The Wolfman Remade

[goldwyn girl]

Thanks for the review Mike, I'm looking forward to seeing it !

 

[vintage68]

I'm heading out to catch an afternoon matinee, so I'll post again once I've seen it.

 

[John in Covina]

I saw it this morning, the 10:30am showing at the local AMC theater. I enjoyed it thoroughly, to me it was well made paid homage to some of the old werewolf-wolfman films and broke some new ground without taking liberties. There are a couple of scenes that were errie where Benicio Del Toro looked a lot like Lon Chaney Jr and that made my happy to see such a love for the original. The transformation scenes were well done too. I don't see why the critics are so down on it.

Victorian horror monster picture fun.

 

[vintage68]

Saw it this afternoon. I thought they did a very good job evoking Victorian England. The sets and the costumes were really well done. Very atmospheric.

Unfortunately to the right of me some guy was texting throughout the entire film, and just in front and below me a girl texted three or four times so I was pretty annoyed and distracted. I swear, sometimes I despair for our species...

Anyway, I'll have to see it again before I decide one way or the other, but I think it was well done.

 

[Zombie_61]

I'd heard around that CGI will be used for some of the wolfman transformation scenes (some in the trailers look fairly obvious). I'll hold back any judgment on that til seeing the movie, but I if that's true I am bummed for Rick Baker. No doubt he and his team did a lot to make the character and his transformation spectacular.

According to an article in the Jan/Feb issue of Rue Morgue magazine, Joe Johnston accepted the job of director only three weeks before shooting was scheduled to begin. As such, that did not leave enough time for Rick Baker and his crew to design and create the makeup effects that would be necessary for the transformation scenes in addition to the fully transformed makeup effects he and his crew were already working on. Also, Johnston wanted the flexibility CGI offers so that he could make last-minute changes to any transformation shots that weren't "working".

Also in the article, Baker said if Universal had given him complete control over the transformation scenes he would have used "a hell of a lot" of CGI himself.

I don't see why the critics are so down on it.

I haven't read a lot of reviews because I want to see the film spoiler-free; there are too many critics out there who think nothing of revealing critical plot points like they're handing out Halloween candy.

Of the few I've skimmed, it seems critics who are fans of the classic Universal and Hammer horror films are kinder and more receptive to this film than critics who prefer what passes for "horror" films these days.

 

[Solid Citizen]

Wolfman (NOT Jack)

Tried to see it today, but so many with cabin FEVER & still too many huge snow piles in the mall parking lots, will have to wait!

Solid Citizen

PS CALLING Larry Talbot

 

[Zombie_61]

I saw The Wolfman this afternoon and I have to say I really liked it, but I didn't love it.

Benicio Del Toro's performance as Lawrence Talbot is a bit too understated at times, and doesn't quite generate the sympathy Lon Chaney Jr. achieved for the character in the '41 version. Aside from that, I felt the performances were believable and, thankfully, there are no "comic relief" characters. Nice to see David Schofield (the dart player in The Slaughtered Lamb from An American Werewolf In London), but don't blink or you'll miss him (my way of saying his part isn't much more than an extended cameo). And, for the particularly alert, Rick Baker has a very brief cameo appearance as well.

Rick Baker's makeup effects IMO are realistic (given the premise, that is) and believable, and I liked the character design for the fully transformed wolfman. The CGI effects, though quite good, aren't flawless; scenes of the werewolf running through the streets and rooftops of London, for example, are of the "close, but not quite" variety. Still, I didn't find them bad enough to be distracting.

A tweak or two aside, the story plays like an expanded version of the '41 film; the Talbot family history and relationships between the characters are simply fleshed out a bit more (no pun intended) than in the original...until the "twist", that is, after which the film is pretty predictable even with this added element. Actually, I could see the "twist" coming from the beginning of the film, and it's the main reason I didn't "love" the film. I could have done without it; your mileage may vary.

That said, I would recommend this film to anyone who is a fan of the Universal and Hammer classic horror films, or anyone else who expresses an interest. It's not perfect, but IMO it's far better than most of the other remakes we've seen in recent years.

 

[Doublegun]

I saw The Wolfman this afternoon and I have to say I really liked it, but I didn't love it.

Benicio Del Toro's performance as Lawrence Talbot is a bit too understated at times, and doesn't quite generate the sympathy Lon Chaney Jr. achieved for the character in the '41 version. Aside from that, I felt the performances were believable and, thankfully, there are no "comic relief" characters. Nice to see David Schofield (the dart player in The Slaughtered Lamb from An American Werewolf In London), but don't blink or you'll miss him (my way of saying his part isn't much more than an extended cameo). And, for the particularly alert, Rick Baker has a very brief cameo appearance as well.

