Van Helsing poster & wallpaper

David Wenham, Hugh Jackman, Kate Beckinsale

Set in the late 19th century, Bram Stoker's fabled monster hunter, Dr. Abraham Van Helsing, is summoned to a mysterious land in East Europe to vanquish evil forces in the form of: Count Dracula, the W...( read more  read more... )olf Man and Frankenstein's Monster. Assisting him once he gets there is Anna, the heir of a long-running family committed to hunting down and destroying Count Dracula.

Flixster Users

66% liked it

531,863 ratings

Critics

22% liked it

202 critics

PG-13, 2 hrs. 25 min.

Directed by: Stephen Sommers

Release Date: May 7, 2004

Invite friends to see

DVD Release Date: October 19, 2004

Get It:

Stats: 28,115 reviews

Get movie widget Recommend it Add to Favorites
report incorrect info

Photos

Van Helsing Van Helsing Van Helsing Van Helsing Van Helsing Van Helsing The vampire brides Van Helsing Van Helsing Another Werewolf Hugh Jackman Van Helsing Van Helsing Van Helsing Van Helsing Van Helsing sexxxxxxxxxxxy Van Helsing
Upload a Photo |

View All Van Helsing Photos (148)

Your Rating


clear rating
Share on: Facebook Twitter

Flixster Reviews (28,115)

  • phubbs1
    July 18, 2009
    phubbs1
    Such a cool idea, I love it, but they wrecked it. The start is great, in the village against the vamp brides and the black and white homage to Hammer at the very start was so good. The werewolves look amazing ( best since American Werewolf in London) but Dracula is sooo camp, Fra...( read more)nkenstein's monster is shit and eggs hatching into vamps?? what the hell! Beckinsale is white hot and Jackman is a good hero, but they just loose the whole film from the midway point, it gets so tacky, almost like a music video with Roxburgh as Dracula, and the whole Bond gadgets sideline is too much of a rip of.
  • stopitgoaway
    July 12, 2009
    stopitgoaway
    It's big, it's dumb, it's cheesy as hell, but I found it to be enormous fun. This was made to be a roller-coaster ride and by that token it should be judged.

    Actually after the opening pastiche of the Boris Karloff Frankenstein movie, I thought this had the potential to be a 5 s...( read more)tar movie. It was very atmospheric and had me hooked. However the film never really captures any sense of magic from there onwards.

    The main body of the movie does go on a bit, and it could have done with some attempt to create engaging characters. Plot and story are not always necessary for fun movies, but you do need characters with a level of interest to capture the mind, otherwise you tend to find yourself not giving a s**t. I felt Van Helsing did verge into this territory, but for the most part it's so fast paced this doesn't matter so much. The points where it does try to introduce plot are the moments where it really does fail. In fact there is too much going on that is never really explained, and I think it would've been better not to have bothered at all, than use the nonsense Sommers resorts too. For example the attempts at backstory to Van Helsing. Better to have one of those interlude chatty scenes you have in the Indy films, where it establishes he's a dude, rather than the poor attempts at angst and pathos. Really bad was the moment he gets upset over Frankie's Monster. What the hell was that all about?

    Hmm maybe I took that a bit seriously, but the movie knows what it is, why try be something else. I also thought that that masked ball sequence was a natural conclusion, the eventual finale at the castle felt like an add on, which lacked any real punch.

    Far better was Van's introduction to Transylvania, with the benefit of some neat angles and panning shots, the crossbow battle with the brides was cool. The coach chase was exciting without being exhilarating, but kept the flow going, so it's a shame some more bad plot gets thrown in, especially when it was involving the underwritten Velkan. That's the film's main problem - overkill of characters, with little space given to any of them to evolve.

