User Score
5.5

Mixed or average reviews- based on 248 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 78 out of 248
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Apr 20, 2014
    10
    Wow. I can't describe how much i'm disappointed. How can you not like this movie? And that's why we don't get good movies nowadays. People don't even have a good taste! This movie is awesome. Amazing storyline, seriously.. A monster hunter? EPIC. I mean, who doesn't like it? It's so good! The werewolves are incredible, the best ones I've EVER seen in a movie. And the vampires? Van HelsingWow. I can't describe how much i'm disappointed. How can you not like this movie? And that's why we don't get good movies nowadays. People don't even have a good taste! This movie is awesome. Amazing storyline, seriously.. A monster hunter? EPIC. I mean, who doesn't like it? It's so good! The werewolves are incredible, the best ones I've EVER seen in a movie. And the vampires? Van Helsing is probably the only movie that shows vampires how they really are: monsters. But sure, people now prefer "vampires" who shine like fairies at the sun! Is that even a vampire? Oh right, no. And the werewolves? Nowadays are simply wolves. Van Helsing recreates it as a completely beast, which is what they are! And the CGI? It too damn good! It was 8 years ago and it is still way better than most of the movies we get now! Just.. argh. Seems like people don't know what are good movies. Today, people prefer vampires who fall in love with humans and it's all a big teenager drama than really good stories who give a message. The world is lost. Such a good storyline, such good characters and actors. The CGI is very good and.. then there's the public who actually sucks. Van Helsing is a really good movie. Expand
  2. JaredC.
    Dec 4, 2007
    4
    Van Helsing is a definite thrill ride, just the never-ending action sequences were so prolonged that it got quite annoying after a while.
  3. ThomasS.
    Jun 21, 2005
    0
    Easily one of the worst movies I have ever seen. It's caused me physical pain to watch. The special effects were horrible. In the flying vampire women scene, you can see the digital boxes around them whenever they fly! Don't waste your time.
  4. [Anonymous]
    Sep 1, 2005
    3
    To think 160 million dollars went into one of the worst movies i've ever seen. Blade II uses half that amount, and gives you twice the fun, and axes those annoying Transylvanian accents. Dracula's brides were cool when they didn't talk. That crossbow is a good use of Retro-futuristic imagination. But everything else is a total wreck. How could ILM screw up so badly? Those To think 160 million dollars went into one of the worst movies i've ever seen. Blade II uses half that amount, and gives you twice the fun, and axes those annoying Transylvanian accents. Dracula's brides were cool when they didn't talk. That crossbow is a good use of Retro-futuristic imagination. But everything else is a total wreck. How could ILM screw up so badly? Those FX guys worked with Steven Spielburg, for heaven's sakes! Even the musical score fails to deliver. Oliver Stone's disasterous Alexander at least had uplifting, epic music from Vangelis, but this stuff was just garbage. Just watch the mummy movies for hollywood cheese. This blunder doesn't even qualify for those lowly standards. Expand
  5. TommiK.
    Sep 6, 2006
    2
    Noisy, fast paced, boring, lacking any depth. Very nice effects and lots and lots of actions. Also sometimes stylish design and lots of effort. If only it had plot and charisma.
  6. TomM.
    Nov 14, 2004
    3
    How can anyone give this movie a 10? Seriously folks, I understand that everyone has different tastes in movies but a 10? It's not Casablanca. Bottom line is that this movie provides a weak story (which is fine for what this movie tried to be), awful acting (which is never ok), horrible cgi effects, and god awful dialogue. I wish I could rely more on the internet to get a decent idea How can anyone give this movie a 10? Seriously folks, I understand that everyone has different tastes in movies but a 10? It's not Casablanca. Bottom line is that this movie provides a weak story (which is fine for what this movie tried to be), awful acting (which is never ok), horrible cgi effects, and god awful dialogue. I wish I could rely more on the internet to get a decent idea of what to expect in regards to movies. Apparently that is just not going to happen. Honestly, if people really love this movie and want to rate it a 10 then I am not surprised at all with the dung that Hollywood continues to churn out. Expand
  7. JoeB
    Dec 14, 2008
    9
    Strange that so many people hated this movie. The plot might not have been very original, but it was decent. The action sequences were fun to watch, there was more humor than the average horror movie, and the graphics were good. I guess I don't hate mainly because I didn't know much of the vampire, frankenstein, and werewolf lore that so many people were upset about since the Strange that so many people hated this movie. The plot might not have been very original, but it was decent. The action sequences were fun to watch, there was more humor than the average horror movie, and the graphics were good. I guess I don't hate mainly because I didn't know much of the vampire, frankenstein, and werewolf lore that so many people were upset about since the movie didn't stick to them. Expand
  8. Nov 5, 2011
    4
    I heard great things about this movie. It failed at keeping my attention but I have to say that the graphics and concept was truly something out of the ordinary. I'm a fan of vampire movies but this was not something I could get myself to enjoy.
  9. Jun 16, 2013
    7
    I'm really baffled at the hateful negative response to this film. No it's not Oscar material, it's just good campy fun. If you're a fan of old monster movies, James Bond and Indiana Jones flicks, and over-the-top humor in an action/horror movie, then you get it. I guess if you're looking for a summer action flick that takes itself too seriously, then you're out of luck with this one.

    I
    I'm really baffled at the hateful negative response to this film. No it's not Oscar material, it's just good campy fun. If you're a fan of old monster movies, James Bond and Indiana Jones flicks, and over-the-top humor in an action/horror movie, then you get it. I guess if you're looking for a summer action flick that takes itself too seriously, then you're out of luck with this one.