Rick Baker's makeup effects IMO are realistic (given the premise, that is) and believable, and I liked the character design for the fully transformed wolfman. The CGI effects, though quite good, aren't flawless; scenes of the werewolf running through the streets and rooftops of London, for example, are of the "close, but not quite" variety. Still, I didn't find them bad enough to be distracting.

A tweak or two aside, the story plays like an expanded version of the '41 film; the Talbot family history and relationships between the characters are simply fleshed out a bit more (no pun intended) than in the original...until the "twist", that is, after which the film is pretty predictable even with this added element. Actually, I could see the "twist" coming from the beginning of the film, and it's the main reason I didn't "love" the film. I could have done without it; your mileage may vary.

That said, I would recommend this film to anyone who is a fan of the Universal and Hammer classic horror films, or anyone else who expresses an interest. It's not perfect, but IMO it's far better than most of the other remakes we've seen in recent years.

For those of you who have seen it: my 16-year old daughter really wants to go to the movie. I am not overly concerned about the blood and stuff but I hear there is a little sexual activity in the movie - is there and is it explicit?

Thanks

 

[handlebar bart]

For those of you who have seen it: my 16-year old daughter really wants to go to the movie. I am not overly concerned about the blood and stuff but I hear there is a little sexual activity in the movie - is there and is it explicit?

Thanks

No sex scenes in the movie but alot of people getting tore to bits.

 

[Zombie_61]

I concur with Handlebar Bart. Scenes between Gwen Conliffe and Lawrence Talbot are of a romantic nature rather than a sexual nature; certainly less explicit than many of the things seen on network television in recent years.

 

[Caity Lynn]

I haven't seen the original. But I'm glad I haven't because I generally despise remakes with a passion. That being said....

My opinion....

Amazing effects. Absolutely stunning. Several overly typical lines that just made me giggle in the delivery. Typical plot, but then again, there are only two ways a Werewolf movie can really go. Anthony Hopkins was sheer perfection. Props to Emily Blunt- the girl who played Gwen. I'm glad to see her in a large role, and I liked how she played it. Most actresses who get in situations like that "suddenly" realize they are now incredibly athletic and remarkably good shots or sword-fighters, and are now no longer attached to the infected. I hate that. If a woman has been brought up in that time era, and is a blushing wilting flower the rest of the film. Have her running, terrified, and trying to save the man up until the last possible second. Which she did. Bravo. The asylum scene was phenomenal. Gave me cold chills. Over all I'd give it a 5-6 on my movie scale. Cute Werewolf film.


I found it too gory for my taste though, but then again, I'm not a big blood and guts gal. I have a thing about necks, having my throat slit or clawed is my biggest fear, can't stand people touching mine, etc...so there were some scenes that got to me lol. Interesting V-day date movie

 

[Edward]

I saw it last night, and enjoyed it very much. The "twist", yes.... I have no strong feelings o that either way - I found it perfectly acceptable. I doubt I'd have missed it, but I certainly didn't feel it lessened the quality of the whole. It did make me very glad it wasn't Ang Lee in the director's chair though, given how he completely ruined The Hulk with a similar device. What I had feared particularly was that they would turn it into an action film with little or no character development. However, it seems to me that they managed well the mix of action and plot, nice (and rare enough) to see in a contemporary release for the mainstream market. Regarding its relationship to the original, well, other than the title and a few character names and relationships, really it replicates little from the 1941 version that isn't simple genre staple. The Victorian setting (as opposed to the contemporary approach taken in the Lon Chaney original) helps to distinguish it too. In many ways it put me in mind of the kind of film I should expect Hammer to be producing in 2010, were they still in business.

One small aside - I had far more sympathy for this Talbot with his conflicted feelings of attraction and guilt regarding his dead brother's fiance than I did for Lon Chaney's Talbot who, if memory serves, knowingly attempted to win away another man's fiance...

 

[rkwilker]

Count me in as one who liked this film. Picture has a great look to it. I would recommend it. It does pay homage to the original.

 

[mike]

Did anyone catch the scenes and specific shot that seemed to be referencing and comparing him to the main character in Goethe's The Sorrows of Young Werther?

