Wolfman-The Offical Thread

Rate the movie

  • 10

  • 9

  • 8

  • 7

  • 6

  • 5

  • 4

  • 3

  • 2

  • 1

  • 10

  • 9

  • 8

  • 7

  • 6

  • 5

  • 4

  • 3

  • 2

  • 1


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Coming Soon: The Weekend Warrior: February 12 - 15.
(4 day weekend)

2. The Wolfman (Universal) - $32.5 million

Analysis:
If there's one thing Universal Studios is better at than any of their competition, it's monsters. After all, they were the studio who first introduced classic movie monsters like Dracula, Frankenstein, The Mummy and the Wolfman to the screen. The first two were based on works of literature, and they were groundbreaking as some of the movies of the post-silent era; the latter two were original creations. In the past few decades, the first three have all had star-studded big budget remakes, The Mummy being reinvented roughly ten years ago as an action-adventure franchise. Meanwhile, the Wolfman remained fairly dormant for a number of years while other studios jumped on the werewolf bandwagon and the popularity of the creatures has grown in popularity in recent years. The clearest example has to be the "Twilight" saga, of course, which introduced its own hunky shirtless werewolves to moviegoers with New Moon, making it one of the biggest movies of 2009. While movies like Blood and Chocolate and Stan Winston's Skinwalkers and even Wes Craven's Cursed bombed, Screen Gems launched the "Underworld" series about a war between vampires and werewolves, which have done great business, finding a strong audience of mostly males with its gory take on the creatures.

Playing the role of Lawrence Talbot made famous by Lon Chaney in the 1941 classic is Benicio Del Toro, the Oscar-winning actor who first got attention for his role in Bryan Singer's debut The Usual Suspects before winning an Oscar for Steven Soderbergh's Traffic. Del Toro hasn't been in that many movies since then with notable roles in Awards fodder like 21 Grams, Things We Lost in the Fire and Soderbergh's epic Che. His only real forays into genre were his small role in Frank Miller's Sin City and the thriller The Hunted. Talbot's love interest in the remake is played by British actress Emily Blunt who has been getting strong notices for her roles in smaller movies like Sunshine Cleaning and The Young Victoria (currently in theaters) but she'll probably be best known for key role in the chick flick hit The Devil Wears Prada.The real sell of the movie might be the film's other Oscar winner, Sir Anthony Hopkins, who successfully drove Universal's serial killer franchise playing Hannibal Lecter and who was also involved with the Zorro movies of the '90s. Even though it's hard to imagine him as a box office draw, he does bring a certain amount of prestige to the project that makes it seem like a much more worthwhile remake than some of the cheap horror movies we've seen in recent years.

Directing the movie is Joe Johnston, a big name in genre having helmed movies like The Rocketeer and Jurassic Park III, although a straight horror movie like The Wolfman is quite a departure from his last movie which was the Disney action-adventure Hidalgo. He got the gig after the original director Mark Romanek bailed due to creative differences, and in the last couple years, there's been a lot of word that the movie was plagued with similar problems. What sets a lot of alarm bells ringing is that the movie has been delayed for over a year. Sure, we can figure that part of the delays might have been to get the important transformation scenes right, but releasing the movie in February, even over the holiday weekend, is not showing the type of confidence the studio would have if they released it in October or during the summer. (Although both The Silence of the Lambs and Hannibal were released in February, those were very much exceptions.)

One key thing that's going to speak volumes to horror fans is that they had Rick Baker on board to handle the make-up effects, Baker having done the amazing transformation in An American Werewolf in London, considered by many to be a werewolf classic. He also did The Howling, Wolf with Jack Nicholson and many other movies that required hairy creatures, so Baker really knows his stuff. One thing that might throw modern audiences off is that the movie is done as a period piece rather than as a movie set in modern times, although the recent success of Guy Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes seems to show that American audiences may be more open to period genre movies.

