its fullest to explore this gothic narrative. Supported by Alan Silvestri’s stirring and bombastic score, Sommers goes hell-for-leather…
