Hellboy

Hellboy 2004

When it comes to adapting comic book properties for the silver screen, audiences have earned the right to be concerned.

These days it’s not just a question of whether the movie can capture the comic’s essence. Even more challenging is creating a finished product that appeals to fans and general audiences without insulting either.

Guillermo del Toro’s 2004 adaptation of Mike Mignola’s Hellboy stands as a rare comic-to-film translation that honors the source material while embodying the director’s vision.

What makes this such a successful adaptation is its ability to capture the comics’ dark atmosphere without losing the fun and adventure. Del Toro’s keen eye fills each frame with intricate details. And the Gothic aesthetic perfectly complements Mignola’s art.

One of Hellboy’s key strengths is its ability to juggle different tones and genres without coming off as disjointed. The film seamlessly transitions from horror to action to comedy and back, without ever losing sight of the characters or the stakes at play.

This impressive consistency is due to del Toro’s expert direction, which balances the film’s various elements and keeps the pacing tight throughout.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Not only did del Toro’s Hellboy receive critical acclaim upon release, it has since become a cult classic beloved by fans and newcomers.

Hellboy tells the story of a demon summoned to Earth during World War II in a Thule Society ritual gone awry. Raised by Professor Trevor “Broom” Bruttenholm – who, in a scene that wouldn’t be allowed these days, professes Catholicism – the red-skinned, stone-armed creature instead becomes a defender of humanity.

Fast forward to 2004. Hellboy works for the Bureau for Paranormal Research and Defense, fighting preternatural threats alongside the amphibious empath Abe Sapien and pyrokinetic Liz Sherman.

At the heart of Hellboy‘s success is its titular character, brought to life by Ron Perlman’s masterful performance.

Known for his powerful on-screen presence, Perlman’s portrayal of the horned hero is nothing short of iconic. He captures Hellboy’s gruff exterior and wry sense of humor. But he also imbues the character with a touch of vulnerability that make him feel three-dimensional.

The title character could easily have turned out one-dimensional in lesser hands. But Perlman manages to infuse a demon with genuine humanity. No mean feat.

High praise also goes to Doug Jones and David Hyde Pierce, who provide Abe’s physical and vocal performances, respectively.

And Pierce is such a class act that he refused accolades for his voice work, crediting the refined yet affable portrayal to Jones alone.

But the performances are just where Hellboy’s excellence starts.

The film’s visuals are stunning. That’s a rare compliment in the digital age. But from its detailed makeup and prosthetics to its elaborate sets and costumes, the movie create a world that feels otherworldly yet grounded in reality.

That’s how you know you’re watching a Guillermo del Toro movie.

And it’s thanks to del Toro’s insistence on prioritizing practical effects that Hellboy’s visuals hold up 20 years later.

Nor is del Toro stingy with his gifts. We’re treated to a standout sequence One of stands right at the opening. The scene with American and German soldiers fighting over an arcane device as sorcerers use it to open a hell portal is a masterclass in visual storytelling.

Bonus points for the sound, including minimal dialogue and the haunting score, which sets the stage for Hellboy’s arrival. The sequence sets the tone for the rest of the movie, establishing the world and its characters in an efficient way that resonates emotionally.

But while Hellboy is a feast for the eyes, it doesn’t forget the heart. The father-son relationship betwee Professor Broom and Hellboy forms the emotional core of the film. John Hurt brings warmth and gravitas to the Professor that gets the viewer on Broom and Hellboy’s side from their first scene.

The film’s themes of family, identity, and yes, faith, are all explored through the lens of Hellboy’s struggle to belong, with results as moving as they are thrilling.

Of course, no discussion of Hellboy would be complete without mentioning its villains. Grigori Rasputin – imagined here as a Lovecraftian wizard – and his followers make formidable and memorable antagonists.

Roden’s Rasputin projects a cold menace that makes him a terrifying foil for Hellboy.

But even the otherworldly hypermage Rasputin is upstaged by occultist, clockwork ninja, and Hitler’s top guy, Colonel Dr. Karl Ruprect Kroenen.

Karl Ruprecht Kroenen

From the second we see this guy stick his hand into a giant whirling gyroscope without flinching, he projects palpable fear in every scene he’s in.

Despite having zero dialogue.

Except one chuckle that’s among the most unnerving in recent cinema history.

The action in Hellboy is also top-notch. Del Toro’s eye for detail and sense of pacing make each set piece feel engaging and necessary. From Hellboy’s first confrontation with the monstrous Sammael to the unabashedly Lovecraftian finale, the visceral action stays pitch perfect.

But not because it’s nonstop. Del Toro understands that keeping dramatic tension piano wire-tight throughout an entire movie is exhausting. So he gives us just enough character moments and comic relief to stave off fatigue.

And while the film doesn’t shy away from violence, it never feels gratuitous. Each fight advances the plot and deepens the characters.

That is the difference between action and mere violence. And del Toro hits the sweet spot.

In the end, what makes Hellboy a near-perfect movie is its ability to balance spectacle and emotion. It’s full of stunning visuals and rollercoaster action, but it never loses sight of its characters and their goals. The result is a thrill ride and a heartfelt exploration of what it means to be human.

Using a demon protagonist.

Only Milton does it better.

Overall, Hellboy meets the gold standard for comic book movie adaptations. It captures the heart of the source material while standing on its own as a fun, complete movie that’s almost perfect.

Almost.

