Director:
Stephen SommersGuión:
Stephen SommersCámara:
Allen DaviauMúsica:
Alan SilvestriReparto:
Hugh Jackman, David Wenham, Kate Beckinsale, Shuler Hensley, Richard Roxburgh, Will Kemp, Kevin J. O'Connor, Alun Armstrong, Josie Maran, Tom Fisher (más)Streaming (3)
Sinopsis(1)
En el corazón de los Cárpatos se asienta la misteriosa y mítica Transilvania, un mundo donde el mal siempre está al acecho, donde el peligro aumenta en cuanto se pone el sol, don-de cobran forma los monstruos que pueblan las peores pesadillas del hombre. La historia transcurre en el siglo XIX en Londres, Roma, París y Transilvania; los seres humanos son constantemente acechados por el mal encarnado en múltiples for-mas: monstruos que sobreviven generación tras generación, enfren-tándose a los valientes que dan su vida en esa guerra sin fin contra la raza humana. Van Helsing (Hugh Jackman), el legendario cazador de monstruos al que dio vida Bram Stoker en Drácula, en su eterna batalla para librar al mundo de estas malvadas criaturas, y respondiendo al encargo de una sociedad secreta, viaja a Transilva-nia con la idea de vencer al letal y seductor, al enigmático y pode-roso Conde Drácula (Richard Roxburgh). La intrépida Anna Vale-rious (Kate Beckinsale) se unirá a él para derrotar al vampiro y li-brar a su familia de una antigua maldición. (Universal Pictures España)
(más)Reseñas (6)
A nonstop slasher with exaggerated affect and absolutely incompetent narrative tone combined with excellent action, the indomitable warrior Hugh Jackman and a sufficient dose of exaggeration. I try to avoid phrases like "popcorn entertainment" if possible, but Van Helsing is precisely the epitome of action-adventure certainty.
()
Me encanta la composición de la imagen, el arte cinematográfica, Kate Beckinsale y los efectos digitales, siempre que se utilicen sabiamente (Parque Jurásico). Por no hablar de las películas de terror clásicas. Pero no me puede gustar Van Helsing. Para eso, necesito magia, un toque de realidad de la película. La realización de Van Helsing costó 150 millones de dólares, y evocó la misma emoción e interés por los personajes que su tráiler de apenas un minuto. Vacío emocional, desinterés total por lo que ocurre en la pantalla. Los efectos digitales no han progresado un pelo, mantienen la misma calidad desequilibrada y son tantos que dejamos de creer en el mundo que nos fingen. Y Richard Roxburgh es aquí el mayor error de casting del año. Dos estrellas sólo por el impresionante prólogo, los bonitos decorados y el chiste de la vaca.
()
Stephen, Kate and Hugh made a cake that is not very palatable. It looks like a burger from McDonald’s and it tastes like that too: it’s not very juicy and too crowded with toppings. If I were to take it as laid-back popcorn entertainment, there would have to be a clearer sign that the film doesn't take itself too seriously. If I were to be afraid, Sommers would have to be able to create an atmosphere of tension. Instead, I was bored, waiting to see what kind of rubbish the director would unload on me again, and the few scares didn't save it. And when it comes to the action, well, I have nothing against a crossbow shooting arrows like a machine gun, but in a film that is supposed to be a sort of homage to old horror movies (in the words of the director), it feels like a punch in the face. And for me to have fun, there would have to be at least some funny moments. Sommers evokes lightness with exaggerated action scenes that lack wit and logic (but whatever). And Dracula? I don't understand why the Lord of Darkness has to look like the frontman of some faded pop rock band like Bon Jovi. Murnau's Nosferatu, lay your hand of vengeance on that barbaric Sommers and taste his arteries. He’s calling for it!
()
I dare say there is no significant difference between the well-received The Mummy and the criticized Van Helsing. Both are fast-paced, skillfully made, and superficial without internal story logic. The difference, in my case expressed by one star, lies in the degree of self-awareness. The Mummy follows the style of Indiana Jones, while Van Helsing, to its detriment, aims more to impress than to amuse. Since it takes itself too seriously, all the flaws in Stephen Sommers' directing style are more easily revealed. Overall impression: 40%.
()
Little kids will love Van Helsing, it's cute, colourful, fast-paced, likeable, and can draw on the rich "monster-movie" mythology that they love so much, with apparently every single drop being squeezed out of it. Teens will respect Van Helsing because it stars the cool Wolverine guy, Kate Beckinsale struts around the set in tight pants, and because the plot leaves no room for any pesky emotions and merely furiously presents Sommers' most B-movie homage to a popular and nearly extinct film genre. On the other hand, adults who have seen a few fantasy flicks in their lifetime will hate and laugh at Van Helsing because it's visually overstuffed, emotionally barren, blandly acted, and has a script that was either concocted by someone on drugs or someone who needed to make a quick buck for drugs. I’m giving it three stars only because I was a little boy, or a teenager, when I watched it on VHS, and a thick whiff of nostalgia comes over me every time Hugh Jackman raises his crossbow, or when the camera hungrily takes in Kate Beckinsale's backside, or when Richard Roxburgh, playing Dracula, tries to resurrect his ugly offspring, distant relatives of the little zombie from Jackson's Braindead. Alan Silvestri deserves the biggest praise, the other stars should forget about this overpriced trip to Transylwood. 55%
()
We still have a VHS of Van Helsing at home (quite possibly no longer working) and I remember watching the film regularly about once a year. Now I've come back to it after some time, and I suddenly find that relatively a lot has changed, given the view of the film through the eyes of a teenager vs. an over-aged student. I know that after the first few viewings, I really dug the film because it featured both my favorite monsters – werewolves and vampires - as well as a great cast – the charismatic Hugh Jackman, the murderously seductive Kate Beckinsale, and the lovably goofy David Wenham. Together with the first two Underworlds, it was my favourite vampire-werewolf film at the time. With hindsight, however, I can see that the result is a piece of crap with a heavily overacted Dracula and annoying brides, all wrapped up in overpriced visual effects, which ironically are not very well done (Van Helsing went to the cinema a year after the The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King btw). Despite all this, I have a certain nostalgic attachment to this film that blinds me to critical reviews. I'm willing to overlook the American ignorance of European geography, the almost immortal character of Princess Anne, and the many wtf-scenes you could collect like Pokémon. It is still one of my greatest guilty pleasures – from A to Z and back again.
()
Anuncio