    Finally a word on the CGI. I thought it was very good, especially the morphs that were used. The very first moment Drac starts to turn made me jump a touch, and when the vampires turns into their fanged, contorted state it looked pretty scary to me. The wolfman transformation, with the ripping flesh looked genuinely painful. At this point I was thinking the CGI was genuinely stunning. I'd have preferred the finale if it had just been Van vs Drac though, having CGI characters fight felt uninvolving, and Drac in snarly state was far better than the beast he turns into.

    This is a movie to genuinely switch of the brain and enjoy. At times there's too much going on and perhaps a bit too much swinging about for my liking, but it's an adrenaline filled ride
  • mrpopcorn
    April 27, 2009
    mrpopcorn
    "The One Name They All Fear"

    The notorious monster hunter is sent to Transylvania to stop Count Dracula who is using Dr. Frankenstein's research and a werewolf for some sinister purpose.

    REVIEW

    No d...( read more)oubt many a viewer will want to slow roast this piece of cinematic excess over a crackling fire, and perhaps maybe the director and cast as well. While Van Helsing may be no masterpiece, it is certainly a bit much to say this is the worst film ever made. Granted, there is more CGI here than there is actual cast, and it gets to be nauseating. The problem with CGI is that it just doesn't look real. You can tell that forbidding castle and those green-baby-bat-things and are fake. The only thing less genuine in this movie is Kate Beckinsale's atrocious Romanian accent, which simply grates on the ears. (I haven't been this offended since Dennis Quaid tried to do New Orleans in "The Big Easy.") Hugh Jackman's a poor actor, and this is rather poor material, so at least there's a match there.

    Nevertheless I have to give the devil his due. "Van Helsing" turns out to be good, campy, badly-acted fun. If our senses are overloaded with monsters, explosions, and relatively bloodless violence, at least we enjoy it. It's everything a campy movie should be: A fix of mindless testosterone injected straight into the cerebral cortex. If we've all turned into culture junkies then at least here's a good score.
  • AgentLexi2132
    December 31, 2008
    AgentLexi2132
    ''My life... my job... my curse... is to vanquish evil.''

    The notorious monster hunter is sent to Transylvania to stop Count Dracula who is using Dr. Frankenstein's research and a werewolf for some sinister purpose.

    Hugh Jackman: Van Helsing

    The Mu

    ...( read more)mmy(1999), Stephen Sommers showed us that he could make a film that had quirky characters, plenty of CGI, and was simply witty and humourous. The sequel was a typical overblown similar venture .
    The premise for Van Helsing must have seemed brilliant to film houses bosses, take the three biggest horror characters of the 1800's (namely Dracula, the Wolf Man, and Frankenstein's Monster) and blend them all together with a hero who, whilst originally was just a mild-mannered doctor, is now a kick-ass monster hunter. What could possibly go wrong? Well alot actually.

    The problem is that Van Helsing seems like a continuation of the Mummy series, just with a different story, location and a new set of players: 2D characters, massive amounts of dodgy CGI, and dollops of fun, mainly from David Wenham's friar. It's yet another step down for the director who, although has proved he's up for plenty of action, cannot put any life into it. Hugh Jackman appears to be the perfect lead for the role of Gabriel Van Helsing, but he never gets the chance to give depth to his character, as soon as he kills one set of baddies, he's off to kill some more. He can handle the action well (but we already knew this from the X-Men films), and could probably handle any real drama that should have been inserted into the film, but the director just doesn't seem to want us to know anything about any of the characters, he just wants to see them fight, which is not enough. I couldn't help but think that if things had been taken a little slower, the film could have been made that much more interesting, less would have been more in this case.

    Anna Valerious: Oh, my God! The Frankenstein Monster!
    Frankenstein's Monster: Monster! Who's the monster here? I have done nothing wrong, yet you and your kind still wish me dead!

