Van Helsing reboot starring Tom Cruise is not an April Fool’s joke producer assures in interview . . .
“Well, I don’t want to give away too much, because we are actually at the very beginning of talking about what to do with it. But I do feel like the Van Helsing that Anthony Hopkins plays in Dracula is sort of the parody version of it, and the Van Helsing that Hugh Jackman played was obviously in a different place as well. I think that these kinds of movies have evolved a lot since then. You know, The Dark Knight was a major, major corner-turning moment in the way that genre and superhero stories could be told. Really grounded in reality. Really grounded in really cool things. That’s what I’d like to do without sacrificing the fantasy element. We aspired to do that as well on Star Trek, you know, keep it “real.” That’s such a different franchise than Batman, but that’s really what we wanted to do. And we’d love to do that with Van Helsing.”
Why anyone would want to remake Van Helsing is a bit of a mystery. The original 2004 movie starring Hugh Jackman and Kate Beckinsale directed by Stephen Sommers cost a whopping $160 million to make and only made about $300 million worldwide. Once you calculate in marketing costs and exhibitors’ cuts then it is doubtful the movie made much of a profit – if any. The movie isn’t even particularly beloved either, scoring a lowly 5.7 out of 10 at Internet Movie Database and 34 out of a 100 at Rotten Tomatoes.
Kurtzman and Cruise are also planning a new Mummy movie, also for Universal. There seem to be a complete dearth of creativity at Universal. The studio is also planning to revive its moribund Jurassic Park franchise for example. What’s next? A Jaws remake?