"The Wolfman" My Review

[Pumpkin_Man]

Hi Folks:

As promised, here is my review of "The Wolfman." I would have written it last night, but to my "suprise," the cable system was down, and since my cable tv, phone and internet are all packaged together, I was 'in communicado" pretty much the rest of the night, so I am FINALLY getting out my review of this awesome and classic horror tale in every sense of the word.

First off, there won't be any spoilers, becaus the basic story is the same one we all knew and loved when Lon Chaney lit up our shiny tv tubes back in 'the day,' but there were some differences that I won't go into so to be sure that I don't spoil it for anyone.

When I first heard that Universal was going to retell Larry Tolbat's story, I was hoping with all of my heart for a CLASSIC gothic style horror story, in the tradition that I knew and loved back when "Creature Features" and "Dark Shadows" graced the air waves. Well, I got that and then some. "The Wolfman" has the creepy old mansion. It has the insane asylum where abuse was common place. It has gypsies. It has spooky old woods, and it has plenty of curses, and of course, thw curse of the wearwolf. Additionaly, it has the blood, guts, gore and all the elements that make a great gore fest.

While attending the screening last night, I actualy forgot it was February, and for a few moments, thought it was Halloween. Talk about missing the boat. This film should have been release in October, but I won't get into that now.

"The Wolofman," is going to be a horror classic, and already has a place reserved on my DVD shelf, the very dayit's released to that medium.

Over all, the acting was superb, the directing was superb, the transformation scenes were everything we expected, and even a few sudden scares were thrown into the package for good measure.

The cinematography was pretty good, all though it was dark through out a lot of the places in order to create the brooding mood of the Larry Tolbat story. I usualy don't go along with that, but in this case, it actualy worked.

The soundtrack was not bad either. Hollywood did not try to "modernize" but stuck with musical scores that were more conductive to the year the story takes place, the 1890s. It had a classical tone to it, which enhanced helped to enhance the classic brooding story that was presented.

And as I stated above, the acting, production and direction were instrumeental in making "The Wolfman" the classic that it was.

So all in all, I would say that it was well worth the price of the ticket. In fact, I want to see this film on one of those I-Max screens some time within the next few months while it's still in theatres. It will DEFINATELY be on my home screen next Halloween if I have my way. So for those of you who enjoy both classic creepy stories of old houses and spooky woods combined with blood, gore and sudden scares, you just can't go wrong with "The Wolfman."

Mike

[iHaunt]

Thanks for the review, Mike!

Thought me and my girlfriend were going to see it tomorrow night on Valentine's Day - but we already seen it last night, and it was so great! We had high hopes for this one, and we were not let down. It has a lot of elements that remind you of the feel of the classics. I liked how they did not go crazy on the makeup. It still looks like the Wolfman, but with an up to date more scary look. The animation was very well done, but not over done. I liked the new storyline with some of the original characters left in tact. This gives me a good feeling about all the other Universal remakes on the way. I'd give it a 9¾ out of 10.

I would suggest for everybody to go see this movie now!!

[hippieluvn]

i haven't been around here since halloween hope you're all well and having a great new year

i saw the wolfman this evening and wanted to let y'all know that i enjoyed

it was fun remake of the universal classic with a few twists

[iHaunt]

I do abso-fricking-lutely loved it!

Stunning sets and lightnings, Rick Baker's work was so great, though.... they put the right actors in the right roles.

But the problem here.... The Wolfman is more of a yawn than a scream!


Read on: www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35332789/ns/entertainment-movies/

[MacPhantom]

I went to see it today, and I have to say that while it succeeded both visually and atmospherically, it failed on several levels of good film-making. In a way, it was disappointing because of how much better it could have been.

I'll start with what I liked. My biggest gripe with the original Universal Wolf Man was that he choked his victims to death. I mean, come on! You're a wolf!! Man!! You've got fangs and claws, and you're gonna choke people!?!? That's why, even though I usually groan when I hear the word "remake", this time I felt something could be added and improved upon. I was particularly impressed by the look of the new Wolfman; he was very reminiscent of the original, while being much scarier and, well, wolfier. And that thing about only choking his victims? Yeah, well, that wasn't a problem this time around. Blood and guts galore, so that part they got right.

The sets and scenery were also fantastic, even when it was CGI. There was a haunted woods, dark and dreary and gothic look throughout, and there were several shots that I'd just like to have a poster of. Danny Elfman did the music, and combined with the cinematography, the perfect atmosphere was set for a really great movie.

Now the bad, and I'll start with the worst part first: Benicio Del Toro. When I first heard he was cast, I was really excited, because I always thought he looked like the original Lon Chaney Jr. Wolf Man. It turns out that that was the only thing he had going for him. His acting was really appalling, his delivery of lines frequently cringe-inducing and sometimes outright groaners. I don't necessarily think it's because he is a bad actor so much as that the part and his dialogue was so poorly written. You would think that a guy who experiences the death of a family member, a vicious attack by a monster, a betrayal by someone close to him, a budding romance, weeks of physical and psychological torture, and, oh yeah, STARTS TURNING INTO A WEREWOLF EVERY MONTH, would have one heck of a character arc, but he doesn't at all. The Larry Talbot who we meet in his very first scene is pretty much the exact same Larry Talbot in his very last scene. He's brooding and morose (the perfect Hamlet!), flat and un-dynamic. He has all the passion of a coma patient, and roughly the same likeability as a heroine addict on the nod.