    The film was also executed as a horror and action film, and yet there is not one moment that provides a genuine chill or cheap scare, although it is very dark(it's mostly set at night-time) Admittedly some of the action scenes and sets are convincing, and the film does have good production values, but once again it seems the budget has gone towards all the CGI, and not on the script or story. With each film, Sommers seems to include more and more monsters, as if he is trying to outdo his last film in terms of effects. This is a prime example of the "quality not quantity" adage, as the more CGI there is, the less real it looks. The action scenes quickly become repetitive and although start off original and good, end up being a bit of a bore. And really, how many times to we have to see the lead characters swing on a rope in front of a castle? It's just not necessary?

    Overall, it's a real shame that the film turned out this way. It really needed to be either a slower horror film, or an action film which did not feel the need to rush through at such a pace that the audience are afraid to blink lest they miss something. Stephen Sommers must learn how to do character development prior to this, action later, if he's going to keep a fan base going, simply relying on visual effects alone, just isn't enough for us anymore.

    ''Viscous material, what did I tell you!''
  • TheMachinist
    November 6, 2008
    TheMachinist
    "Igor: Please, don't kill me!
    Van Helsing: Why not?
    Igor: Well, um... I... um... uh..."

    It's fast paced, an CGI pumped scene comes after another and the movie looks pretty good for its age. But there are sooo many things that have gone terribly wrong, important things like:
    - th...( read more)e story
    - character development
    - dialogue etc.

    But somehow I was kinda entertained by the film, although mistake after mistake filled the big screen. Let's just hope that a sequel will never be made. One's enough...
  • toxxicgoddess
    November 21, 2009
    toxxicgoddess
    A good movie. I was surprised actually the cast did the best they could with what they had.
  • youcanta4dme
    November 20, 2009
    youcanta4dme
    I loved this movie only because of all the great hair
  • dancergirlvw
    November 19, 2009
    dancergirlvw
    Wow! This movie is amazing!! It was truly a fantastic movie and I would recommend it to anyone!
  • zeventzgirlz
    November 19, 2009
    zeventzgirlz
    i luv vampire, dracula movie,..lol..
  • banzaibrother
    November 19, 2009
    banzaibrother
    Critics say it fell flat...I say they're wrong. Hugh Jackman makes the perfect Van Helsing...although I kept waiting for his Wolverine persona to come out and slash the female vamps! And Kate Beckinsale...if she's in the film...I'll watch it! :) Good special effects, great actio...( read more)n, and fantastic pacing...it's a good DVD for the weekend!

View All Van Helsing Reviews

Critic Reviews

August 1, 2004
Anthony Lane, The New Yorker

The horror flick, at its height, was a lyrical caressing of our fears; by the end of this nonsense, you fear for the well-being of the genre. 'It's dead!' full review

June 6, 2004
David Edelstein, Slate

It's empty calories: There isn't a single nourishing, non-synthetic sequence in the entire movie. Not a scene. Not a line. Not a look. full review

May 7, 2004
Moira MacDonald, Seattle Times

This movie is just too silly for words. full review

May 7, 2004
Stephanie Zacharek, Salon.com

This is what happens when you spend pots of money on special effects but don't give a fig about storytelling. full review

May 7, 2004
Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times

Silly and spectacular, and fun. full review

May 6, 2004
Edward Havens, FilmJerk.com

A gargantuan mess of a film, which substitutes special effects for story and has not a single redeeming moment in its two hour plus running time. full review

May 6, 2004
Peter Travers, Rolling Stone

A shrieking bore. full review

May 6, 2004
A.O. Scott, The New York Times

Despite the rococo obsessiveness of its special effects and its voracious sampling of past horror movies, Van Helsing is mostly content to offer warmed-over allusions and secondhand thrills. full review

May 6, 2004
Colin Covert, The Minneapolis Star Tribune

More and more summer movies depend on relentless action sequences at the expense of coherent narrative, but Van Helsing might be the first whose overkill reaches nuclear capacity. full review

March 31, 2004
Nick Schager, Slant Magazine

Perhaps the loudest summer film of all time, Van Helsing's apt to provide more migraines than nightmares. full review