    I admit that the film runs a little to long, the chemistry between Beckinsale and Jackman leaves something to be desired, and the Frankenstein "monster" (though well-intentioned to give a nod to "Young Frankenstein") is really annoying. But the entertainment spawning from the hokey fun that "Van Helsing" is all about, makes these flaws so forgivable.

    For me, I'll take the over-acting screaming Brides of Dracula, the silly homages to dozens of classic action and horror movies, the cheesy one-liners, and the not-so-convincing special effects. Isn't that what monster movies are all about?
    Expand
  10. Dec 6, 2011
    5
    Van Helsing just about works as a film if you don't take it too seriously. It's a fun fantasy romp with numerous references to 30s and 40s Universal horror films. It does have some awful dialogue (it's written and directed by Stephen Sommers, and as with The Mummy and The Mummy Returns, he proves himself much more talented in directing ballsy action sequences than bringing profound vocalVan Helsing just about works as a film if you don't take it too seriously. It's a fun fantasy romp with numerous references to 30s and 40s Universal horror films. It does have some awful dialogue (it's written and directed by Stephen Sommers, and as with The Mummy and The Mummy Returns, he proves himself much more talented in directing ballsy action sequences than bringing profound vocal utterances to the big screen). It also has some awful performances from its cast (the chief culprit being a laughable, bad Eastern European-accented Kate Beckinsale, but a fairly wooden and inconsistent Hugh Jackman in the title role doesn't fair much better) and the plot is an ugly mess - rather than a glowing tribute to classic horror filmmaking it's a ridiculous throw-everything-but-the-kitchen-sink affair. Despite these glaring issues, Van Helsing could never be called boring. Yes, it might be a bit too long, but the film boasts some fantastic effects (I personally feel that the werewolves featured in the film are the finest in movie history) and the action scenes are handled well - though each set-piece is quite long, the momentum is never lost. You also have a liberal dose of humour and a standout performance in Richard Roxburgh's Count Dracula. Yes, he's hammy, but in a knowing sort of way, and he's a much better actor than Bela Lugosi ever was, and, perhaps most importantly, he appears to be having so much fun with the role. Van Helsing is completely hilarious if it's taken completely seriously, but if you're willing to suspend your disbelief, ignore its more wobbly aspects, it's quite possible to derive a certain amount of perverse pleasure from such a genuinely entertaining film. Expand
  11. MaddieS.
    Sep 27, 2005
    10
    I guess people hate this movie, huh? Well, I'm weird.
  12. Sam
    Nov 28, 2005
    6
    Easily, may I repeat EASILY, 2004's biggest cinema dissapointment. It's not a terrible movie, I just expected it to be a classic on the lines of Batman Begins or Spider-Man 2, and, well, it wasn't. It had pretty good FX and the action scenes were enjoyable, but the plot was just a rip-off of Godzilla if you think about it. The bad guy is trying to let his billions of babies Easily, may I repeat EASILY, 2004's biggest cinema dissapointment. It's not a terrible movie, I just expected it to be a classic on the lines of Batman Begins or Spider-Man 2, and, well, it wasn't. It had pretty good FX and the action scenes were enjoyable, but the plot was just a rip-off of Godzilla if you think about it. The bad guy is trying to let his billions of babies hatch to rule the world. That's pretty much it. I will, however, admit that Van Helsing and Dracula are likable, but all the other characters hace as much life as Dracula's children, for a few momentary seconds they may have life, but then right after they lose it. Expand
  13. Louis'sbrother
    Mar 22, 2007
    9
    Another epic breakthrough by Universal studios. I loved the monster violence, but the story needs some help. Definately a solid 9.
  14. ChandlerS.
    Nov 15, 2004
    8
    Very Good Movie. The characters were well thought out and designed. The Special effects were awesome. The plot could use some work, but overall a very good movie, that I recommend.
  15. AMovieCritic
    Nov 13, 2004
    8
    Here's another under-appreciated movie. This is a movie where people went into it....expecting...well...I don't know what they were expecting! I was expecting an 'action packed thrill ride with amazing special effects' ....and that's what I got. The action (which almost NEVER STOPPED) was amazing, the effects were jaw dropping, the plot was cool, the villains and Here's another under-appreciated movie. This is a movie where people went into it....expecting...well...I don't know what they were expecting! I was expecting an 'action packed thrill ride with amazing special effects' ....and that's what I got. The action (which almost NEVER STOPPED) was amazing, the effects were jaw dropping, the plot was cool, the villains and monsters were cool.....the directing was awesome, (sometimes the camera brought A LOT to the screan...Sommers is really turning into an awesome Action Movie director. See this if you want fun action, with great effects and cool characters. I don't know what everyone else was expecting, but they obviously didn't get what they expected. What I described is EXACTLY what to expect. Go into this movie expecting that, and chances are that you won't be disappointed. Expand
  16. Sam
    Nov 3, 2004
    8
    Sure the beggining is a bit slow, but I can't help but be furious with most crititcs because the special effects are gougeous, the plot is pretty cool, and the action is intense. I would have given it a 10, but the slow begginig detracts 2 points.
  17. VictorD.
    May 11, 2004
    8
    It sucks!
  18. CaseyK.
    Mar 30, 2010
    3
    Although great action scenes, Van Helsing is a pathetic attempt to create interesting monster characters but senseless with daft screenplay and terrible directing from Stephen Sommers.
  19. Oct 7, 2011
    2
    To save you valuable hours of your life, here's a summary of the whole movie: Big action scene with monsters, Bad CGI, People talk fast, Big action scene with monsters, Big action scene with monsters, Big action scene with monsters, People talk fast, Big action scene with monsters, Bad CGI, Big action scene with monsters, faux-dramatic scene, Big action scene with monsters, Bad CGI, Bad CGI, Fin.
