Van Helsing (2004) is worse than I remembered

Hello readers! Do you remember the film Van Helsing, from 2004? It starred Hugh Jackman as a legendary vampire-slayer, and also had Kate Beckinsale in it. Count Dracula was the main villain, but there were plenty of other enemies. Frankenstein was in it. So was the Wolf Man. Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde had a cameo. And Frankenstein’s monster was there too! But don’t worry if this isn’t ringing any bells, because Van Helsing is anything but memorable.

Still, this lacklustre blockbuster managed to become a childhood favourite for many people my age. Even if we weren’t old enough to see it in cinemas, most of us saw it on DVD some time later, and it had almost everything a fantasy-obsessed child could ask for: swords, giant werewolves, saw blades, an eternally stormy castle, and a semi-automatic crossbow (this last one being the most important). Twenty years down the line, my friends and I decided to re-watch it, to find out whether it could meet the standards of fantasy-obsessed adults. How badly had it aged?

Some context for the blissfully ignorant:

Van Helsing (2004) is a cheesy, Gothic-horror action film set in 1800s Transylvania. The story follows Gabriel Van Helsing, a crossbow-slinging monster killer employed by the Catholic church to hunt down Count Dracula. However, this premise was apparently too simple to stand on its own, because instead of focussing on one gothic monster, Van Helsing tries to get the whole monster gang back together. It bit off more than its little vampire teeth could chew, and the result is a mess.

It’s safe to say that this film splits opinions. Out of me and my friends, those of us who had seen it many times before still absolutely loved it, while the rest of us were left nonplussed or disappointed. I was firmly in the latter camp – still, I can see why people enjoy this film, just as they enjoy other questionable cult classics (e.g., the 1984 version of Dune). Van Helsing contains tiny kernels of genuine creativity, and although they might be lost amid a stinking haystack of mediocrity, they are there, and they’re worth discussing.

Universal’s grand plan

Before talking about the film itself, let’s talk about why it exists. Between 1913 and 1956, Universal Studios released multiple film adaptations of well-known literary works, including Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde (1913), Dracula (1931), Frankenstein (1931) and The Wolf Man (1941). These films were remade and rebooted several times, even within this so-called “classic” era. Universal contrived various scenarios so that their monsters could team up or battle one another, leading to such memorable outings as Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man (1943) and Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein (1948). In modern terms, this was a “cinematic universe” – and Van Helsing (2004) was meant to bring it back from the dead.

The plan went into action in the 1990s. First, Universal released their classic “monsters” movies in a VHS bundle, as if they had always been intended as a series. They then started remaking one of their most popular properties: The Mummy, originally released in 1932. Universal hired Stephen Sommers to make the new version, and in 1999 The Mummy was once again a huge box-office hit.

Following The Mummy’s success, Universal sought to revive its other classic characters – and Stephen Sommers seemed to be the perfect man for the job. He envisioned a film that would include multiple monsters, making it the perfect foundation for Universal’s grand plan. They wanted a new monsters franchise, spanning numerous films and TV series, and they were so confident in Sommer’s success that they created a tie-in video game, an anime short film, and a novelisation, all while Van Helsing was still in production. They thought it would be a massive hit – and then it wasn’t.

An underwhelming response

The grand plan crumbled as soon as the film was released. Critics’ reviews were crushingly negative, and cinema audiences weren’t too impressed either. Although Van Helsing didn’t lose money, it certainly didn’t make as much money as Universal expected. Plans for a franchise were dropped almost immediately.

However, despite its poor box office performance, Van Helsing sold surprisingly well on DVD. This would be crucial to its success, as it opened the doors to younger viewers who were much more impressionable, and much less discerning. The seeds of a cult hit had been planted in the family DVD collection, and over time, these seeds blossomed into a fanbase that didn’t just love Van Helsing in spite of its flaws, but who viewed it as a formative part of their childhood.

