There are certain films which make a critic reassess their philosophy on the criticism of movies. For me, Hellboy is just such a film. The fact of the matter is that for the most part, I enjoyed my movie-going experience, but for all the wrong reasons. This is a movie that is so bad, its good. But how to grade this? Do I look at it strictly by the book, and take into account the movie only as it stands “on paper,” (performances, script, special effects, etc.), or do I attempt to critique something much more difficult to assign words to: my perception of the movie? This is what makes film criticism a tougher job than just thumbs up and thumbs down (shamelessly tooting my own horn and putting down Ebert & Roeper all in the same sentence!). The long and the short of it though is that its a little of both, and that’s why Hellboy is neither a complete failure nor success.
I only own a few comic books. A couple “American Splendor” issues, and a few “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles” comics from the late 80’s and early 90’s. Although I am not well-versed in comics, I am familiar with a lot of the titles which have recently been adapted into movies. One which I had not heard of though was Hellboy. Thus, all I know about the characters mythology is what the movie tells us. Hellboy is a demon who is discovered during by American troops during a World War 2 invasion of the Nazis. Raised by Professor Bruttenholm as his son, Hellboy is an interesting mix between Frankenstein and the Hulk, and still manages to find time to crack jokes and fight evil.
Had writer/director Guillermo del Toro taken a little extra time to create some sort of coherent script, Hellboy would have been a success. The script makes so little sense, that any person even inattentively watching would be able to point out multiple flaws, and even the most attentive viewer would be confused. But here again I am presented with my paradox: had the movie taken itself more seriously and had del Toro written a tighter script, would I have been able to enjoy such things like the hilarious S&M assassin or David Hyde Pierce voiced aquatic side-kick -- things that work with the unintentional silly tone?
Ron Perlman may be best known for his voice-work in various animated TV shows and movies. But playing Hellboy is the best career move of his life. He is the best thing about this movie, plain and simple. His interpretation of Hellboy is not only deftly comedic, but genuinely touching at parts. As for the rest of cast, I wasn’t really impressed. Selma Blair - best known for playing the heavy in Legally Blonde - gives a particularly dull performance as the love interest, and Rupert Evans who plays Hellboy’s keeper, is completely unmemorable.
It’s true, I enjoyed Hellboy, thanks mostly due to Ron Perlman. It’s also true that Hellboy is a bad movie, as on paper, it‘s a tired attempt to jump on the comic-book band wagon and is littered with many “straight-to-video” attributes. As a critic, it is my job to strike some sort of balance between these two competing interpretations. Thus please allow me to free-associate for a moment: balance...middle...mediocre...Hellboy.
Grade: C
© 2004 Jacob Sproul