While the movie's inability to get PG-13 rating might hurt its chances at getting younger teens over the holiday weekend, releasing it with an R-rating and all the blood and gore expected with the violent creatures will mean the movie can and will be taken more seriously among horror fans. The amount of gore might also detract it from branching out to other audiences. Universal's marketing for the movie has been solid, although they haven't really been using the name actors they have in the movie, instead focusing on the eerie visuals while keeping the werewolf somewhat hidden (another warning sign). You probably won't have seen any of the actors doing the talk show rounds in the past few weeks, although that's likely to kick into high gear this coming week. For the most part, Universal has waited until the last week to screen it for critics, which is not something the studio normally does. The movie has basically been hidden and chances are that it's not very good. Even so, one can only have doubts that the movie will be as good as they hope and either way, it's likely to do most of its business on Friday and Saturday and then start dropping off over the week, then get slaughtered by Martin Scorsese's own horror offering Shutter Island next week.

Why I Should See It: The original "Wolfman" movie is considered a horror classic and the great cast should help this one.
Why Not: Delayed for a year and not screened until opening weekend? Something's not quite kosher in Wolfsville.
Projections: $31 to 33 million over the four-day weekend and roughly $75 to 80 million total.
 
If Valentines Day beats Wolfman and Percy Jackson then something wrong with people i think. Wolfman looks surperior then another other film before March but Percy Jackson is make me be more interested in it because of Brosnan and Bean.
 
Does anyone think it to make people think Hopkins is the werewolf who bit him and its someone else entirely. Hopkins is just weird after hunting it for so long.

My moneys on the old lady if its not Hopkins
 
Coming Soon: The Weekend Warrior: February 12 - 15.
(4 day weekend)

2. The Wolfman (Universal) - $32.5 million

Analysis:
If there's one thing Universal Studios is better at than any of their competition, it's monsters. After all, they were the studio who first introduced classic movie monsters like Dracula, Frankenstein, The Mummy and the Wolfman to the screen. The first two were based on works of literature, and they were groundbreaking as some of the movies of the post-silent era; the latter two were original creations. In the past few decades, the first three have all had star-studded big budget remakes, The Mummy being reinvented roughly ten years ago as an action-adventure franchise. Meanwhile, the Wolfman remained fairly dormant for a number of years while other studios jumped on the werewolf bandwagon and the popularity of the creatures has grown in popularity in recent years. The clearest example has to be the "Twilight" saga, of course, which introduced its own hunky shirtless werewolves to moviegoers with New Moon, making it one of the biggest movies of 2009. While movies like Blood and Chocolate and Stan Winston's Skinwalkers and even Wes Craven's Cursed bombed, Screen Gems launched the "Underworld" series about a war between vampires and werewolves, which have done great business, finding a strong audience of mostly males with its gory take on the creatures.

Playing the role of Lawrence Talbot made famous by Lon Chaney in the 1941 classic is Benicio Del Toro, the Oscar-winning actor who first got attention for his role in Bryan Singer's debut The Usual Suspects before winning an Oscar for Steven Soderbergh's Traffic. Del Toro hasn't been in that many movies since then with notable roles in Awards fodder like 21 Grams, Things We Lost in the Fire and Soderbergh's epic Che. His only real forays into genre were his small role in Frank Miller's Sin City and the thriller The Hunted. Talbot's love interest in the remake is played by British actress Emily Blunt who has been getting strong notices for her roles in smaller movies like Sunshine Cleaning and The Young Victoria (currently in theaters) but she'll probably be best known for key role in the chick flick hit The Devil Wears Prada.The real sell of the movie might be the film's other Oscar winner, Sir Anthony Hopkins, who successfully drove Universal's serial killer franchise playing Hannibal Lecter and who was also involved with the Zorro movies of the '90s. Even though it's hard to imagine him as a box office draw, he does bring a certain amount of prestige to the project that makes it seem like a much more worthwhile remake than some of the cheap horror movies we've seen in recent years.