There is a segment when Lawrence is wearing similar clothes to that classic painting depicting Werther looking out over the precipice. (Who painted that? The name escapes me at the moment... William Hunt?) I believe they framed one shot specifically to reference that painting.

Which then begs the question, are they trying to make him a Werther-like character? The film takes place in 1891, well after the copycat Werther tragic romantic suicide craze, but why split hairs in a mainstream Hollywood film over hundred(s) year old European lore. Some may argue, but I don't think he's pining for a romance, rather attempting to pick up the pieces of a shattered family. It's nowhere near word for word Goethe, but I do believe elements have been thrown into the mix. Wandering through the wilderness contending with severe melancholy over having no one to turn to and no answers in sight feels like... THE SORROWS OF YOUNG WERE-THER!

 

[Zombie_61]

Did anyone catch the scenes and specific shot that seemed to be referencing and comparing him to the main character in Goethe's The Sorrows of Young Werther?

Oh, good call! If it wasn't intentional, it may have been subliminal. Being a fan of the classic Universal horror films, I was more focused on his wardrobe in that scene, which appeared to be a nod to Henry Hull's wardrobe in Werewolf of London. [That always made me laugh--he's a werewolf, but he has the presence of mind to don his cloak and flat cap?]

I saw The Wolfman again today with a lifelong friend, and enjoyed it more than the first time. My friend saw it on Friday and, as he put it, "Now that I know it's not the horrible remake I was expecting, I want to relax and see it again to see if it holds up." I was of the same mindset, so off we went.

I was able to appreciate the subtle nuances of Del Toro's performance a bit better this time around. And I have to agree with Caity Lynn, Emily Blunt's performance is spot-on and very appropriate for the era. I'm still not completely sold on the "twist", but now that I know it exists rather than waiting to find out whether or not it would happen, I was able to better appreciate that as well.

If only someone would produce a functional version of the wolf's head cane...

 

[Flat Foot Floey]

There is a segment when Lawrence is wearing similar clothes to that classic painting depicting Werther looking out over the precipice. (Who painted that? The name escapes me at the moment... William Hunt?) I believe they framed one shot specifically to reference that painting.

Caspar David Friedrich
And I don´t think its an actual portait of Werther or reffering to Goethe in any way. It´s just called "Wanderer über dem Nebelmeer" and seems to be a self portrait of the nature loving painter. This "big nature, small human" thing is characteristic for the european romanticism. Well if you put it this way...the wolf is stronger than the civilised man

I am looking forward to see this movie too. Have to wait a bit longer than you, cause the release date in Germany is later.

 

[Sam Craig]

I drove a couple hours to a big city theater to see Wolfman with my two sons and we all enjoyed it greatly

A very nice nod to the original, without being condescending

Also ... and I hope this is a trend ... as was the case with the new Star Trek, Wolfman headed in something of a new direction ... with the period costuming and refined look

It's exciting to see new life breathed into these great stories ... and that IS where they begin ... with a terrific story

Stephen King once wrote about the excitement of storying telling ... where you have something that you just HAVE to pass on and we all sit around with held breath ans the new tale is told

That's what you are seeing with these new films. Sure the special effects are great, but what MAKES them is the writing

Hollywood is still awash in poor films that rely on lots of movement and action, but great stories will always be appreciated.

 

[mike]

Caspar David Friedrich
And I don´t think its an actual portait of Werther or reffering to Goethe in any way. It´s just called "Wanderer über dem Nebelmeer" and seems to be a self portrait of the nature loving painter. This "big nature, small human" thing is characteristic for the european romanticism. Well if you put it this way...the wolf is stronger than the civilised man

I am looking forward to see this movie too. Have to wait a bit longer than you, cause the release date in Germany is later.

YES!!! THANK YOU! I had this painting on the cover of my copy of the book which I read in college. It's in a box... somewhere :eusa_doh:

 

[Feraud]

props

The Wolfman's arms

 

[coble]

i really enjoyed it

i really enjoyed this movie. Saturdays at my father in laws its called sci fi saturdays. But we both really enjoy well made monster movies. We watched werewolf in london, and we though the wolfman was just all out well made.
I saw it in theaters with my wife. It is listen as one of my favorite movies of the year. I loved the clothes and hats. Its why i am buying a homburg soon. I've been looking for a coat with the fur on it, it looks really comfortable.
But i give it a thumbs up. I thought the acting was well done, and the cinematography was flat out awesome. When he changes to the wolfman is just classic. It reminds me a lot of the werewolf in london.