  20. Oct 17, 2011
    2
    If Bram Stoker resurrected and see what they did with his story, he kill himself! this movie is just, i don´t know, this movie simply have no reason to exist
  21. Dec 12, 2011
    1
    Van Helsing is possibly the closest I have come to giving a film a 0. It is a lifeless corpse of a movie. The acting is dreadful bordering on laughable. The referencing of classic monster movies doesn't only fall flat but it grates. Richard Roxburghs Dracula is over the top in the worst possible way and the scripting is dreadful. If anything its one saving grace is a remarkablyVan Helsing is possibly the closest I have come to giving a film a 0. It is a lifeless corpse of a movie. The acting is dreadful bordering on laughable. The referencing of classic monster movies doesn't only fall flat but it grates. Richard Roxburghs Dracula is over the top in the worst possible way and the scripting is dreadful. If anything its one saving grace is a remarkably entertaining intro to the character of Van Helsing (even if Hugh Jackman is terrible as the title character) with the fight between Jekyl and Hyde being a fun piece of action. Its the films only saving grace and its only 5 minutes. The film lumbers on after that, slowly killing your soul. It's dire and thats before it gets to the end where you get to witness Lion King esque sky visions. Because copying Disney in a monster movie seemed like a good idea at the time. Don't watch it, and if you do, bring a pillow. Expand
  22. Nov 28, 2012
    5
    Shallow storytelling and it really only amounts up to a CGI showcase.
  23. Feb 19, 2013
    6
    Eh, it's pretty mainstream and a good example of shallow storytelling, sure, but it's ok after all if viewed with the right mindset. Not that I'm into those things that much, but the action segments and the CGI were not bad at all, so combine that to a story that is... well, I'd say more "neutral" than bad, like incredibly obvious and, again, mainstream... and I guess you get somethingEh, it's pretty mainstream and a good example of shallow storytelling, sure, but it's ok after all if viewed with the right mindset. Not that I'm into those things that much, but the action segments and the CGI were not bad at all, so combine that to a story that is... well, I'd say more "neutral" than bad, like incredibly obvious and, again, mainstream... and I guess you get something "ok-ish" out of it. I admit it also has some minor sentimental value to me, seen this one a lot of time ago. Expand
  24. Aug 26, 2013
    2
    Had very big expectations, because of the great opening 5-10 minutes, but i was disappointed! It could be so much better! 2/10 is my score for "Van Helsing"
  25. Nov 13, 2013
    2
    Van Helsing made me want to gouge my eyes out.
    This was an extremely painful movie to watch, quite frankly a missed opportunity in ever sense of the word. A horrible script with actors simply reading their lines and waiting to get through it.
  26. Aug 18, 2014
    3
    It is epic and exciting for the eye, but its plot is a bit too cheesy, even for Dracula films. The characters seem too inhuman, even if they are not vampires. The plot is solid, though, and the cinematography is surprisingly impressive.
  27. KevinF.
    Nov 5, 2004
    1
    If you must.
  28. WesG.
    Oct 27, 2004
    1
    If you enjoyed this movie...what DON't you enjoy? It's just too lame for my tastes...
  29. LarryT.
    Oct 28, 2004
    9
    Cheesy, but thoroughly enjoyable. Kate Beckinsale never looked better.
  30. BubbaFresh
    Nov 6, 2004
    0
    Reminds me of a swan sculpture made of crap. No matter how nice it looks, its still crap, and WTF is up with the oompa loompas with goggles.
  31. GregT.
    Oct 25, 2004
    4
    I watched this movie and kept it running. Peed. Watched this movie and kept it running. Cooked dinner. I never really missed a thing during these absences, because it was continual special effects overload. It just went on and on. In the end, I felt that if I saw one more flying vampyress, I was going to beat the s... out of her and the TV. The effects were great, but it was all just a I watched this movie and kept it running. Peed. Watched this movie and kept it running. Cooked dinner. I never really missed a thing during these absences, because it was continual special effects overload. It just went on and on. In the end, I felt that if I saw one more flying vampyress, I was going to beat the s... out of her and the TV. The effects were great, but it was all just a tad over the top. Expand
  32. RaggetB
    Oct 24, 2004
    3
    Too long. Sucks.
  33. BobB
    Oct 24, 2004
    2
    I fell asleep way too much, boring...
  34. MichaelM.
    Oct 22, 2004
    5
    Van Helsuck? No, Van Helsing. The new monster mash of a movie from the director of The Mummy series. Although, Van Helsuck would be an appropriate title for this. There are so many things wrong with Van Helsing. First of all, the plot is so overstuffed, the film always seems confusing and will leave a bad taste in your mouth. Second of all, the acting isn't really something to shout Van Helsuck? No, Van Helsing. The new monster mash of a movie from the director of The Mummy series. Although, Van Helsuck would be an appropriate title for this. There are so many things wrong with Van Helsing. First of all, the plot is so overstuffed, the film always seems confusing and will leave a bad taste in your mouth. Second of all, the acting isn't really something to shout from the hilltops about. But, the special effects are really spectatuclar, and if you could forget all the things wrong with Van Helsing and just focus on the dazzling visuals, you will have a good time. I'd wait till DVD on this one. Expand
