Wolfman: Yay or Nay?

[TheWolfman]

 I seen the new movie today, and iam pleased with it. Its not really a remake, but a new version of the Talbot story. We monster fans all know the story of the 1941 original, and after seeing the new movie, there is definetly some surprises and twists to this new movie. Some of the character names are the same, a few different additions to the characters storylines are not the same as the original, but all in all it was a good movie. For all new Wolfman fans who dont know the original version from 1941, lets just say it has its differeances. The wolfman scenes are great, and the way the wolfman is built in his upper body & shoulders are very muscular very  cool. Looking forward to the dvd release in the summer.

[SirJon]

fmofmpls,

Yes, i agree the characters and overall sequence of events were all there (and i did notice the Conliffe antique shop was VERY similar to the original set). I think i need to see it again (maybe tonight) because like i said i went in expecting to see a more direct remake like Halloween. I guess some of the things they changed i wasn't expecting and they bothered me. I didn't like the relationship change between Sir John and Larry, as well as the fact that Gwen was his brothers fiance'/wife or whatever. I missed the Jenny Williams character and her crazy mother. I mean in retrospect some of the scenes were still there like Larry going back to see Gwen at the shop, the telescope scene w/ Sir John. I dunno maybe i'm just too closed minded but this is a remake of a movie I watched thousands of times as a kid and I feel like it should have been a more straight forward remake.

[artistguy]

Hey Terry I.,

Just came back from seeing the Wolfman... LOVED IT!!!!!!! and your review!

[packy120353]

I can't wait! Rats the wife is out of town til tomorrow night...and I have kids... But there is an 11:30pm showing tomorrow-  that's almost perfect! How much Mountain Dew would that take!

[depressedlarrytalbot]

The thing is that as a remake it lets you have your cake and eat it too. Nothing detracts from the original, while the new one carries over sufficient elements to say that the filmmakers acknowledge and honour their creative debt to the Chaney film, but give us enough new stuff to make things interesting.

I haven't seen the more recent version of PSYCHO but the consensus among friends who have, was that it was pointless.

If you're a Marvel reader, it may help to think of this as 'ULTIMATE WOLFMAN'. That is, unless you detest the 'Ultimates' universe [I don't, and again, nothing invalidates the original which is still there. This is also literally the case with STAR TREK now, which even goes to the length of telling us the original universe remains]

[Halloween Jeff]

     

     After seeing "The Wolfman" today, I feel more disappointed than anything else....I was hoping "Wolfman" will usher in a new era for the Universal Monster creatures, but aside from the special effects, which were excellent (I especially liked the scene with the Wolfman howling at the full moon), I was less than impressed with the story.

     Del Toro didn't display any of the pathos I associate with Chaney's Talbot, although the continuity with character names was a nice touch, but Anthony Hopkins is no Claude Rains either.

     Still, seeing a new werewolf movie is always good.


Bizarro Jeff

[TheWolfman]

 I was surprised how they put Gwyen as a future Talbot  family member. The death of his brother, the telescope scene, the gypsy woman miliva, and the antique store was the only things they kept in the story from the original. I was glad they kept most of the original character names, but the other twists were very un-expected. I dont want to say too much for those who havent seen it, but the wolfman scenes, close up wit his snawrl, and roars were great. And his muscular build was great.

[Toy Ranch]

Just got back from seeing it.

The good:

The sets, atmosphere, costumes, special effects, and most of all the MONSTER were brilliant.

The soso:

The movie featured some marvelous actors, but I thought Hugo Weaving stole the show from Del Toro and Hopkins, even with less screen time and lines.   I never felt like Hopkins was fully engaged in the role, and Del Toro never seemed to achieve the proper sense of urgency, even though he had some exquisite moments.  Emily Blunt did a nice job too.  

The bad:

I'm usually a big fan of Danny Elfman, from his Oingo Boingo days and through his career in film scores, but this was not a good effort from him.

The spoilers (black on black text):




I thought the movie was boring.  It was just the gothic horror tale we want it to be, and it was boring.  There were exciting action sequences, not in the typical action-adventure sense, but in the classic horror sense...  it wasn't a roller coaster, it wasn't deep, the story was like a dark ride at the State Fair, where you pay $5 to get in a little car and see a couple of cool things before it spits you out the other side.  Certainly there are other gothic horror movies in Universal's canon which are more boring than The Wolfman, but there are also many better.  The place it failed for me is that it gave the characters rather complex interpersonal scenarios, and never developed them very well, aside from making it known that they exist.  And the part of classic horror that I think we all love the most is the struggle between the man and the monster in one person.  Del Toro arrived as a successful actor, only to be attacked and turn into a werewolf.  His humanity was never really established before he was attacked, and his struggle with the monster inside him was never fully explored, only his anguish at his situation.  Hopkins was at peace with his monster, but the relationship between him and his son(s) was not only never explained, it didn't make a lot of sense.  



