Van helsing is great action it a great fight scenes awesome ending fight werewolf vs vampire

The Three Acts:The initial tableau: There is a lot going on in this film. The initial context comes from four vignettes: (1) Doctor Frankenstein has successfully brought life to his cobbled together monster. Dracula, who funded Frankenstein, figures that his investment has borne fruit, and kills the doctor. The monster is enraged by this, and manages to escape Dracula and the mob with their torches. Dracula recruits Igor.(2) Van Helsing confronts Mr. Hyde in Paris at the behest of a secret group operating out of the Vatican. In doing such work, Van Helsing has become a wanted criminal of international renown. He has no public support whatsoever, and is hated by many.(3) At the Vatican, Van Helsing is dressed down by Cardinal Jinette. He gets a new assignment: to protect the Valerian family (Anna and Velkan), and to help them kill Count Dracula in a fulfillment of a family oath. The oath was that the family would not enter Heaven until Dracula was destroyed. Van Helsing meets the friar named Carl, who is both timid and talented.(4) Velkan and Anna attempt to trap the werewolf that has been terrorising the village. Velkan kills the werewolf, but is bitten in the process.Delineation of conflicts: Velkan becomes a rather powerful werewolf. Dracula would use Velkan for his own purposes. Van Helsing and Anna have a chewy first meeting, then agree to oppose Dracula's intentions toward Velkan.Dracula and his trio of mates (Aleera, Verona, and Marishka) want their undead offspring to have life. Van Helsing, Anna, and the Vatican want them to die: Van Helsing, to follow orders; Anna, to save her family from Purgatory; the Vatican, to drive the spawn of Satan from the face of the Earth.Frankenstein's monster would like to live in peace with some degree of freedom. Dracula wants to consume him to transfer life to his offspring. The Vatican wants the monster dead since he's not precisely human, and his life was not given to him by God. Carl would like to comply with the Vatican's wishes, but cannot in good conscience.Dracula wants Van Helsing dead for strong reasons of his own. Van Helsing, Carl, Anna, and the monster are opposed.Resolution: Excellent, difficult, and harmonious.

This film portrays Van Helsing's efforts to fight Dracula, which is now trying to give life to his children through the research of the late Doctor Frankenstein. Directed and written by Stephen Sommers, this adventure film has the participation of Hugh Jackman, Kate Beckinsale, Richard Roxburgh and Shuler Hensley in the lead roles.There are certain adventure films, inspired by horror movies, that makes a jumble of elements and characters that have nothing to do with each other. This is one of those films, mixing Dracula to Frankenstein's monster. Even Dr. Jekyll (and his alter-ego, Mr. Hyde) enters the movie! This is not new, has been done in other films and works well when it's done carefully, but definitely wasn't the case here. The script is confusing and makes an attempt to transform Van Helsing, originally a Dutch professor with taste for the occult, in a kind of good supernatural entity destined to hunt down and kill evil monsters. Sorry, but the way this character ended up being "deconstructed" was wrong. The director/writer could have made other more interesting options like keeping Van Helsing more faithful to Stoker's novel and try to frame him in a story in the current time, perhaps. The truth is that this film is a clear script error, resulting of flying imagination of its director/screenwriter.The actors were good in their roles, without surprises or special highlights, except perhaps Shuler Hensley, who played a character far from the usual monster, in constant psychological conflict because of his horrid appearance and inner humanity and goodness. The accent of some characters wasn't well done and if the idea was to make them closer to the Romanian universe (when is usually located Dracula's Castle), it failed and became them more humorous than they can be at certain supposedly dramatic moments. The setting, costumes, makeup and sound, visual and special effects are too imaginative, like coming out of a Marvell comic or a graphic novel. The soundtrack, despite the good performance, also didn't stand out particularly.This film is well seeing and entertaining, but doesn't bring big surprises or positively impresses the audience. Far from being a good movie, is ordinary and we see it without big pleasure or expectation.

I'll be honest 'Van Helsing' is a hard movie to review. I totally see both ends of the spectrum. It can be a very fun movie when one looks at it's corny audacity and monster set pieces. And yet it's just too much to ask for a whole hearted straight faced recommendation because that dialogue... I kind of hate and love this movie for a lot of different reasons some of which conflict with one another. In the end I can't quite condemn it because it's too much stupid fun.There is no getting around the fact that it has one of the stupidest half-assed written scripts for any huge summer blockbuster. There are moments in this movie where Stephen Sommers writes himself into traps and a vampire will pop literally out of nowhere because he has no idea of anything else to do. My all time personal favorite moment is when he has no idea how to get our heroes to Dracula's castle so a painting suddenly becomes a portal. The characters are so shallow that whenever Sommers tries to squeeze in some personality or motivation it becomes jarring and hilarious. The Transylvanian Princess Anna remarks that she has never been to the sea as they explore Frankenstein's ruins. It's ineptness reaches a climax in the big finale when Hugh Jackman doesn't actually fight Dracula. He turns into appalling CGI werewolf. I felt kind of ripped off. It's bad screen writing 101.And yet as far as stupid movies go this one is kind of entertaining in that it so sincerely believes it's smart. Hugh Jackman is the reason 'Van Helsing' retains just enough serious to laugh with and not at the film. If Sommers had Brendan Fraiser again this movie would have been a disaster. Jackman is perfect here. He is entertaining and adds the right amount and right kind of humor to his performance. I don't know. All my criticism and smiles come down to me being a huge Universal Monster fan. This movie loves the iconography of the monsters. You definitely see where the money went on this thing. The sets and make-up effects are all spectacular. The cobwebs, the Transylvanian villages, the laboratory. I can't help but smile at it. The opening ten minutes alone are worth the price of admission. The movie only truly gets boring when it is loaded with CGI....and yet on the other hand I can't help but be a little angry that Universal thinks this and 'Dracula Untold' is how to honor their monster heritage. Bela Lugosi, Boris Karloff, and Lon Chaney Jr never played characters as superficial as these in any of the Universal classics. Everything is at face value here. The iconography? Beautiful. The mythology? They don't have a clue as to what made these characters appeal to monster fans. I understand the hate this movie gets but I think it's far too stupid to devote any passionate loathing to. I loved it as a kid when it first came out and looking back at it I can still sort of see why I did. It's goofy and has fun being goofy. It's a 'Batman & Robin' caliber watch. You'll be entertained I think if you sort of smirk at it.