  35. MikeW.
    Oct 23, 2004
    10
    DEFINATELY FUN! It's what alot of folks go to movies for...suspension of reality...and ALOT of FUN!!! I bought the DVD and it will have a home in my collection.If you can't enjoy this one...I'd like to know what you can. It has everything,great acting,great scenery,costumeing was very COOL and animation was stunning.The work that went into this movie seems of epic DEFINATELY FUN! It's what alot of folks go to movies for...suspension of reality...and ALOT of FUN!!! I bought the DVD and it will have a home in my collection.If you can't enjoy this one...I'd like to know what you can. It has everything,great acting,great scenery,costumeing was very COOL and animation was stunning.The work that went into this movie seems of epic proportion and you can't beat the lead role casting...to of the newest "best" actors there are...so go to it,buy it and for gosh sake have fun...it's only a movie!!but a really well done one! Expand
  36. AllanW.
    Oct 21, 2004
    0
    This is the worst movie ever. this movie is a atrocious butchering of all that is good in this world. Burn this movie to erase it from the pages of history, for if a higher power or more intelligent life was to stumble upon this piece of trash, they would surely decide that we are unfit to continue existence. Sommers butchers every legend, tale, or story that has every involve anyone of This is the worst movie ever. this movie is a atrocious butchering of all that is good in this world. Burn this movie to erase it from the pages of history, for if a higher power or more intelligent life was to stumble upon this piece of trash, they would surely decide that we are unfit to continue existence. Sommers butchers every legend, tale, or story that has every involve anyone of these characters in this movie. Trash. Expand
  37. Rico
    Oct 20, 2004
    8
    For a popcorn movie this kicks ass. I was never bored and some of the effects were breathtaking. if you want a serious movie to contemplate then this is not for you. if you want to sit down with some nachos and be taken on a wild ride then check this out.
  38. curefreak
    Oct 18, 2004
    1
    This movie made no sense not even for the low standerds set by summetime action- adventure flicks the score was loud and annoying and frankly so was the movie there was no real plot and the special effects werent realistic or compelling in any way whover wrote this has no real compassion towards monster movies since frankenstein is sensitive and misunderstood and vampires can walk around This movie made no sense not even for the low standerds set by summetime action- adventure flicks the score was loud and annoying and frankly so was the movie there was no real plot and the special effects werent realistic or compelling in any way whover wrote this has no real compassion towards monster movies since frankenstein is sensitive and misunderstood and vampires can walk around in the daylight before i saw this it felt like they just threw a bunch of monsters together without any logic thinking poeple would be stupid enough to see it well unforuntely they were right since the audience i saw it with clapped and cheered at the end obviously these kinds of movies dont have to be intelligent or thought provoking but if thats the case shouldnt the action and the effects take up the slack? anyone who enjoyed this movie needs a lobotomy quick! Expand
  39. Vicky
    Sep 28, 2004
    6
    The special effects were fine the acting also but the direction "oh my god" it made me sick and dizzy! kill the director!!!!!!!!
  40. CrystalC.
    Aug 15, 2004
    10
    I loved everything about it! It was the greatest movie I have ever seen in my life!
  41. HarrisonB.
    Aug 8, 2004
    8
    Van Helsing was a great thrill ride. Hugh Jackman was like Johny Depp in Secret Window. A little too many special effects. But great animation. It was a good movie.
  42. DragonKnightofFinalFantasy
    Jul 17, 2004
    8
    I liked this movie with lots of non-stop action which wasn't good had no real story though. I thought it was a good B List movie with some humor thrown in I liked it okay and The San Fransico Chronicle and Wall Street Journal can shove it for giving it a zero.
  43. RoyT.
    Aug 13, 2004
    5
    For a fantasy movie, Van Helsing is two-thumbs up movie, but as to the rest, Van Helsing has much to say.
  44. Linkster
    Aug 7, 2004
    8
    Pay no attention to Dan...It seems his only way of critiquing a film is attempting to humiliate those who don't see things exactly as he does. It is definitely worth seeing, if you are a fan of the Dracula and Frankenstein horror stories.
  45. RobM.
    Jul 26, 2004
    10
    This is a great thriller movie.
  46. EfeB.
    Jul 30, 2004
    0
    Van helsing. first of all the name VAN suggests that this fella is of dutch origin. why would a dutch guy go around killing famous horror classics when he has horrific dull landscapes to paint is beyond me. i guess during child upbringing, parents should urge their kids to take art lessons?...is this the idea? as for the so called "horror legends" such as dracula and frankenstein, they Van helsing. first of all the name VAN suggests that this fella is of dutch origin. why would a dutch guy go around killing famous horror classics when he has horrific dull landscapes to paint is beyond me. i guess during child upbringing, parents should urge their kids to take art lessons?...is this the idea? as for the so called "horror legends" such as dracula and frankenstein, they would be terrified to have their names associated with this film, no need for wooden stakes here...they are allready taken care for, avoiding anymore bad scripts. the person who played dracula should be allowed to meet horror film fans at a convention so he can enjoy a meal of fresh vegtables in his face. the actor (too lame to be named here) kind of tries to mimic a romanian accent but he comes across as an angry french waiter. which by the way is very scary if you ever saw one. van helsing fella (too redundant to say his name here) does a good job of keeping the production value as low as possible so the director can keep up with him in order to create a complete crap of a film. this fella was decent in the x-men movies and now we know for a fact that his acting skills are result of amazing on screen luck. either that or the fella who directed the x-men films (some young punk) took like 300 shots for a single scene. whatever the case, this guy aint no buffy. for the ammount of money they spent on this film one would anticipate a marvel, now we are only marveled by how much nothingness a money can buy. Expand
  47. MarkR.
    Jun 12, 2004
    9
    A blast of a movie that kept me glued to the screen- fantastic effects, alluring females (well, it's true) and a gripping score- to keep the film alive. A must for fans of the (admittedly) cliched action thriller: as this film most certainly is.