To sum it up:
It had all the elements of a great gothic horror story, and it's a solid effort from Universal, but in the end... it's not a great movie.  A good movie, but not a great one.  I HOPE it's very successful so Universal will so some others.  It is a million billion times better than Van Helsing.  I liked it better than the Kong, the War of the Worlds, the Forbidden Planet, etc. remakes too.  

[kreaturekid]

I had soooo much hope for this movie, but im disappointed. Iv seen it twice trying to find good in the bad but i just can't seem to not be let down. I think they made it to much of a bloody action movie rather then real horror. I thought the wolfman looked great! But the ending i thought was terrible and corney (the battle scene), really ruined it for me.

[Toy Ranch]

I was hoping "Wolfman" will usher in a new era for the Universal Monster creatures,

I think it's too early to say it won't.  All it has to do is make a nice profit for Universal, and they'll make more.  Perhaps one of them will be a great movie.  The movies we remember and talk about from the classic era...  there were others that were utter flops.  Movies that got all the hype but didn't deliver.  Dracula's Daughter comes to mind right off...   if you were expecting a timeless tale and a great movie...  you probably had your expectations set too high.  I was hoping for better than Van Helsing or those Mummy movies...  and I'm happy that it achieved that.

[monsterphile]

I just got back from seeing it with my wife and daughter (almost 13).  I was concerned that there might be too much gore for my daughter, but after reading some, decided that it probably wouldn't be gratuitous.   I feel that it wasn't and would rather my daughter  (and myself for that matter) watch this 10 times over than watch 10 minutes of a Rob Zombie movie.  If anyone is looking for an exact remake, you're fooling yourself.  No one can ever capture the identical feeling of the films back then and still be financially successful. 

In THE WOLFMAN, the visceral attacks and the blood were quick and the camera didn't linger on it for shock value.  The coloring of the film (at least to me) at night seemed subdued giving it an almost black & white look to it.  The cinematography as a whole was beautifully shot and I thought a lot of attention was given to capturing the look of the period.  There were several times during the film when I looked at Del Toro and was quite taken by how much his facial expression really reminded me of Chaney.  As Bobby mentioned, Hugo Weaving was very good, but I always think of him as a stand out actor, so there was no surprise there.  Even the older woman at the pub/inn (I believe this was Mrs. Kirk played by Lorraine Hilton?) reminded me of Una O'Connor in THE INVISIBLE MAN, but not as campy. 

The transformations and the make up were great and it must of have been difficult for Rick baker to come up something different.  I was hoping that I wasn't going to see AN AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON retread, and I didn't.  Kudos to you, Rick. 

Probably the best part was my daughter saying how cool it was.  She watches an occasional horror movie, but is not totally obsessed with them, but it was a nice change from the werewolves she's used to seeing in her TWILIGHT films.

Rob

[Tom Smith Monsternut]

  IT WAS AWESOME !! Great acting ,action,music, Rick Baker outdid himself on the makeup !" and the coolest most scary Wolfman ever on the screen ! Very violent I must say" the wife did not like that" but it made the Wolfman even more beast like in my opinion. A true Monster flick ! 10 paws up !

[fmofmpls]

if you were expecting a timeless tale and a great movie...  you probably had your expectations set too high.  I was hoping for better than Van Helsing or those Mummy movies...  and I'm happy that it achieved that.

My feelings exactly. I went into this movie with one expectation - to be better than Van Helsing and the insipid Mummy sequels. And that it achieved hands down. This is a really decent monster movie. That in and of itself is something we haven't seen from Universal in a long time. This isn't a cinematic opus for the ages. Did anyone really expect one from a movie titled The Wolf Man? Seriously? It's not Casablanca, Star Wars with a brilliant John Williams orchestral score, or even a ground breaking fantasy film like Aliens. It's a decent monster movie and nothing more. Go out and enjoy it for what it is. And be thankful that it wasn't a cartoonish mashup like Van Helsing was.

[Tom Smith Monsternut]

I also loved that the Wolfman also have a lot of screen time ! Most Werewolf movies you see the monster halfway through the film and only a few times after that..in this version THE WOLFMAN IS THE STAR ! not Larry,not dad,not the love interest..THE FREEKING WOLFMAN IS !!! I got to see it again 

Tom

[The Creeper]

I am so happy that most everyone likes it!  I got tickets for Sunday so I have to wait darn it!  Boy, I really can't wait to see this!  But for tonight I will be viewing the original.