View more Van Helsing reviews at RottenTomatoes.com

Comments

  • leongwah
    August 29, 2009
    leongwah
    i love vamp movie !!! such good idea in this film
  • dorothyelizabeth6789
    June 15, 2008
    dorothyelizabeth6789
    adooooore this film. richard roxburgh is by FAR my favorite Dracula.
  • karthu1993
    May 29, 2008
    karthu1993
    Not boring but too violent to watch. and the ending ruined the movie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11
  • itbegins2005
    April 26, 2008
    itbegins2005
    HOW DO YOU FUCK UP THIS PREMISE?!? Young Van Helsing has to take on the Wolfman, the Frankenstein monster AND Dracula- sounds frickin' AWESOME to me! Except instead of Van Helsing, we get a 19th century James Bond wannabe who finds himself in an Indiana Jones rip-off that never even TRIES for horror, or even atmosphere (save in the first, glorious scene). Way to make a brightly lit monster movie, Stephen Sommers- you are dead to me now.
  • valentin702
    April 23, 2008
    valentin702
    Glorious movie!!!
    one of my favorites!!

    Besides... you have Kate Beckinsale AND Hugh Jackman!!!
  • mariefuller80
    April 7, 2008
    mariefuller80
    A boring wreck.
  • hippiesrkewl
    January 20, 2008
    hippiesrkewl
    very awesome movie i totally luved it!
  • carbadi09
    October 20, 2007
    carbadi09
    Do not enjoy as much as I thought much publicity in the t.v. And everything but the movie was bad in the end. The effects were almost like some video games and other bad effects where they noticed the assembly lines, the effects of tear franknstein is outdated. Poor saw only once and I do not want to see it fall again.
  • MorpheusOne
    September 22, 2007
    MorpheusOne
    A subpar action/horror film. The subplot of Van Helsing's & Dracula's deep/long lost connection made me wonder if I wasted my time... I probably did! If you catch it on cable it might be worth it, but if you see it in the theater, unless you sneak in and see it completely for free, it isn't worth it!
  • jaybird95
    August 17, 2007
    jaybird95
    This is my fav movie :D

Post A Comment | View All Comments

Critic ratings and reviews powered by RottenTomatoes.com

Fresh (60% or more critics rated the movie positively)

Rotten (59% or fewer critics rated the movie positively)

All Rotten Tomatoes content is used under license from Rotten Tomatoes. Rotten Tomatoes, Certified Fresh, and the Tomatometer are the trademarks of Incfusion Corporation, d/b/a Rotten Tomatoes, a subsidiary of IGN Entertainment, Inc.

Official Trailer

View Larger Van Helsing Trailer

Cast

More Like This

Click a thumb to vote on that suggestion, or add your own suggestions.

  • Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
    Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (55%)
  • The Brothers Grimm
    The Brothers Grimm (64%)
  • The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen
    The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (81%)
  • Schindler's List
    Schindler's List (36%)

More Movies like Van Helsing

Facts

No facts approved yet. Be the first

Van Helsing : Watch Free on TV

Van Helsing Trivia

  • Who starred in Van Helsing, X-Men, and Swordfish?  Answer »
  • Which of the following legends is not in the movie "VAN HELSING"?  Answer »
  • Hugh Jackman, Sir Anthony Hopkins and Mel Brooks have all played which character?  Answer »
  • Who is the actor who has a role in all of these movies? -The Prestige -Van Helsing -X-men -Kate and Leopold  Answer »
More Van Helsing Trivia

Movie Quizzes

Create a Quiz |

All Quizzes

Video Clips

Upload a Video |

All Van Helsing Videos

Meet Other Fans

Add Van Helsing to favorites

Recent News

Submit a Story |

View Van Helsing News

Recent Lists

Make a List |

View All Lists

Most Popular Skin

KhrisP Skin by KhrisP
571 Profiles
Add to Profile

More Skins