Wolfman: Yay or Nay?

[darkmonkeygod]

SPOLIERS GALORE

A couple (possible spoiler) questions regarding this film:

- Are we to believe that Sir John is dead at the end? He was decapitated and burned but was there silver involved?

You mean that's not how you kill the Wolfman?!? I kid.  No one in the film ever says the ONLY way to kill a werewolf is with silver.  We, as an audience, just know that's the lore. So, when somehow a writer or an exec forcing a writers hand decides to subvert common expectation... Hopkins' head changes back to human form, implying that the curse has lifted and, um, yeah, we are supposed to buy that as Hopkins death. Pretty bad, huh?

- Aberline (who does precious little policework IMO) gets bitten but there's no resolution . . . sequel? He did wind up with the cane, after all.

Just in case it makes enough dough and piques popular consciousness enough to have a sequel. I can't imagine that it will, and even if it does that Weaving would do it. Just seemed like a bad set up to me, but that's me.

[Gillman-Fan]

Sadly, I could see the powers that be doing a quickie sequel to this using Weaving as the lead (I'd bet his salary is far below your average "movie star"). This flick alluded to Aberline's involvement with an infamous series of gruesome murders . . .

It's not much of a stretch to imagine The Wolfman vs. Jack the Ripper!

The theory that The Ripper's activities did not stop after the Whitechapel period could serve as the premise.

[Gareee]

I actually love that idea!

[Gillman-Fan]

You heard it here first!

Seriously, my mind wandered sooo much during this movie. Trying to sort through the bits and pieces for something resembling a cogent concept.

[darkmonkeygod]

Seriously, my mind wandered sooo much during this movie. Trying to sort through the bits and pieces for something resembling a cogent concept.

I hear ya there. During the sequence in which it apparently took a lunar month for: a) Lawrence to WALK back to Talbot Hall, b) Aberline to posse up and ride there and c) Gwen to go by coach, I actually said aloud (a RARE occurrence for me in a film, but I just couldn't help it) "You gotta be kidding". Several people in the theatre chuckled.

I still can't figure out Sir John's bit about getting drunk, knocking out Singh and killing... who? His wife? The son? A passel of other Blackmoor villagers? And why did it take three weeks for the son's body to turn up? I know the answers: poor writing/editing. Large holes in the story which, like you, left my thoughts wandering during the film.

[depressedlarrytalbot]

When I first head the Aberline character was going to be in the film, I assumed the Wolfman was actually going to "be" The Ripper. 

[Gillman-Fan]

The whole "Larry goes to the Insane Asylum" subplot was a complete waste IMO. Now, this could have worked as a great piece of misdirection had the story been laid out in such a way that you thought the mentally-compromised Larry was the Wolfman when in fact it was actually his Father. Better yet, Sir John could have faked his son's death (partial/unidentifiable body with planted personal affects) and was trying to contain his favorite werewolf son in the crypt cell . . . using Larry (the tragic unloved son) as the patsy. And the casual offscreen dispensing of the "Singh" character was a real letdown.


Ugh, just about anything would have been more satisfying.

[darkmonkeygod]

The whole "Larry goes to the Insane Asylum" subplot was a complete waste IMO. Now, this could have worked as a great piece of misdirection had the story been laid out in such a way that you thought the mentally-compromised Larry was the Wolfman when in fact it was actually his Father.

I'm pretty sure this was the crux of the first finished draft (2006). I didn't read it, just read of it and discussed it with someone who had read it, but I think in that version we (audience) are left guessing "is he/ isn't he?" until this asylum scene when Larry wolfs out. Then, twist!  It's revealed that Sir John is one as well and had committed the atrocities that Larry was blaming himself for. Or some such.

And the casual offscreen dispensing of the "Singh" character was a real letdown.
Ugh, just about anything would have been more satisfying.

Yeah, I made a joke about wishing Singh had be played by Scatman Crothers (may he rest), à la The Shining.

[Wolf Man]

While I thought is was a great irony that Sir John had removed the powder from Singh's bullets years before I would have enjoyed seeing Singh put up a hell of a fight with Sir John using his massive knife in a drag out fight to the death before Old wolfman kills him rather than letting it occur offscreen.  It did have good shock value though seeing him hanging there.  But back to defending himself.  You would think this character, knowing who Sir John was all those years would have a lot of ability to fight him valiantly even with the powder gone from his bullets.  A true warrior always is prepared and has plenty of back up weapons as Singh did.  We just never get to see the full affect on screen. 