Directing the movie is Joe Johnston, a big name in genre having helmed movies like The Rocketeer and Jurassic Park III, although a straight horror movie like The Wolfman is quite a departure from his last movie which was the Disney action-adventure Hidalgo. He got the gig after the original director Mark Romanek bailed due to creative differences, and in the last couple years, there's been a lot of word that the movie was plagued with similar problems. What sets a lot of alarm bells ringing is that the movie has been delayed for over a year. Sure, we can figure that part of the delays might have been to get the important transformation scenes right, but releasing the movie in February, even over the holiday weekend, is not showing the type of confidence the studio would have if they released it in October or during the summer. (Although both The Silence of the Lambs and Hannibal were released in February, those were very much exceptions.)

One key thing that's going to speak volumes to horror fans is that they had Rick Baker on board to handle the make-up effects, Baker having done the amazing transformation in An American Werewolf in London, considered by many to be a werewolf classic. He also did The Howling, Wolf with Jack Nicholson and many other movies that required hairy creatures, so Baker really knows his stuff. One thing that might throw modern audiences off is that the movie is done as a period piece rather than as a movie set in modern times, although the recent success of Guy Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes seems to show that American audiences may be more open to period genre movies.

While the movie's inability to get PG-13 rating might hurt its chances at getting younger teens over the holiday weekend, releasing it with an R-rating and all the blood and gore expected with the violent creatures will mean the movie can and will be taken more seriously among horror fans. The amount of gore might also detract it from branching out to other audiences. Universal's marketing for the movie has been solid, although they haven't really been using the name actors they have in the movie, instead focusing on the eerie visuals while keeping the werewolf somewhat hidden (another warning sign). You probably won't have seen any of the actors doing the talk show rounds in the past few weeks, although that's likely to kick into high gear this coming week. For the most part, Universal has waited until the last week to screen it for critics, which is not something the studio normally does. The movie has basically been hidden and chances are that it's not very good. Even so, one can only have doubts that the movie will be as good as they hope and either way, it's likely to do most of its business on Friday and Saturday and then start dropping off over the week, then get slaughtered by Martin Scorsese's own horror offering Shutter Island next week.

Why I Should See It: The original "Wolfman" movie is considered a horror classic and the great cast should help this one.
Why Not: Delayed for a year and not screened until opening weekend? Something's not quite kosher in Wolfsville.
Projections: $31 to 33 million over the four-day weekend and roughly $75 to 80 million total.

Uh...what?

One or two cuts were screened and have been screened. Several months back there was a screening or two with uncompleted effects actually.
 
Uh...what?

One or two cuts were screened and have been screened. Several months back there was a screening or two with uncompleted effects actually.

He means for critics it wasn't screened til this week. They are under gag orders.

Don't think it's going to get a great number of good reviews.
 
If Valentines Day beats Wolfman and Percy Jackson then something wrong with people i think. Wolfman looks surperior then another other film before March but Percy Jackson is make me be more interested in it because of Brosnan and Bean.

Shutter Island looks really good!

Does anyone think it to make people think Hopkins is the werewolf who bit him and its someone else entirely. Hopkins is just weird after hunting it for so long.

My moneys on the old lady if its not Hopkins

I've read the book... SPOILERS.
It's Hopkins, and the detective gets bit so it builds for a possible sequel...

Uh...what?

One or two cuts were screened and have been screened. Several months back there was a screening or two with uncompleted effects actually.

Critics have yet to view it.
 
Yeah, I think it's 102 minutes. My theater has it listed.

Dammit. I hope the film's quality makes up for it.

And that's all that matters.

I know alot of you here have been complaining that 96 minutes is hardly enough time to make this a good movie, and frankly, i find that crap.

The 96 minutes you sit through could damn well be a solid, action packed, emotionally driven film. I'm a student filmmaker, and some projects that I've been assigned have included taking a small, set script, and making a short film with a max. running time of 5 minutes. Some people have managed to capture enough power in 2 minutes than someone who needed the full 5. Not that I'm comparing, directly, student films to this feature, but not every movie needs to be 2 + hours in order to have a punch to it. Hammer Films had MANDATED 96 minute long films, and those are of great quality, if not bogged down a bit, due to budget and period special effects.

People just need to shut up, wipe the slate clean: ignore the delays and all the problems. You need to take this movie for what it is. You need to watch this movie with an open mind, free of "Bah! 96 Minutes is HARDLY enough time blah blah blah" because you could very well be proven wrong.

