In a time where so called "werewolves" can't stay a single minute with their shirts on, a werewolf movie where the monster in question stays all the time dressed like a victorian gentleman is more than welcome.
The Wolfman is a remake (it seems that hollywood can't create anything, anymore) from the homonym film shot in 1941. The begining of the movie totally reminded me of Bram Stoker's Dracula, and for a moment I thought that it would copy or something like that but I was surprised that both movies had only that aura of fear in common. It isn't really scary (at least not for me) but you can feel the aura of fear by the heavy mist and the lack of color.
Story is simple, no big deal. Lawrence Talbot (Benicio Del Toro) is an actor and he's in London, he receives a letter from his sister in law asking him to go back home and help to find his missing brother. So, he goes back to his old home in Wales, meets his father (Anthony Hopkins) and finds out that he's late and his brother was alredy found dead. He decides to stay and find out what happened to his brother. The plot gets a little bit more interesting when it starts to reveal the curse in the Talbot family. Simple story, but entertaining film.
What I really liked was the werewolf. Different of what we've seing lately. The last werewolf I saw in a film was in Harry Potter and the Prisioner of Azkaban (I won't talk about those New Moon shirtless furry pups) and don't get me wrong, PoA is my very favorite HP movie but the werewolf itself was quite disappointing. This werewolf is fascinating, walks like a man, runs like a wolf, it doesn't have that elongated snout and it stays dressed all the time! (How odd for a modern werewolf uhn? It will be revolutionary when we have a non sparkling vampire movie) Wolfman fits perfectly in this case, when you look at it you can tell that it's a man, well, when it's not running and striking, of course, but it's a man lupine features. Brilliant make-up and CG work.
Benicio Del Toro and Anthony Hopkings were superb, seing the two together was really nice. Hugo Weaving, always in a supporting role but always making a magnificent job. Emily Blunt, on the other hand, was just an ornament. (She was much better in Jane Austen Book Club)
The low point is that the movie intends to frighten but it doesn't really do that (like I said above, at least no me, but I heard that some people were shitting on their pants) Instead, the scenes are really brutal, gore. Heads being riped off, brains and guts all around. The changing is quite violent too.
The movie isn't "WOW what a movie" but it's entertaining and the good part is that the werewolf isn't crazy about ripping off his clothers and showing off his washboard belly. ;)
2 comentários:
Again, name/url is not working, so I'm posting as anonymous.
Thanks for this review! I am itnerested in this film, but I've read so many negative views, and I am not sure if I should spend precious 6 euros (or so) on it. I love Benicio (one of my fav actors), but the negative reviews made me thinking. I admit, it's all about the money, not the time waste.
I liked Sherlock Holmes so much, and I was hoping for something not similar, but since it's the same time period, I wanted "Wolfman" to be deep, well acted and done in the best possible way for a story that is just... Well, familiar (more or less). And yes, I did watch Dracula several times, but we all know it's not really because of the movie itself (or Keanu Reeves). In fact, there are many aspects of "Dracula" that I didn't like.
So, thanks for this review, and I'll think about it. My husband's birthday is soon, so it would be great to go to cinema and watch something at least decent.
Mira
It isn't "all that chocolate" but it isn't a total waste of time or money. The only thing that I found really unecessary was Emily Blunt's character. (They "needed" to put some romance in it)
There are other good movies at the theatres now, like Nine, that I'm dying to see. (Maybe tomorrow, it's cheaper)
Post a Comment