Let me attempt to summarise the plot…

The film starts in black and white, in 1887. We are in a laboratory filled with electricity and literary inaccuracy, where Victor Frankenstein has just brought his monster to life. Count Dracula is there for some reason. Apparently, he funded Victor’s research – but Victor is refusing to relinquish his parental custody of the newborn monster. He raises his sword against Dracula, only for the count to skewer himself on it like a kebab, do an evil laugh, then kill Victor with a set of CGI teeth. Say what you will about Van Helsing, but at least it has the decency to set the tone early.

An angry mob of peasants chase Frankenstein’s Monster to a windmill, which they proceed to burn down. This makes Dracula very upset – although the reasons for his melodramatic wailing are unclear. What just happened? The audience are wildly confused. What are we watching? This film isn’t in black and white, is it?

The film jumps to Paris before anyone can ask any more questions. It’s one year later, and suddenly we’re in full technicolour (the audience breathes a sigh of relief). Here, we meet Gabriel Van Helsing, who is grappling with a CGI ogre in Notre Dame cathedral. I say “ogre”, but this Shrek-sounding monstrosity is apparently Mr Hyde – the evil alter-ego of Dr Jekyll. Why is he in Paris? We’ll never know. He winds up dead five minutes later, following some CGI shenanigans involving a giant bell, a saw blade, and a grappling hook. Van Helsing has established himself as a wise-cracking Victorian monster assassin, and the film has established itself as gross misrepresentation of classic literature.

The name’s Helsing. Van Helsing…

From Paris, we jump to the Vatican, where we learn that Van Helsing is employed by a shady, secretive branch of the catholic church that specialises in monster-killing. A cardinal reveals his latest mission, and the film almost finds its feet. Van Helsing is to go to Transylvania and kill Count Dracula (sounds simple enough). He must also protect Anna and Velkan Valerious, who are the last descendants of an ancient family that has sworn to destroy Dracula, or end up in Purgatory (what?). This is all explained in under a minute – but to avoid the audience feeling lost, the cardinal shows us a photo of Kate Beckinsale. Instantly, all confusion evaporates. Van Helsing must go to Transylvania, because this is where he will find his Hollywood love interest. Everything is simple again – and the audience breathes another a sigh of relief.

We are then introduced to the Vatican’s R&D department by Friar Carl, a shameless gothic rehash of James Bond’s Q. He presents Van Helsing with an assortment of ridiculous weapons, including an automatic crossbow and a holy hand grenade.

Introducing Anna: the Hollywood love interest

The action cuts to Anna and Velkan, who are fighting a werewolf. Apparently, the beast is under Dracula’s control, because werewolf command is one of his vampiric powers (remember this). But what about Anna? She has a goth-girl bodice, a pretty sword that she never uses, and wears silly little boots with silly little heels that make running almost impossible (a foolish choice of footwear for someone who does little else besides running away from things). Velkan kills the werewolf, then falls into a green-screen-ravine. Anna is very upset, but at this point, that’s all we know about her. Is she a leader? A princess?

Van Helsing and Friar Q arrive on the Transylvania film set, where they meet people with accents that are either vaguely or offensively eastern European. They are attacked by Dracula’s three brides almost immediately (no down time allowed). The brides don’t own much in the way of clothing, but maybe this is to aid their transformation into grotesque CGI monstrosities? Van Helsing fires off a frankly embarrassing number of silver crossbow bolts before managing to bring one down – but not before the brides have killed a few villagers, eaten through the special effect budget, and thrown a cow through a wall.

Anna is not impressed with Van Helsing’s pitiful aim. She appears to be in charge of the village, although her role is never explained. Given that she lives in a big gothic mansion and doesn’t appear to work for a living, I suppose we must assume that she’s a landlord.

The Wolfman Cometh

That evening, Velkan reappears. Turns out he wasn’t dead! But he is a werewolf now, and apparently that means that Dracula can control him (remember this). Van Helsing runs in to scare him away, because Anna is evidently incapable of saving herself. When she won’t stop whining about her wolf brother, he chloroforms her – which I’m sure we can all agree is perfectly reasonable behaviour.