[darkmonkeygod]

You would think this character, knowing who Sir John was all those years would have a lot of ability to fight him valiantly even with the powder gone from his bullets.  A true warrior always is prepared and has plenty of back up weapons as Singh did.  We just never get to see the full affect on screen. 

I'd think, knowing what Sir John was all those years and having worked so hard to help him control the beast except (seemingly) that one time when John got ripped to the tits and knocked him out (wha?), wolfed out and killed his beloved wife but not the child who started upon 'em (double wha?), Singh would have killed the man once he went off rez and decided to eat his son etc etc.

[Gillman-Fan]

As far as Sir John's tampering with Singh's shotgun shells, any sportsman/hunter worth his salt would have immediately noticed the difference in the way the cartridges felt weight-wise. I know it's a seemingly tiny detail but that character was supposed to be a punjabi GUN BEARER!

[Crazy1van]

I hear ya there. During the sequence in which it apparently took a lunar month for: a) Lawrence to WALK back to Talbot Hall, b) Aberline to posse up and ride there and c) Gwen to go by coach, I actually said aloud (a RARE occurrence for me in a film, but I just couldn't help it) "You gotta be kidding". Several people in the theatre chuckled.

I still can't figure out Sir John's bit about getting drunk, knocking out Singh and killing... who? His wife? The son? A passel of other Blackmoor villagers? And why did it take three weeks for the son's body to turn up? I know the answers: poor writing/editing. Large holes in the story which, like you, left my thoughts wandering during the film.

I think we're to believe it was a day, not a month, for everyone to converge in Blackmoore.  And it would appear Sir john knocked out Singh before killing John Jr; most likely he expected he would attack and kill Gwen though.  I do think Singh's loyalty would have ended after the death of John's wife, and he should have killed the old man in his sleep 20 years earlier.

[darkmonkeygod]

I think we're to believe it was a day, not a month, for everyone to converge in Blackmoore.  And it would appear Sir john knocked out Singh before killing John Jr; most likely he expected he would attack and kill Gwen though.  I do think Singh's loyalty would have ended after the death of John's wife, and he should have killed the old man in his sleep 20 years earlier.

The moon is full only once a month. Every 29 and half days actually, so some years get 13 full moons, but never two nights in a row. It's an astronomical impossibility.

As far as the wife, I thought she was supposed to be John's drunken/accidental kill, and that Singh stayed helping John control himself and protecting the younger brother. The internal logic of the story really does fall apart right about there.

As far as Sir John's tampering with Singh's shotgun shells, any sportsman/hunter worth his salt would have immediately noticed the difference in the way the cartridges felt weight-wise. I know it's a seemingly tiny detail but that character was supposed to be a punjabi GUN BEARER!

Oh, it's not a tiny detail at all. It's poor writing. Were all the other problems gone, I'd forgive the shotgun shells with the idea that they were refilled w something inert. Of course, I'd have given Hopkins the line "I filled those with sand years ago" or "I pulled the primers" or some-such instead.

[Unknown Primate]

The whole "Larry goes to the Insane Asylum" subplot was a complete waste IMO. Now, this could have worked as a great piece of misdirection had the story been laid out in such a way that you thought the mentally-compromised Larry was the Wolfman when in fact it was actually his Father. Better yet, Sir John could have faked his son's death (partial/unidentifiable body with planted personal affects) and was trying to contain his favorite werewolf son in the crypt cell . . . using Larry (the tragic unloved son) as the patsy. And the casual offscreen dispensing of the "Singh" character was a real letdown.


Ugh, just about anything would have been more satisfying.

Where were you when they were writing the script?  I agree completely!

[SirJon]

The whole "Larry goes to the Insane Asylum" subplot was a complete waste IMO. Now, this could have worked as a great piece of misdirection had the story been laid out in such a way that you thought the mentally-compromised Larry was the Wolfman when in fact it was actually his Father. Better yet, Sir John could have faked his son's death (partial/unidentifiable body with planted personal affects) and was trying to contain his favorite werewolf son in the crypt cell . . . using Larry (the tragic unloved son) as the patsy. And the casual offscreen dispensing of the "Singh" character was a real letdown.

AhhhhhH!
I have to disagree - Larry is the wolf man and the movie would've sucked if they had totally just made him into a nut case and his brother be the wolf. Thats just IMO.

Cool concept but i woulda hated that movie had it been made.

I had some issues with the remake but i didn't think it was terrible as like you guys do.