Wolfman-The Offical Thread

[TheBatman072]

Check out Hatchet. It's a nice throwback to the 80's slashers.


I must ask everyone a question here. What are your favorite Werewolf films and where do you rank The Wolfman in them?


An American Werewolf In London is still my number 1 werewolf flick, with this one close behind. I also liked the original Wolfman. I pretty much hated the Underworld flicks.

I'm gonna say that I think the New Wolfman and American Werewolf in London and the original Wolf Man are all three tied as my favorite. They're all just PERFECT werewolf movies.

 

[cryptic name]

Check out Hatchet. It's a nice throwback to the 80's slashers.


I must ask everyone a question here. What are your favorite Werewolf films and where do you rank The Wolfman in them?


An American Werewolf In London is still my number 1 werewolf flick, with this one close behind. I also liked the original Wolfman. I pretty much hated the Underworld flicks.

my updated ranked list would be:

An American Werewolf in London
The Wolfman (2010)
Curse of the Werewolf
The Wolf Man (1941)
The Howling
Dog Soldiers
assorted Paul Naschy flicks

 

[Doctor Jones]

I gotta say, I think Dog Soldiers is still my favorite werewolf flick with the original film closely behind it.

 

[terry78]

Leaving Teen Wolf off any list should cause you to lose your film geek card automatically.

 

[cryptic name]

Leaving Teen Wolf off any list should cause you to lose your film geek card automatically.

I prefer Teen Wolf Too

 

[chaseter]

whats wrong with go seeing movie because you think it looks good unless you think the critics view film the same way as yourself?

Reread that post and then try again.

 

[CELTICPRED]

Just got back from the showing.

Sadly, only got one good jump scare on me. [BLACKOUT]Singh hanging near the end of the film.[/BLACKOUT]

The pacing was all over the map, some terrible editing, and some pretty laughable CGI.

Having said that though, I really did like some of the violence and gore, and I wouldn't call any of the performances weak, it just seemed that none of the characters were given enough time to flesh them out on screen.

 

[BLACK-SPIDEY]

So yeah, i just got back.

It was pretty good.

The jump scares were predictable but sometimes kind of scary

Spoiler

like Gwen hugging lawrence and "OH SNAP WEREWOLF SHOT", oh its over but they are about to hug and "OH ANOTHER WEREWOLF SHOT", almost laughable to be honest, the only thing that managed to scare me was that little ****ed up wolf boy thingy and that little sequence at the end with Lawrence looking for his father in the mansion.

The werewolf looked great, it was violent and gory, not SAW or Hostel violent and gory, it was just the right amount of both, the score was okay, expected something better from elfman, and the performances were good, just good period.

Overall: 8/10

PS:

Spoiler

Werewolf fight FTW!

 

[Doctor Jones]

Eh I didn't care for it. It would have been much better if

Spoiler

his father was the one who killed him and was never the other werewolf. Gwen never admits she loves Lawrence. His father should have killed him, because even though he killed his wife, he still loved his son but could never tell him, hence the saying, only a loved one can kill the beast.Besides, the fight was kinda dumb. I mean it felt like a wrestling match, forced action. When the werewold tore off it's shirt I couldn't help but think of a wrestler. All around his father didn't need to be the werewolf.

 

[WarBlade]

Straw man my ass. You have clearly been making fun of the prosthetic work, especially by comparing it to Teen Wolf(which I've seen before).
If you didn't want it to be CGI what did you want exactly, especially when the prosthetic work is done by Rick Baker. Look him up if you don't know his previous Werewolf effects work as well as his work on other films.

A straw man argument is an attempt to misrepresent something that someone said, then attack the misrepresented version in order to discredit the whole point of debate. So the shoe fits. And again you do it by telling me that I "clearly been making fun of the prosthetic work" when I have in fact been ridiculing the design.

You may not have wanted the Wolfman to be a quadruped but calling him a sheep dog is a ridiculous thing to say if you're trying to say you don't like that they used prosthetics.

I called him a "scottish terrier". A sheep dog, to my way of the thinking, would be a border collie and I'd say that would have been an improvement over what I saw on screen, on account of border collies having a more lupine appearance.

I don't really care if someone doesn't like a film that I like or am looking forward to but I always tend to question someone about their comments if they seem ridiculous at times.

Feel free to criticise anyone who talks about others "missing the point".