As soon as Anna recovers from Van Helsing’s assault, she goes with him to get her brother back (no sign of ill effects, resentment or confusion). This is when they discover Dracula’s collection of slimy egg sacks. He has hundreds of slimy little vampire babies ready to hatch, and he wants to unleash them on the world. Van Helsing attacks him, and there follows a frankly anaemic fight scene, with less energy than a Jane Austen ballroom sequence. Between half-hearted punches, Dracula informs Van Helsing that they have met before. But unfortunately, any sense of mystery is undermined by the audience not giving a crap.

Some plot happens, I dunno…

Van Helsing and Anna flee the castle, and run to the burnt-out windmill from the monochrome prologue (remember that?). Here, they fall into a cavern and meet Frankenstein’s monster. Turns out that he isn’t dead either! He reveals himself to be the key to Dracula’s plans, as only he can bring life to the slimy egg sacks. Van Helsing decides to take him back to Rome, where the Catholic Church, so well-known for their tolerance of science, are sure to welcome him with open arms.

Luckily for the monster, they never make it home. En route, they are attacked by Dracula’s remaining brides. Velkan joins the action too, as he is seemingly under Dracula’s control (remember this). Van Helsing kills another bride, really cementing his reputation as a feminist ally, but Anna is captured. Which makes sense, because she was hardly capable of capturing herself. Also, Van Helsing gets bitten by Velkan, and Velkan dies for what feels like the third time.

Then we’re in Budapest. Dracula has organised a masquerade ball, and is forcing Anna to dance with him, having effectively paralysed her (seems reasonable to me, no questions your honour). Van Helsing shows up to rescue her (she is hardly capable of rescuing herself) and blows some vampires to tiny bits with the holy hand grenade. Frankenstein’s monster is captured by Dracula, and just like that we’re back on the Transylvania set. Did you enjoy the irrelevant diversion? Good. Neither did I.

Thank god it’s nearly over

What can Van Helsing possibly do? Now that Dracula has Frankenstein’s monster, there is no way to stop him releasing the contents of his slimy egg sacks upon the world. But wait – Friar Q has tripped over and revealed an ancient wall mural that explains everything! Dracula is the son of Anna’s ancestor, and in 1462 (does the year really matter?), he was killed by some guy called “the left hand of God.” He made a deal with the devil to attain immortality, and the Valerious family have been trying to take him down ever since, to repent for the sins of their relative. It all makes total sense!

Van Helsing and the others go through a magic portal to get to Dracula’s castle. It’s at this point we learn that Dracula can only be killed by a werewolf. Huh. This is quite the stroke of luck, isn’t it? Considering that Van Helsing happens to have been bitten by a werewolf, and that they didn’t have any other plans for killing Dracula. Oh, and it also turns out that Dracula has a cure for werewolfism (the official medical term) in case he ever needed to defend himself from them. Makes perfect sense when you think about it. After all, it’s not like he can control all werewolves with undisclosed mind powers (rememb- oh, wait).

Van Helsing turns into a wolf, Dracula turns into a gargoyle, and they have a messy CGI battle which has as much impact as being slapped with overcooked spaghetti. Anna gets to fight the final vampire wife, but true to form, she doesn’t have the capability to do this by herself. Frankenstein’s monster and Friar Q both step in to help, and this allows Anna to grab the anti-werewolf formula and run to save Van Helsing. Upstairs, the Jane Austen dance dialogue has resumed, as Dracula tells Van Helsing, between punches, that he was “the left hand of God” who killed him in 1462 (the year definitely matters). Does the audience retain the mental capacity to be surprised at this point? Or are they to preoccupied with praying for the sweet release of death?