  48. Ben
    May 31, 2004
    6
    Would I see this again? No. But do I regret seeing it? No. Hey, I went in expecting a stupid action movie with hot women, and that's what I got. Final score: 6 Final score without Kate Beckinsale's cleavage: 2.
  49. SylviaG.
    Jun 29, 2004
    10
    Un film à aller voir !!!!
  50. RoscoTrain
    Jun 9, 2004
    0
    Just the worst. I was tempted to flee the movie several times. The beginning was your typical cookie cutter "I made frankenstein" scene. Count Dracula's actor was not at all scary looking. Poor casting. Van Helsing was boring and barely killed anything. He had a weapon that created light as powerful as the sun but never used it until the end ballroom scene. If he had a bag full of Just the worst. I was tempted to flee the movie several times. The beginning was your typical cookie cutter "I made frankenstein" scene. Count Dracula's actor was not at all scary looking. Poor casting. Van Helsing was boring and barely killed anything. He had a weapon that created light as powerful as the sun but never used it until the end ballroom scene. If he had a bag full of these devices he could have destroyed all the vampires from the very start, instead he uses turbo arrows that never hit anything. Vampire babies? What the heck? So like how do they make a "Dead" baby, grow it into a form then put it into a sack and its still dead. Just need electricity to make it alive. Right. Scene after scene makes no logical sense. Stupid stuff happening one after the other. They swing around like tarzan with one hand on the rope, one hand holding a girl across a river 1000 feet high with no injuries. Have you ever tried to hold on to a rope or bar with one hand. Good luck. Nobody had any super powers unless I'm missing something. Just a joke of a movie. Basically this movie SUCKS. Expand
  51. MelissaM.
    May 16, 2004
    5
    Okay, not the best SCIFI I've ever seen, but definitely a good way to kill an afternoon. Worth the matinee, but don't pay full price for this one.
  52. OmarM.
    May 14, 2004
    10
    This movie was fun!
  53. VictorD.
    May 16, 2004
    3
    It sucks!
  54. Dan
    Jun 23, 2004
    0
    Hey vicky... congratulations on seeing your first movie.
  55. GustavoH.R.
    May 29, 2004
    4
    Is this fun? No. Are the visual effects great? No, they're horrible. What about the actor's performances? Inept. Direction? Non-existent. A monumental waste of $160 million dollars. I'm sorry if this will sound a bit arrogant, but even I could write a better movie. What a disappointment.
  56. JohnyBoy
    May 10, 2004
    10
    Loved it, gonna go back to see it, excellent action in the movie, so who cares how the story works out?
  57. TomB.
    May 10, 2004
    1
    I wasn't expecting much when I went in but even my lowest expectaions were shattered by this dull and noisy hunk of crap-o-la. For all of the promotion the movie received it looked as though it were pratically thrown together. Perhaps the worst movie I've seen in a long long time.
  58. MarcusB.
    May 10, 2004
    10
    Silly, mindless fun. Very cheesy at times, but I loved the visuals and the tongue-in-cheek homage to classic horror flicks.
  59. NathanF.
    May 12, 2004
    2
    By the time the credits started rolling my forehead was red from slapping it so much in stupefied disbelief. This movie can be summed up with a quote from Futurama where Fry says "Wow, it has a vampire AND an explosion." If you liked this film, lean over here so I can slap you.
  60. LindsayM.
    May 21, 2004
    9
    I thought this was an excellent and entertaining movie. I went into the theater skeptical, but found myself really enjoying the film. The only downside was that it was a little long. But don't listen to "steaming turd" kid, it was well worth the price of a movie ticket!
  61. ZachW.
    May 18, 2004
    9
    This was a great movie, no doubt about it. It has all of the original horror movie characters, pretty good acting, (I love Frankenstein) and some really good action. I heard "this movie has no plot", and "there's no way you can mix frankenstein, the werewolf and dracula and come out with a good story". Well, I think it worked, and it worked very well. I would definitely recommend This was a great movie, no doubt about it. It has all of the original horror movie characters, pretty good acting, (I love Frankenstein) and some really good action. I heard "this movie has no plot", and "there's no way you can mix frankenstein, the werewolf and dracula and come out with a good story". Well, I think it worked, and it worked very well. I would definitely recommend this movie if you are into those old horror creatures, but don't want to see a horror movie, but a great action movie. Expand
  62. Mandy
    May 20, 2004
    10
    For all those people who are rating this movie bad you have serious issues... I'm not kidding, really I'm not. I love horror/action movies and this satisfied both. The cast and location couldn't have been better either. Every single aspect was perfect. I could watch the movie over and over again and it wouldn't get boring at all. I throughly enjoyed Van Helsing and so For all those people who are rating this movie bad you have serious issues... I'm not kidding, really I'm not. I love horror/action movies and this satisfied both. The cast and location couldn't have been better either. Every single aspect was perfect. I could watch the movie over and over again and it wouldn't get boring at all. I throughly enjoyed Van Helsing and so should you. Expand
  63. VickyR.
    Jun 11, 2004
    10
    Absolutely the best movie I have ever seen in my life! The whole story ties together into a mysterious romantic thriller. You see the classic villians such as the Wolfman, Dracula's Brides, Count Dracula, and Frankenstien. No other movie can surpass the greatness of such a wonderful movie as this. This movie is simply THE BEST!