So please, can you explain what exactly you think would have made the makeup work or overall design look better?

Take elements of a wolf that might be sinister and use them to effect. It's that simple.

Wolf

Not a wolf

Not a wolf

Also, I don't blame this one on the movie, but for some reason, my showing had tons of cigerate burns. I thought most prints were digital now, how is that possible?

There is no such thing as a "cigarette burn" on film. The term was invented for dialogue in Fight Club and what it refers to is actually called a "cue dot". Someone even came to me looking for a job and used Fight Club as his job research, then started talking about "cigarette burns".

I'm surprised though. I never saw a single cue dot on the print I tested.

As for digital, no. The standard is still 35mm. Digital has been slow to take hold, although the rate of change will probably accelerate in light of Avatar's technology push via 3D.

 

[CrimsonMist]

WARNING! SPOILERS!! SPOILERS!! WARNING!!

Rather than riddle my post with spoiler tags, i'm warning you now that this review has many spoilers it in it. Read at your own risk.

Saw it tonight. Thought it was very entertaining. Scenes of The Wolfman causing havoc made me smile. But i came out thinking that there could have been more, and that it could have been much better. Did I enjoy it? Very much. But it was only a good movie, nothing less and nothing more. Just...good.

The opening could have been MUCH better. It should have really established atmosphere and mood, but it just moved too damn fast. Then it cuts to Lawrence already on his way home... It just didn't feel like there was breathing room.

The conflict with the gypsies wasn't played up enough. The religious angle should have been played up even more. And thematically, the Oedipal and Shakespearean references should have been top priority. The Oedipal complex introduced in the film was, to me, very fascinating, but i never felt they used it to it's potential.

I had some issues with acting. I liked Emily Blunt alot in this movie. She was my favorite. Her scenes with Lawrence were very good ,especially the stone skipping one, but I didn't feel their connection. It happened all too briefly. It needed to be strengthened and lengthened out a bit. It would have made the ending much more powerful. Anthony Hopkins felt like he was phoning it in. He seemed so damn casual throughout the film. Only very few times did he seem truly menacing. But because he was so casual, I found it hard to care about anything he said. How he became cursed? There was no suspense to it. It just happens. He killed Ben? He just says it and it's not even shocking.

Benecio Del Toro...hugely disappointed with him. He looked confused the entire movie, rather than a tortured soul. He doesn't seem apprehensive about returning to his ancestral home, he doesn't seem distant, and once he's bitten, he doesn't seem to be tortured by that either. In fact, he seems alright with it, or seems not to care.

The Gypsy camp attack seemed all too sudden as well. It really felt like something was missing. It just kinda happens and it caught me off guard


The little twist with Hugo Weaving felt INCREDIBLY forced. The Wolfman is a feral beast, alright? He attacks Hugo Weaving and goes after Emily Blunt. So Hugo Weaving pokes him with a spear, does it again, and The Wolfman just kinda shrugs him off. Shrugs him off. This man has been trying to kill him since London, he stabs him with spears. The Wolfman killed a crap load of people, but you're gonna convince me that he's just gonna leave Hugo Weaving alone? Hugo's guts should have been covering the walls of Blackmoore. Francis Abberline vs Frankenstein's Monster? NO! Gimme Larry Talbot or bug off!

The big werewolf battle was dopey. I didn't like it in the original Andrew Kevin Walker script, thought they might get rid of it (and it initially seemed like they did), they brought it back and i thought "Hey, might be cool", but no. It wasn't. It felt too damned choreographed. It felt like watching 2 guys beat each other up, no different than, say, the fight scene in "They Live". These are 2 feral, wild beasts. This fight should have been INSANE! But you could make notice of all the wire work, the obvious choreography and the camp. And all that, being so in your face, is what ruined it. Though I will say, 1. Papa Talbot's Werewolf looked cool and 2. I'd love to see Del Toro's Wolfman up against Frankenstein's Monster.

I didn't mind the CGI that much. I actually liked the bear and stag CGI. Could it have been better? Certainly. But i'll take what they gave me. The gore was alright. It was a little over the top in presentation, but never too much. It was exciting. But the feral child CGI? That was awful.

As i said earlier, pacing was a huge problem for me. My friend Casey noticed it too. It just moved too damn fast. Especially when Lawrence is transported to England. It just happens so damn quickly. I didn't have time to absorb what I was seeing. There wasn't enough time to connect, and with the sub-par acting, it was even harder.

