Metascore
35

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 38 Critics What's this?

User Score
5.5

Mixed or average reviews- based on 248 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Starring: , , , ,
  • Summary: Gabriel Van Helsing (Jackman) is a man cursed with a past he cannot recall and driven by a mission he cannot deny. Charged by a secret organization to seek out and defeat evil the world over, his efforts to rid the world of its nightmarish creatures have been rewarded with the title thatGabriel Van Helsing (Jackman) is a man cursed with a past he cannot recall and driven by a mission he cannot deny. Charged by a secret organization to seek out and defeat evil the world over, his efforts to rid the world of its nightmarish creatures have been rewarded with the title that now follows him: murderer. (Universal Pictures) Expand
Watch On
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. 63
    For all its tangle of characters and plot twists, Van Helsing isn't the slightest bit involving, and more than once (especially whenever Beckinsale is onscreen), it is unintentionally hilarious. But it's the rare kind of movie where the badness just adds to the fun.
  3. Universal Studios has unloaded its entire monster catalog in this movie, which is aimed at people with the attention span of a kindergartner. Shreds of coherence and character have been sacrificed to fangs and fisticuffs at every chance.
  4. 40
    Van Helsing wears its price tag on its ruffled lamé sleeve. And yet it gives off an aura of what I can only call lavish cheapness.
  5. 38
    The biggest crime of Van Helsing is that it resurrects classic monsters and fails to make them scary. With a full 132 minutes of feeble jokes and gimcrack phantasmagoria, it's not spine-tingling - it's butt-numbing.
  6. 30
    The road of excess leads to the palace of boredom in this overblown monster epic.
  7. Sommers film just lies there, weighted down by a complete lack of wit, artfulness and internal logic. So it's a disaster -- a big, loud, boring wreck.

See all 38 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 54 out of 127
  2. Negative: 51 out of 127
  1. MaddieS.
    Sep 27, 2005
    10
    I guess people hate this movie, huh? Well, I'm weird.
  2. Mar 18, 2014
    10
    I don't understand why people think this is a lame or poor movie. I think it's awesome, fun, CGI was decent, I liked how werewolfs were madeI don't understand why people think this is a lame or poor movie. I think it's awesome, fun, CGI was decent, I liked how werewolfs were made and many more. It is such a shame that actually some good vampire movies have a sigma of bad movie because there are vampires in it, movies like this should be more better because it's something you can't see in a real life, so that you can enjoy it on the big screen. Expand
  3. 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. PeopleWow. 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
  4. 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 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
  5. Nov 28, 2012
    5
    Shallow storytelling and it really only amounts up to a CGI showcase.
  6. [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 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
  7. 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 onVan 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

See all 127 User Reviews

Trailers