  64. IvanaT.
    May 26, 2004
    2
    Everyone here is right. This story DOES have a plot. It's just a crappy one. Ok, so get this. Dracula, who has recently asked Dr. Frankenstein to raise a corpse, tries to use the same method used to revive the Frankenstein monster to bring his thousands of babies back to life. Because he is undead, they are born pre-dead. Thus, he must put life in them. Utter, utter schlock. it was Everyone here is right. This story DOES have a plot. It's just a crappy one. Ok, so get this. Dracula, who has recently asked Dr. Frankenstein to raise a corpse, tries to use the same method used to revive the Frankenstein monster to bring his thousands of babies back to life. Because he is undead, they are born pre-dead. Thus, he must put life in them. Utter, utter schlock. it was probably only made because it gave millions to ILM. Kudos. You have made crappy movie history. Expand
  65. KenG.
    Jun 1, 2004
    5
    Easily the noisest and emptiest movie of the year, Van Helsing even manages to minimize Jackman's innate charisma. While the set designs sometimes excel (Dracula's castle growing OUT of the mountain is an eye-opener), Stephen Sommers, as he did with the Mummy movies, manages to make our favorite scary monsters boring. And what is with Kate's Romanian accent? Slide her back Easily the noisest and emptiest movie of the year, Van Helsing even manages to minimize Jackman's innate charisma. While the set designs sometimes excel (Dracula's castle growing OUT of the mountain is an eye-opener), Stephen Sommers, as he did with the Mummy movies, manages to make our favorite scary monsters boring. And what is with Kate's Romanian accent? Slide her back into leather and the Underworld movies where she's nice eye candy. Expand
  66. BrianD.
    May 22, 2004
    9
    This movie was very exciting and a thriller.
  67. BillE.
    May 6, 2004
    0
    Utterly terrible CGI schlock-fest. And awful CGI at that! There is nothing to recommend in this movie - the acting, plot (lack of), dialogue, music, and - most of all - directing attain new levels of crap. Go only if you feel particularly masochistic.
  68. Bruno
    May 7, 2004
    0
    Id rather die then watch van helsing once more.
  69. MasterChief
    Jun 4, 2004
    2
    The maker of this movie must be flogged in public and then stoned to death!
  70. HannahK.
    May 31, 2004
    10
    It has lots of gross parts but I think it's the best movie I have ever seen! Even my friends think that! I would give it five stars!!!
  71. Hades
    May 8, 2004
    5
    *Sigh*... I'd predicted it would fall into mediocre drivel once I started seeing more and more previews for it, and then once I learned the director of the Mummy films was making it I was really skeptical to even go to it. But gone I have, and dissapointed I am. Rather than try to appeal on a few levels to the audience in really fleshed-out, good ways, the film tries too hard to *Sigh*... I'd predicted it would fall into mediocre drivel once I started seeing more and more previews for it, and then once I learned the director of the Mummy films was making it I was really skeptical to even go to it. But gone I have, and dissapointed I am. Rather than try to appeal on a few levels to the audience in really fleshed-out, good ways, the film tries too hard to appeal to every level and fails on all. It's not properly distributed...the entertainment, it's like they tried to cram in as much random stuff so as not to miss something that could be considered appealling but lost sight of even achieving any one thing remotely interesting or captivating. If you go into the film with low expectations (quite low) you will be pleased, if you go into the movie with reasonable expectations, you will be dissapointed. As expected the CG is good, and there are some definitely interesting locations, but Sommer's use of dialog and attempt at establishing character pale in comparison to the visual elements of his pieces. Yeah, The Mummy films and Van Helsing look great, but taking away the CG elements youre left with a rather sour taste of poor character development and even worse dialog. It wasn't the worst movie made by any means, or even neccesarily "awful" but instead of bursting onto the scene in all its potential glory, Van Helsing stumbles out of the curtain in shame and shuffles off shamefully to the resounding tune of many "boo"s. Expand
  72. TerryD.
    May 8, 2004
    5
    Stephen Sommers previous movies all had a great combination of adventure, action, witty dialog, and gee-wiz factor. This movie sadly does not. It's like a different guy wrote and directed it - a guy not quite as talented as Sommers. Not to say that the movie was badly made or it should be walk out on, but rather just another over-produced, big-budget, summer wiz-bang disappointment. Stephen Sommers previous movies all had a great combination of adventure, action, witty dialog, and gee-wiz factor. This movie sadly does not. It's like a different guy wrote and directed it - a guy not quite as talented as Sommers. Not to say that the movie was badly made or it should be walk out on, but rather just another over-produced, big-budget, summer wiz-bang disappointment. I really hope that this is not a sign that Stephen Sommers best work is behind him - that would the real disappointment. Expand
  73. Kris
    May 8, 2004
    3
    I tried very hard to enjoy this movie - - I really did; I turned off almost all of my brain - - but it just wouldn't click with me. It's a terrible letdown. Perhaps the only enjoyable part for me was the ending, because I was laughing hysterically at it. I wanted badly to scream "Mufasa!" during that sequence. If you were unfortunate enough to pay for this trash, you will know I tried very hard to enjoy this movie - - I really did; I turned off almost all of my brain - - but it just wouldn't click with me. It's a terrible letdown. Perhaps the only enjoyable part for me was the ending, because I was laughing hysterically at it. I wanted badly to scream "Mufasa!" during that sequence. If you were unfortunate enough to pay for this trash, you will know what I mean. Expand
  74. MaxwellS.
    May 8, 2004
    3
    The entire first half of this movie drags along while you continue checking your watch and praying for the end. And while the second half is a bit better, the movie could not be saved. Too bad, I was really looking forward to this one too.