Regardless, I was still thoroughly entertained by it. Would I see it again? Yes. Will I buy the DVD? You bet. I just really hope this doesn't damper Universal's plans for remaking their other classic monster films.

 

[LegendaryCaleb]

7.5/10
i enjoyed most of it!
some parts were a lil corny...but alot of the scenes were classic feeling and very cool imo

 

[Darth Elektra]

For those of you who have followed this thread for months and even years, I was about as excited as anyone for this film! Sadly, I would give the film a

6.5 out of 10.

I really had extremely high hopes, so the film might be better and it's just that I'm extremely sad that it didn't live up to the original. In almost anyway...



*I'll post a longer review/my opinion on the film later in the week maybe after a second viewing.

 

[Darth Elektra]

For those of you who have followed this thread for months and even years, I was about as excited as anyone for this film! Sadly, I would give the film a

6.5 out of 10.

I really had extremely high hopes, so the film might be better and it's just that I'm extremely sad that it didn't live up to the original. In almost anyway...



*I'll post a longer review/my opinion on the film later in the week maybe after a second viewing.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Now I know why it's getting some bad reviews.

Movies like SAW have basically ruined horror films.

People don't want a good story with good, established ACTORS. They don't want emotion or a fleshing out of anything.

They want their gore and death right out in front and within the first five minutes now.

They want a simplistic to non-existent plot that gets out of the way of the screaming and murder and blood, that is gaudy and completely unnecessary.

This movie is nothing like that. Amazing actors, great story, realistic violence and blood and gore integral to the story(because it's about a ****ing werewolf).

Classic horror is dying, and The Wolfman is doing all it can to save it. But I'm thinking that people, in all their idiocy, just don't care about the classic monsters anymore.

And as a classic horror fan, a fan of TRUE monsters like vampires(that don't play baseball in the ****ing sun), werewolves(that aren't giant huskies and that can turn whenever they want), and the like, it deeply pains me to see it happening.

Horror is dying, and SAW is the casket they'll bury it in.

The reason why this film is getting bad reviews is simply because film critics look down upon horror films I can't think of any recent horror film that has an overall positive opinion asides from Paranormal Activity.

 

[Rac]

I liked it. Gore, splatter, fun! 3/5

Horror is dying, and SAW is the casket they'll bury it in.

Horror is doing just fine outside America.

 

[spider-neil]

very enjoyable, will definately be getting this on blu ray if for no other reason that to see how they did the special effects.

 

[bestever23]

I loved it. Waited 2 years for this movie and the action and gore and the original feel to it, It's MUST SEE! 8/10 can't wait to buy it on blu ray

 

[Doctor Jones]

WARNING! SPOILERS!! SPOILERS!! WARNING!!

Rather than riddle my post with spoiler tags, i'm warning you now that this review has many spoilers it in it. Read at your own risk.

Saw it tonight. Thought it was very entertaining. Scenes of The Wolfman causing havoc made me smile. But i came out thinking that there could have been more, and that it could have been much better. Did I enjoy it? Very much. But it was only a good movie, nothing less and nothing more. Just...good.

The opening could have been MUCH better. It should have really established atmosphere and mood, but it just moved too damn fast. Then it cuts to Lawrence already on his way home... It just didn't feel like there was breathing room.

The conflict with the gypsies wasn't played up enough. The religious angle should have been played up even more. And thematically, the Oedipal and Shakespearean references should have been top priority. The Oedipal complex introduced in the film was, to me, very fascinating, but i never felt they used it to it's potential.

I had some issues with acting. I liked Emily Blunt alot in this movie. She was my favorite. Her scenes with Lawrence were very good ,especially the stone skipping one, but I didn't feel their connection. It happened all too briefly. It needed to be strengthened and lengthened out a bit. It would have made the ending much more powerful. Anthony Hopkins felt like he was phoning it in. He seemed so damn casual throughout the film. Only very few times did he seem truly menacing. But because he was so casual, I found it hard to care about anything he said. How he became cursed? There was no suspense to it. It just happens. He killed Ben? He just says it and it's not even shocking.

