Van Helsing, 2004

I just finished watching Van Helsing. I was pretty entertained for almost the entire movie. I think the story was written pretty well and the acting, while sometimes overdone, was pretty good by all involved. There were times where I didn't think they were going to be able to tie up some of the parts of the story with all of the classic monsters, but they did - and that's what made it interesting. I am a little frustrated that we didn't get more background on Van Helsing from the beginning, but that sort of had to be done to add suprise to the climax of the movie. And something looked weird about Kate Beckinsale - I think it might have been the makeup they put on her to make her look more "Transylvanian". As far as the rating goes, I can't quite give this a 7 because I just don't think it ranks up there. I think Bram Stoker's Dracula is more of a 7 because that movie was a lot classier and creepier. But, here's what I don't get: How did Anchorman get a 64% fresh rating from Rotten Tomatoes and Van Helsing only get 22%? Maybe I just didn't get that movie, but Van Helsing was FAR more entertaining and coherent.

What did you think about this review?

Thank you for voting.

Like Dislike

Abuse report sent

Report abuse