  75. SteveG.
    May 9, 2004
    5
    Van Helsing has a race-along story with plenty of action but never quite lives up to its promise - probably because it falls between various stools. There are nods and references to action movies from James Bond to Indiana Jones as well as untold Dracula and Frankenstein films but it is this tangled mess that lets it down: Van Helsing doesn't know what kind of film it is. There is no Van Helsing has a race-along story with plenty of action but never quite lives up to its promise - probably because it falls between various stools. There are nods and references to action movies from James Bond to Indiana Jones as well as untold Dracula and Frankenstein films but it is this tangled mess that lets it down: Van Helsing doesn't know what kind of film it is. There is no character development and any one-line gags more or less fall flat. Good fun though it is at times and visually enjoyable for both its CGI and fetishistic costumes, the plot groans under the weight of too many improbabilities and handy devices - for example we have to accept the Vatican not only employs adepts and monks from every other religion but they work to invent (among other things) a gas fired crossbow so it works like a machine gun. This movie touches on an interesting idea but never properly explores it: as a savior of the human race a person may rightly or wrongly have to be considered a murderer. But perhaps the film never intended to explore anything more than endless rooms in huge castles. Expand
  76. Kelly
    Jun 1, 2004
    3
    A disappointing film with bad dialog, so-so acting, less than impressive effects, and a really cheesy ending. This movie had great potential, but was unable to deliver the goods.
  77. Triniman
    May 8, 2004
    2
    Van Helsing 1/5 After the film, my friend turned to me and said ?Aren?t you sick of the over-use of computer animation in movies these days?? With Van Helsing, the answer is a resounding YES! This is yet another film that proves that special effects alone cannot make up for a lousy script. The best special effects are still the ones you don?t know are special effects. With VH going after Van Helsing 1/5 After the film, my friend turned to me and said ?Aren?t you sick of the over-use of computer animation in movies these days?? With Van Helsing, the answer is a resounding YES! This is yet another film that proves that special effects alone cannot make up for a lousy script. The best special effects are still the ones you don?t know are special effects. With VH going after vampires and werewolves at the same time, you just knew this was going to be a compromise. There?s nothing particularly scary in the film. The best monster of all happens to be Dr Frankenstein?s monster, who actually does have a heart and a mind. Hommage is paid to James Bond Q department and maybe a bit of Indiana Jones and Spiderman. Unlike Indiana Jones, the Van Helsing character is humourless, flat and uninvolving. The first Spiderman film had a heart. This film has virtually no pulse. With a rating of PG-14, you knew Van Helsing was going to be a juvenile, silly affair, and it hits the mark precisely. There?s got to be a video game version coming soon. Is it worth seeing again or buying on DVD? I don?t think so. Let?s hope there won?t be a sequel. Review by Triniman Expand
  78. Danny&Ron
    May 8, 2004
    7
    Good special effects, nice action, fun lighthearted escapism. Not a serious movie for all you tight as--- who are trying to analyze a summer movie. Lighten up and have fun. The movie was meant to be light and entertaining, not change the world.
  79. JonI.
    May 9, 2004
    3
    I walked into Van Helsing excited at the prospects. I thuroughly enjoyed Sommers' Mummy films. So I went in expecting good action and simply a fun summer film. This even fell short of those low expectations. This was obviously nothing more than a thrown together script with every monster character and cliche Universal had at their disposal. Universal has entrusted way to much to this I walked into Van Helsing excited at the prospects. I thuroughly enjoyed Sommers' Mummy films. So I went in expecting good action and simply a fun summer film. This even fell short of those low expectations. This was obviously nothing more than a thrown together script with every monster character and cliche Universal had at their disposal. Universal has entrusted way to much to this film with a video game, tv series, and unfortunately sequels in the mix already. The only part that made this film worth sitting through was Kate Beckinsale who as usual is stunning. Now the question remains will Universal films continue to jam this crap down our throughts or will they abandone their pointless side projects for this movie. The only future I see for this film is on a five dollar bargain rack collecting dust next to Gigli. Expand
  80. CameronS.
    May 7, 2004
    7
    This movie was fun. It wasn't as bad as people are saying it is. I enjoyed it. It's not the best movie out, but it's not the worst.
  81. MarcW.
    May 7, 2004
    4
    In the past 2 years, I've been sorely disappointed by 2 monster flicks, Underworld and now Van Helsing. I had high hopes for the show and was let down in every way. The plot was clunky, the action boring, the acting, terrible and the characters comical (not in a good way.) Can't believe they messed it up so bad.
  82. Gabe
    May 6, 2004
    9
    This movie will and is awsome cuz it takes place in Romania (w00t).
  83. StevieG
    May 7, 2004
    5
    Have no doubt -- this is a bad movie. I thought it might be fun based on the premise and the previews. It was a little amusing. The script is awful, with so much corny bs that it actually becomes sort of amusing. There is so much illogic to many plot points that it astounds the mind. Most of the technical aspects are decent. The special effects are of decent quality. The sets are Have no doubt -- this is a bad movie. I thought it might be fun based on the premise and the previews. It was a little amusing. The script is awful, with so much corny bs that it actually becomes sort of amusing. There is so much illogic to many plot points that it astounds the mind. Most of the technical aspects are decent. The special effects are of decent quality. The sets are interesting. The locations and constumes are fine. The problem with this movie is the script and the bad accents. Expand
  84. NickM.
    May 12, 2004
    4
    This is a great flick -- if you're a thirteen year old boy. Grossly disappointing, crammed full of noise, flash and spectacle, but even Hugh Jackman's valiant efforts can't hold it all together.
  85. JimR.
    May 10, 2004
    7
    Unlike "The Mummy," this film was quite enjoyable. The sets and cinematography are wonderful (and should be recognized somewhere), and it's full of action. Not a terrific film, but definitely not worth the bad press it's getting.