Speaking of death, Count Dracula is finally mauled by Van Helsing. Anna runs in with the formula, and for the very first time, she manages to achieve something on her own: she stabs Van Helsing with a comically large syringe, and cures him of his rampant werewolfism. She also gets killed by him in the process. But come on, it’s not like she had the capability of killing herself.

The film ends with Anna’s body being cremated on a clifftop, Frankenstein’s monster paddling a little raft out to sea, and Van Helsing and Friar Q riding their horses into the sunset. It’s at this point that I put my head in my hands, grieving the loss of my valuable time.

There are some good ideas in here, but they’re buried deep

I’ll admit that Van Helsing isn’t entirely irredeemable. On the surface, it is a shameless, corporate cash-grab, riding on the success of earlier work. It is clear from the endless stream of lacklustre CGI fights that this was only ever meant to be a brainless popcorn fest, but beneath its veneer of mediocrity, you can find crumbs of heartwarming sincerity.

The costume design is fantastic. It suits the bombastic tone of the film perfectly, managing to acknowledge the stupidity of the spectacle with brazen confidence. Yes, Kate Beckinsale’s silly little heels are impractical for slaying in the traditional sense, but do we care when she is slaying in the gen-Z sense? Also, the werewolf designs are arguably some of the best werewolves on screen. They aren’t just big dogs. They’re terrifying, humanoid creatures with furry opposable thumbs.

I also think that the hammy acting and cheesy dialogue can, in some cases, be given a free pass – which is not something that I say very often. But when it comes to vampires, I find that there is a negative correlation between the seriousness of the writing and my level of engagement. Vampires have to be camp or funny – preferably both – because the very concept of a vampire, even going back to Bram Stoker’s original story, reeks of sexual innuendo. And if you ask me, the best way to handle this is by not taking it seriously. Van Helsing clearly had the potential to be a self-indulgent, melodramatic romp – and although some people can look past its flaws to see this, to me, its flaws are too obvious to ignore. Which makes it all the more disappointing.

My biggest complaint? The writing.

The story to this film is nonsensical. The dialogue is heavily expositional, and yet I still struggle to understand what is happening and why. There is never any suspense, because we have no idea what the danger is, what the characters are trying to do, or why they are trying to do it. The plot should be simple: kill Dracula. But it is dragged down by questionable character “decisions” (and I use this term begrudgingly, because the characters rarely display any agency), and by allusions to complicated and unnecessary backstories.

By the end of the film, we still don’t know much about Van Helsing, or his shady commanders in the catholic church – which is a shame, because this feels like a promising idea. We know virtually nothing about Anna. None of the characters have any character, and they certainly don’t develop over the course of the film. Few of the victories feel earned, because they happen due to blind luck. Or maybe God intervened to help his left hand? Who knows. Could be literal deus ex machina.

Issues that are “of their time”…

Multiple aspects of this film haven’t aged well. The vampire brides are oversexualised in a signature early-2000s manner, and although I just spent multiple paragraphs discussing the sexual innuendo of vampires, their portrayal just feels off. I think the problem is that they serve no other purpose. There is no exploration of desire or repression through the vampire brides, or any attempt at comedy – they were merely hired to wear revealing clothing.

The chloroform scene is obviously problematic, especially as Van Helsing, the hero of the hour, is the one responsible. He deems Anna to be getting too hysterical over the loss of her brother, and he clearly just carries chloroform around with him to deal with such situations. The most jarring aspect is that Anna doesn’t seem phased at all. The moment she wakes up, she goes with him to sneak into the castle. It’s just a really odd inclusion. Could the writers really think of no better way to end the scene?

In summary…

I did not enjoy Van Helsing, but I can see why some people do. The costumes, the props and the music make it quite a spectacle, if you can look past the terrible writing and lifeless CGI. It’s also worth noting that there could be a remake in the works: in recent years, Universal studios have taken steps to reboot the franchise. Nothing has been announced yet, but we can only hope that any reincarnation is an improvement. After all, it would be difficult to make anything much worse.

Happy reading, and have a lovely week!