Benecio Del Toro...hugely disappointed with him. He looked confused the entire movie, rather than a tortured soul. He doesn't seem apprehensive about returning to his ancestral home, he doesn't seem distant, and once he's bitten, he doesn't seem to be tortured by that either. In fact, he seems alright with it, or seems not to care.

The Gypsy camp attack seemed all too sudden as well. It really felt like something was missing. It just kinda happens and it caught me off guard


The little twist with Hugo Weaving felt INCREDIBLY forced. The Wolfman is a feral beast, alright? He attacks Hugo Weaving and goes after Emily Blunt. So Hugo Weaving pokes him with a spear, does it again, and The Wolfman just kinda shrugs him off. Shrugs him off. This man has been trying to kill him since London, he stabs him with spears. The Wolfman killed a crap load of people, but you're gonna convince me that he's just gonna leave Hugo Weaving alone? Hugo's guts should have been covering the walls of Blackmoore. Francis Abberline vs Frankenstein's Monster? NO! Gimme Larry Talbot or bug off!

The big werewolf battle was dopey. I didn't like it in the original Andrew Kevin Walker script, thought they might get rid of it (and it initially seemed like they did), they brought it back and i thought "Hey, might be cool", but no. It wasn't. It felt too damned choreographed. It felt like watching 2 guys beat each other up, no different than, say, the fight scene in "They Live". These are 2 feral, wild beasts. This fight should have been INSANE! But you could make notice of all the wire work, the obvious choreography and the camp. And all that, being so in your face, is what ruined it. Though I will say, 1. Papa Talbot's Werewolf looked cool and 2. I'd love to see Del Toro's Wolfman up against Frankenstein's Monster.

I didn't mind the CGI that much. I actually liked the bear and stag CGI. Could it have been better? Certainly. But i'll take what they gave me. The gore was alright. It was a little over the top in presentation, but never too much. It was exciting. But the feral child CGI? That was awful.

As i said earlier, pacing was a huge problem for me. My friend Casey noticed it too. It just moved too damn fast. Especially when Lawrence is transported to England. It just happens so damn quickly. I didn't have time to absorb what I was seeing. There wasn't enough time to connect, and with the sub-par acting, it was even harder.

Regardless, I was still thoroughly entertained by it. Would I see it again? Yes. Will I buy the DVD? You bet. I just really hope this doesn't damper Universal's plans for remaking their other classic monster films.

Pretty much what I thought.

Like I mentioned, the beginning moved too fast. You could tell there was more to it. He came to Blackmore too quickly. I would have loved to see a full scene of Lawrence performing some of Hamlet on stage. The Shakespearean subtext would have fit very well in the film.

The religious themes and the reverend should have played a bigger part too.

And the gypsy woman was criminally underused. There should have been a scene with Lawrence and her before the attack on the camp. Maybe a little subplot on a gyspy being accused of the murders and is put to death.

 

[Brian Braddock]

Seeing the movie tonight [finally!!!!].

Really looking forward to it after the wait.

 

[scifiwolf]

The reason why this film is getting bad reviews is simply because film critics look down upon horror films I can't think of any recent horror film that has an overall positive opinion asides from Paranormal Activity.

Drag Me to Hell did really well

 

[Evan Drew]

The main reason I saw the movie was to see a Joe Johnson movie due to Captain America being his next project. While October Sky delivered on the emotions and The Rocketeer on the fun (though cheesy at times) adventure style, The Werewolf left me wanting more character. I didnt feel any of the performances were well delivered except for Weaving (and Im not a big Matrix fan).

I thought the atmosphere was well done, but the editing and the pacing were all over the place. Things happened way too fast as has been mentioned by others. I didnt believe in any of the relationships, especially the one between Del Toro and Blunt (animal magnetism?). But like I may have implied, perhaps I am not the target audience of this film.

 

[Doctor Jones]

Yeah, I'm kinda thinking that this was the fault of the editing. I mean Johnston is a solid director. If he can deliver on something on a character based story such as October Sky something is up. I just think the reshoots and the editing might distorted his vision of it all.

 

[Darth Elektra]

Friday estimates: $9,850,000 *BOM

#1. Valentine's Day $14,625,000
#3. Percey Jackson $9,775,000

 

[The Guardian]

I saw the film yesterday, I liked it, the FX were good and the wolf looked awesome, I just wish Del Toro would have shown a bit more personality, he was a bit too stoic for my taste, other than that great movie 9/10!!!