  86. RichardG.
    May 10, 2004
    2
    This Movie is utterly ridiculous, has hollywood ran out of stories to tell? They have Van Helsing, Dracula, Mr. Hyde, Frankenstein's monster and the Werewolf running around. I almost died with laughter. I just wanted to see Frankenstein bust a colt .45 revolver, that would finish off this movie. This movie should have just been converted into a spoof comedy during the production -- This Movie is utterly ridiculous, has hollywood ran out of stories to tell? They have Van Helsing, Dracula, Mr. Hyde, Frankenstein's monster and the Werewolf running around. I almost died with laughter. I just wanted to see Frankenstein bust a colt .45 revolver, that would finish off this movie. This movie should have just been converted into a spoof comedy during the production -- Oh wait it all ready is -- it just wasn't done intentionally Expand
  87. KateM.
    May 13, 2004
    7
    I thought it was fun. It had excellent special effects and a very hot leading man! It isn't necessarily great movie-making, but it doesn't have to be.
  88. DerekG.
    May 8, 2004
    2
    Words cannot describe what a complete and utter mess this film is, so I won't bother trying.
  89. CraigA.
    May 12, 2004
    7
    Ok so its not the most realistic film you will ever watch, nor is it the most gripping but I have to admit that despite its many flaws Van Helsing managed to entertain me for 2 hours. True a lot of that time i was thinking "oh how convenient that the rope you are swinging from is pointing exactly at the room where the main character is held hostage" etc but if you're after a good Ok so its not the most realistic film you will ever watch, nor is it the most gripping but I have to admit that despite its many flaws Van Helsing managed to entertain me for 2 hours. True a lot of that time i was thinking "oh how convenient that the rope you are swinging from is pointing exactly at the room where the main character is held hostage" etc but if you're after a good popcorn movie where you can turn off your brain, laugh at the charcters (like the ultra camp dracula) and just enjoy it then I would recommend it! Expand
  90. WakoJacko
    May 8, 2004
    0
    DREADFUL...Simply dreadful!
  91. D.Rush
    May 8, 2004
    1
    I spent several hours in deep thought attemping to draw at least one positive feeling out of this movie experience, and thus far I have drawn a blank. I give it a 1 because I liked the font they used for the credits.
  92. Bob
    May 8, 2004
    0
    Oh My God!
  93. PeterM.
    May 8, 2004
    1
    I was screaming "END DAMMIT" in my head through-out most of the movie and, at about 2 hours in, i walked out...
  94. JimS.
    May 13, 2004
    9
    Awesome effects, the plot sucked but it was still lots of fun. The ending isn't as good too, but you should see it for yourself.
  95. WormyMcworm
    May 9, 2004
    2
    2. For the adorability that was David Wenham scuttling around as a little beetle priest. Everybody else sickened me. I genuinely wanted those stupid vampire brides to explode and kill them all.
  96. AlanC.
    May 9, 2004
    0
    What a huge pile of suckass!!! Don't even rent this when it comes to DVD.
  97. SeanL.
    May 6, 2004
    4
    "Van Helsing" was a monster disappointment. I went to an advance screening and the film was WAY too long and there is no character development. The mythologies of Frankenstien, Dracula and the Wolfman shouldn't be mixed. The special effects and CGI are amazing, but that's about it.
  98. SteveC.
    May 13, 2004
    6
    Great special effects. Mediocre acting and story. Fun show to watch... up until the final 5 minutes. If the movie didn't end as it did, I would have rated it at least one point higher.
  99. RobertCritic
    May 6, 2004
    2
    The special effects were amazing. That is about the only positive thing to say about this movie. The acting was wooden, the dialog was shallow and unengaging, but by far, the worst aspect of this movie is the plot. Written for those who recently fell off the turnip truck or who, like Frankenstein, have an abnormal brain, this screenplay is completely devoid of any redeeming qualities and The special effects were amazing. That is about the only positive thing to say about this movie. The acting was wooden, the dialog was shallow and unengaging, but by far, the worst aspect of this movie is the plot. Written for those who recently fell off the turnip truck or who, like Frankenstein, have an abnormal brain, this screenplay is completely devoid of any redeeming qualities and is frankly just stupid and insulting. There is no emotion connection either between the characters or between the characters and the audience. Several plot lines teased throughout the film are left unresolved in a most unsatisfactory way for the viewer. What is most upsetting after viewing this film is the recognition that a concept with such potential was executed in such a poor and wastful way. Expand
  100. RichardG.
    May 10, 2004
    2
    This Movie is utterly ridiculous, has hollywood ran out of stories to tell? They have Van Helsing, Dracula, Mr. Hyde, Frankenstein's monster and the Werewolf running around. I almost died with laughter. I just wanted to see Frankenstein bust a colt .45 revolver, that would finish off this movie. This movie should have just been converted into a spoof comedy during the production -- This Movie is utterly ridiculous, has hollywood ran out of stories to tell? They have Van Helsing, Dracula, Mr. Hyde, Frankenstein's monster and the Werewolf running around. I almost died with laughter. I just wanted to see Frankenstein bust a colt .45 revolver, that would finish off this movie. This movie should have just been converted into a spoof comedy during the production -- Oh wait it all ready is -- it just wasn't done intentionally Expand
Metascore
35

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 38 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 7 out of 38
  2. Negative: 16 out of 38
  1. This creature feature is exhilarating fun, a richly designed and often quite funny re-exploration of the movie past.
  2. Reviewed by: Todd McCarthy
    60
    The sense of evil overkill is entirely representative of the picture itself, which repeatedly looks ready to blow all its fuses due to sensory overload.
  3. Reviewed by: Pete Vonder Haar
    20
    Sommers suspends the laws of time and physics and forces his characters to spout some of the cheesiest dialogue imaginable.