Though I MUST be honest here. If the Extended Cut DVD is in fact better than the Theatrical Cut, and fares better, it will have been a terrible mistake to NOT release the extended cut theatrically. But until that DVD comes out, all we have is this theatrical cut.
 
Why Not: Delayed for a year and not screened until opening weekend? Something's not quite kosher in Wolfsville.

This, to me, is total bull. And this is no offense to you personally, but the fact that it's been delayed should not be the reason why you choose not to see it. Everyone here has been following this film since it was announced, therefore there is genuine interest. People will see it regardless. People will like it, regardless. And people will not like it regardless. But until you(generally speaking), you can't really say anything because for all you know, you'd end up liking it.
 
I don't think this film looks very good. Maybe it's just the trailers and tv spots, but this film looks like it doesn't know if it's an action film or a horror film.
 
I don't think this film looks very good. Maybe it's just the trailers and tv spots, but this film looks like it doesn't know if it's an action film or a horror film.

Those are trailers though. They're trying to show the different aspects of the film. Granted, they may do a bad job in showing the cohesiveness of both aspects action and horror in one trailer, but that's not to say that the film doesn't know what it wants to be.

Action comes with horror, be it Van Helsing and Harker chasing Renfield back to Carfax Abbey to destroy Dracula, or the angry villagers hunting Lon Chaney Jr. through the forest, action is always gonna be there.

TV Spots always play up different aspects individually. You never get the full idea of a movie from a TV spot. They can't just dish out Benicio Del Toro going "WOE IS ME!" in every tv spot. They're reaching out to different audiences.

Go see the movie. Whether or not the film knows what it is, is for you to decide.
 
I can't wait to see this Thursday night. Gonna be awesome.
 
Everything i have seen tells me its could not have been done better and the cast was perfect in my view.
Hopkins is such a great actor and can save most films but with Weaving, DelToro and Blunt. An Director cannot ask for better talent.
 
Still weird Hopkins was in Dracula and now Wolfman. Wish he'd have some small role in a Frankenstein remake. Or the Creature From The Black Lagoon
 
Those are trailers though. They're trying to show the different aspects of the film. Granted, they may do a bad job in showing the cohesiveness of both aspects action and horror in one trailer, but that's not to say that the film doesn't know what it wants to be.

Action comes with horror, be it Van Helsing and Harker chasing Renfield back to Carfax Abbey to destroy Dracula, or the angry villagers hunting Lon Chaney Jr. through the forest, action is always gonna be there.

TV Spots always play up different aspects individually. You never get the full idea of a movie from a TV spot. They can't just dish out Benicio Del Toro going "WOE IS ME!" in every tv spot. They're reaching out to different audiences.

Go see the movie. Whether or not the film knows what it is, is for you to decide.

Well said. Damn Crim, you are on point tonight.

It is as you say, trailers are designed to quickly show different scenes to entice all kinds of viewers. There are those whole will come for the fun action and those who will come for the dark horror....and there are those who will come for both. And of course there are many more reasons why people would choose to go to this movie.

All OF YOU...go see the movie, judge for yourself, don't let others make up your mind for you, and don't make up your mind based on a 30 second trailer.

We're getting a rare cinematic treat, and just as the old Wolfman was a fun horror flick, so does this new one appear to be.

The idea is to go and have fun.
 
Well said. Damn Crim, you are on point tonight.

It is as you say, trailers are designed to quickly show different scenes to entice all kinds of viewers. There are those whole will come for the fun action and those who will come for the dark horror....and there are those who will come for both. And of course there are many more reasons why people would choose to go to this movie.

All OF YOU...go see the movie, judge for yourself, don't let others make up your mind for you, and don't make up your mind based on a 30 second trailer.

We're getting a rare cinematic treat, and just as the old Wolfman was a fun horror flick, so does this new one appear to be.