The relationships between the movie’s main characters – even the fish-out-of-water Agent Myers – stand out as complex and compelling. You get filial, fraternal, and paternal love, and even a mentor-protege dynamic.

Where the character interactions fall short is in the romance department.

Hate to say it, but Selma Blair’s Liz Sherman strikes a discordant note. Her chemistry with Hellboy comes off as more of an informed attribute than a real romantic bond.

And while her character has high competence and is well-liked by other characters, those sliders aren’t set quite high enough to compensate for her rather grating demeanor.

Every time I watch Hellboy, I get the sneaking suspicion that Blair would rather be in another movie.

Her performance errs on the side of mistaking grumpiness for a personality.

Scenes with Liz just aren’t as much fun. Despite being a fire starter, she throws cold water on the proceedings.

Liz Sherman

It’s not a deal-breaker, though. Because she’s not in the movie that much.

Which is why I still give Hellboy (2004) a high recommend.

Go watch it

 

And for a journey through hell that’s just as thrilling, but with space pirates, read my debut horror-adventure novel:

Nethereal

6 Comments

  1. Somehow I never actually watched this one. I did see the sequel, though. I think these films came out at the wrong time for me in my life to watch them properly. It’s not the first film of its kind from that era that I just missed out on.

    Never saw the reboot, though. I just assume it was trash. Rare that they’re not.

    • Your intuition serves you well. The reboot was a commercial and critical disaster.

      Do yourself a favor and watch Hellboy 1 tonight.

  2. Tom M.

    Note should also be made of Manning, whose portrayal of a humorless bureaucrat and annoying representative of the powers that be would in most works remain as flat as his carefully pressed suits. Yet in this film he’s a character with real growth and a scene of physically unexceptional but timely and heartfelt action that leads to mutual respect and a peace offering with the protagonist (conveyed wonderfully without ever breaking the Manning’s crotchety and condescending manner).

    In an important way Manning is a reflection to Myers, approaching the same story from the opposite direction. Myers is new to the supernatural world and dealing with the wonder and horror of it all while Manning is jaded and cynical. Where Myers must learn the how’s of working in this new world, Manning has to learn (or, depending on how one imagines his backstory, relearn) the why’s – the heroism and courage that is underneath all the dead bodies, destruction, and masquerade cover-ups.

    The standard protagonist in stories like this is young, male, naive, & idealistic – an underlying desire to fight the good fight is natural and effectively assumed, and the character’s ignorance allows him to be a stand-in for an audience that must also be introduced to the artificial world. Yet in this age of limited idealism, pervasive quantification (government and corporate alike), and an overabundance of mere spectacle courtesy of modern special effects, Manning is in many ways a more representative audience avatar than Myers (at least for non-teenagers), and his character growth is a very practical sort of moral lesson.

  3. Sam

    Great movie. The premise of a demon being “born” instead of a fallen angel threw me off, but so much of the story, performances, and technical filmmaking made me go along with it. I see it more as a monster created to do harm, but with faith he chooses to follow a righteous path.

    This is also one of the last fantasy/supernatural movies where practical effects were given priority and CGI wasn’t relied on for everything.

  4. Rudolph Harrier

    The Del Toro Hellboy movie is one of those adaptations that changes quite a lot while still nailing the overall feel of the original. In the comics Hellboy and Liz never had a hint of romantic relationship, Kroenen was a softspoken non-action germaphobe, Hellboy’s existence has been known about to the world for years, Hellboy is much more mature and jaded at this point (after all, he’s effectively 60 years old at this point), etc. Major characters, such as Kate Corrigan, don’t show up at all. And of course the specifics of the plot change greatly, with the original Seed of Destruction focusing on a Poe/Lovecraft style gothic horror adventure in an ancient manor, and the movie being a more action oriented romp centered around the city, and later Russia.

    But somehow it ends up feeling like something that COULD have happened in some sort of alternate universe Hellboy comic. A lot of the changes made sense; for example since the movie doesn’t have the ability to alternate between modern day and flashback plots, it can’t really establish Hellboy as someone naive who matured over time. This is our introduction to the character, so he starts in a place where he can grow (and there are hints of Hellboy’s jaded nature, such as his comments about his job being mainly to beat up stuff that is pretty similar to himself.) I think that Hellboy works much better as a big brother/mentor figure to Liz, not a love interest, but I understand that they wanted a romance plot and since there would be no way to fit Kate into this action heavy plot (and certainly not Alice), Liz was the only option. (Plus it’s not completely random, as Hellboy is immune to Liz’s fire.)

    In contrast the Hellboy reboot built itself up on taking a plot more directly from the comic, and maybe it did (I never saw it.) But the feel seemed completely wrong, and starting a reboot with The Wild Hunt/The Storm and the Fury (a plot that works as a capstone to Hellboy’s whole life) is insane. And that’s without getting into the insanity of the freak out over Ben Daimio’s casting (a character who doesn’t even appear in that story!) while making the most Irish character to ever appear in a comic black.

    Apparently there is another reboot coming out, though I am firmly in the mode of “I’ll wait at least three years to see if it has any merit.” The only thing interesting about it is that it is adapting “The Crooked Man,” which is all about Appalachian witches that sell their souls to the literal devil. There’s no way that you can do that plot at all without invoking Christianity, so it should be interesting to see whether modern Hollywood allows that. But not interesting enough for me to see it without waiting a long time for a proper vetting.

Comments are closed