|
 ‘Van Helsing’ stakes B-movie claim A Review By Glen Osterberger A few years ago, I was excited to see the trailers of “The Mummy.” I thought that little could be more fun than old Hollywood horror with an Indiana Jones twist. When I finally did see it, with lowered expectations, I had fun. It wasn’t serious: It was overblown and plot-shy, but it was fun. It paid homage to many of the old classics but also paid its respects to the cheesy B-movie “sequels” of the ’50s without apology. The sequel was more of the same, and it worked if you expect it to be what it is: pure dorky fun. “Van Helsing” is by Stephan Sommers, the same writer and director of “The Mummy,” so it is little surprise that it is the film that it is. Don’t go expecting any kind of serious film. The film opens in black and white with the typical “peasants storming the castle” scene that is present in so many of the old classic Universal horror films. It is done a little more over-the-top and modern, but there is a definite appreciation of the classic. From there, “Van Helsing” turns into a more action-oriented and contemporary in-your-face film. Taking the vampire hunter from Bram Stoker’s “Dracula” and expanding him into a hunter of all monsters isn’t too far fetched. Think of him as a James Bond of the church with a secret past and an arsenal of high-tech weapons, such as repeating crossbows and spring-loaded silver stakes, created by an ingenious friar (David Wenham). Remembering that this is just meant to be fun, the audience should be able to get past this and just dive right into the silly ride that is “Van Helsing.” Played by Hugh Jackman, Van Helsing is the ultimate secret agent against the creatures who inhabited the old Universal monster movies. In many respects, it plays more like the old Frankenstein versus Dracula films. Perhaps it tries to do too much. “Van Helsing” sort of falls into the trap of the later “Batman” movies that had too many things going on to create a truly cohesive plot. “Van Helsing” serves as a vehicle for cool shots even more than “The Mummy” films and I think that is all it wanted to do. If a viewer can get past the lack of a plot, the overdone computer graphics and the plot holes, it is simply a classic monster extravaganza with lots of explosions and entertainment value. |
 |
||