The idea is to go and have fun.
AMEN!!!! Long live the WOLFMAN
 
I saw this tonight, critics screening and the only one they are having in Saint Louis, the run time is about 2 hours It started at 7:05pm and i got out to my car at 9:03pm after the credits. So yeah the film was good and Johnston needs to work on his pacing. Plenty of Gore. I do not like Benicio Del Toro in the Lead i think we needed someone who can command your presence and he does not. Hopkins steals the show and is worth the price ALONE! Blunt and Weaving respectivley destroy Del Toro as well. It's an ok Film I would say C+/B- effort. I enjoyed the use of real prostetics over too much CGI that really made me respect the film more but Dle Toror almost takes you out of the film. I hope on a second viewing (monday) I will enjoy it more. I had a horrible Audience minus the critics but hey what are you gonna do? If you like Horror see this, if your expecting and actionfest pass. Its a good horror/drama. Anyone have any questions?
 
I saw this tonight, critics screening and the only one they are having in Saint Louis, the run time is about 2 hours It started at 7:05pm and i got out to my car at 9:03pm after the credits. So yeah the film was good and Johnston needs to work on his pacing. Plenty of Gore. I do not like Benicio Del Toro in the Lead i think we needed someone who can command your presence and he does not. Hopkins steals the show and is worth the price ALONE! Blunt and Weaving respectivley destroy Del Toro as well. It's an ok Film I would say C+/B- effort. I enjoyed the use of real prostetics over too much CGI that really made me respect the film more but Dle Toror almost takes you out of the film. I hope on a second viewing (monday) I will enjoy it more. I had a horrible Audience minus the critics but hey what are you gonna do? If you like Horror see this, if your expecting and actionfest pass. Its a good horror/drama. Anyone have any questions?

Just as a quick aside, have you seen the original?
 
I saw this tonight, critics screening and the only one they are having in Saint Louis, the run time is about 2 hours It started at 7:05pm and i got out to my car at 9:03pm after the credits. So yeah the film was good and Johnston needs to work on his pacing. Plenty of Gore. I do not like Benicio Del Toro in the Lead i think we needed someone who can command your presence and he does not. Hopkins steals the show and is worth the price ALONE! Blunt and Weaving respectivley destroy Del Toro as well. It's an ok Film I would say C+/B- effort. I enjoyed the use of real prostetics over too much CGI that really made me respect the film more but Dle Toror almost takes you out of the film. I hope on a second viewing (monday) I will enjoy it more. I had a horrible Audience minus the critics but hey what are you gonna do? If you like Horror see this, if your expecting and actionfest pass. Its a good horror/drama. Anyone have any questions?

is there a scene in a zoo?
 
I saw this tonight, critics screening and the only one they are having in Saint Louis, the run time is about 2 hours It started at 7:05pm and i got out to my car at 9:03pm after the credits. So yeah the film was good and Johnston needs to work on his pacing. Plenty of Gore. I do not like Benicio Del Toro in the Lead i think we needed someone who can command your presence and he does not. Hopkins steals the show and is worth the price ALONE! Blunt and Weaving respectivley destroy Del Toro as well. It's an ok Film I would say C+/B- effort. I enjoyed the use of real prostetics over too much CGI that really made me respect the film more but Dle Toror almost takes you out of the film. I hope on a second viewing (monday) I will enjoy it more. I had a horrible Audience minus the critics but hey what are you gonna do? If you like Horror see this, if your expecting and actionfest pass. Its a good horror/drama. Anyone have any questions?

With revealing as little amounts of spoilers, could you go into depth about the pacing problems?
 
Hmm. Interesting.

It is interesting, because he's not coming from a hard core fan perspective.
On the one hand, his review is from the general public's view, and for that, his review is pretty positive. On the other hand, we have not yet heard the review from a hard core fan, who sort of knows what to expect and what to look for.
 
I guarantee you this right now, one review, whether in a paper or online, that praises this movie will use the phrase, "this Wolfman has nards."
 
I guarantee you this right now, one review, whether in a paper or online, that praises this movie will use the phrase, "this Wolfman has nards."

Hahahahaha. I'd love to see that! :woot:

Monster Squad kicks ass.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,289
Messages
22,080,715
Members
45,880
Latest member
Heartbeat
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"