The script itself had enormous problems apart from the lack of a dynamic main character. The pacing was like riding in a car with my grandmother driving; creeping along, then suddenly slam on the gas pedal, then hit the breaks, then creep along, then BAM another acceleration, and over and over. I understand the somewhat cyclical nature of a man who becomes a monster based on the lunar cycle, but other werewolf movies have found ways to deal with the monthly transformation without creating such a choppy story. And when it comes to story, there were too many things that just didn't make any sense. I won't go into details because I don't want to give anything away, but apparently two people can form a deep and devoted love for each other, to the point where they will risk life and limb for one another, simply by one teaching the other how to skip stones. Did you know that's all it takes? Hear that, single fellas? Teach a girl how to chuck rocks, and she's yours forever!

I thought the CGI would bug me more than it did, and while I think if you hold Rick Baker's work in this up to his work in An American Werewolf In London it falls way short, it still made for a very cool Wolfman, when he wasn't cartoonishly animated. I'm still convinced that, although in the first two decades of the twenty-first century it looked as though CGI would destroy good film-making forever, we are only a few years away from the second Renaissance, wherein movie makers will cast off computer animation in favor of a return to filming actual objects doing actual things.

Overall, I have to recommend this movie because it looks so good, but have to caution that it leaves much to be desired. It reminded me of an eclair that makes you drool when you see it, but when you bite into it you realize that the chocolate is under-sweetened, the pastry is dry, and someone forgot the cream filling. Sure, you eat it anyway, but afterward you know it was just empty calories, and you probably would have enjoyed a nice, crisp, juicy apple more. 6 out of 10, or maybe 6½ if I had a few beers first.

[iHaunt]

In my opinion....


Will you love it? No! But will you like it? Absolutely yeah!


It was very awesome.... but not for the faint of heart! It has bloody horror violence and gory too! And, the running time is 102 minutes.

[Pumpkin_Man]

Well, I think it was a classic in it's own right, and as for the acting, I thought the actor who portrayed Larry Tolbat did an excelent job of portraying the brooding, unwilling monster.

Mike

[hippieluvn]

Was Benicio Del Toro chosen because of his superb acting skills, or because he bears an uncanny resemblance to Lon Chaney, Jr., the original actor who played the Wolfman?

[iHaunt]

Was Benicio Del Toro chosen because of his superb acting skills, or because he bears an uncanny resemblance to Lon Chaney, Jr., the original actor who played the Wolfman?

That's good question here.... and, I wish to find out same thing.

[Murfreesboro]

Benicio del Toro is one of those actors whose name I know better than his face. He won the Oscar a few years back, didn't he? So I suppose he's a pretty good actor. It's not a guarantee that he'd be excellent in every role, of course.

I see very few movies in the theater and probably won't see this one before it hits DVD, but I'm sure I will enjoy it, from what you all have said. I don't know why they don't release stuff like this closer to Halloween. I have noticed for years that TPTB seem to take pleasure in holding their scary releases for other seasons.

I think my favorite werewolf movie will always be An American Werewolf in London. I just love the dark humor of that one. But a more traditional approach is fun, too.

[witchy]

I think my favorite werewolf movie will always be An American Werewolf in London. I just love the dark humor of that one. But a more traditional approach is fun, too.

I love that movie too, it's my favorite werewolf movie!!

[MacPhantom]

No werewolf movie ever has, or ever will, come even close to touching American Werewolf.

[witchy]

I agree!!! American Wolfman rocks!!

I went to see the new Wolfman, and it was really good, but not movie ticket worthy, sorry!!
I will probable buy it when it goes on DVD, but is was not the Epic movie I was hoping for!!

[Pumpkin_Man]

Speaking of "An American Wearwolf in London," there actualy was a sequel to that. "An American Wearwolf in Paris," and it was pretty good, but nothing like the original. But I have to beg to differ on one point. I think both "The Wolf Man," Lon Chaney, and "The Wolfman" the remake were true classic horror movies in their own right. I like the "American Wearwolf" flicks just fine, but nothing can hold a candle to the Larry Tolbat sagga.

Mike

[witchy]

Speaking of "An American Wearwolf in London," there actualy was a sequel to that. "An American Wearwolf in Paris," and it was pretty good, but nothing like the original. But I have to beg to differ on one point. I think both "The Wolf Man," Lon Chaney, and "The Wolfman" the remake were true classic horror movies in their own right. I like the "American Wearwolf" flicks just fine, but nothing can hold a candle to the Larry Tolbat sagga.

Mike

I Didn't know they made a sequel to that, Ohhh I am soo going to go rent that tonight!! Thanks!!