The Wolfman (2010)

eazybox

Member
A CREATURE remake has been in the works for a long time and there is some info about the preproduction at imdb.com. Breck Eisner is listed as the director. There have been a couple of INVISIBLE MAN offshoots in the dim and more recent past, but I haven't heard anything about a remake of the original yet-- or a remake of BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN. Dark Horse books recently published a novelized sequel to BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN which was titled PANDORA'S BRIDE.

Jack
 

caats

New member
that line "I WILL KILL ALL OF YOU!!" is so awesome. looking forward to this.


btw, i wish they'd make Frankenstein, except i wish they'd follow the book. the book is great.
 

Goonie

New member
caats said:
btw, i wish they'd make Frankenstein, except i wish they'd follow the book. the book is great.

I never read the book. How did it compare to Kenneth Branagh's Mary Shelley's Frankenstein with De Niro as the monster?:confused:

One thing that ticks me off is that they still haven't released that movie in widescreen on DVD.:mad:
 

Agent Z

Active member
I was surprised at how well the CGI worked in the trailer....or at least to the point that it didn't distract me.

I'm more excited for this than I am for Avatar, if we must compare notes from yesterday's Trailerathon.
 

eazybox

Member
One of the astonishing things about FRANKENSTEIN was that it was written by an 18 year old girl, Mary Shelley, in 1817. Her mother was a well-known champion of women's rights and died within a few days of Mary's birth. The Branagh movie followed the book fairly closely.

I would like to see a DRACULA movie that is faithful to the original novel. Although Coppola's film was called BRAM STOKER's DRACULA, it strayed pretty far from the original material.

The closest thing to a classic werewolf novel is probably THE WEREWOLF OF PARIS by Guy Endore. The werewolf occupied a rather obscure corner of folklore before Universal's WOLF MAN in 1941.

THE WOLF MAN was created by Curt Siodmak, a German Jew who had been a very successful novelist and screenwriter in his native country before the rize of Nazism and Hitler (who called himself Father Wolf).

Siodmak became an outcast. His family was murdered but he managed to escape, in his words, "into a world I did not know." He ended up in America where he had to start from scratch, learning to write and speak in a completely unfamiliar language-- a potentially fatal handicap for a professional writer.

But Siodmak not only survived but thrived as an American novelist and screenwriter. His very real experience with fate and horror inspired him when he wrote his WOLF MAN screenplay, in which an innocent man is victimized by an inescapable fate.

Jack
 

caats

New member
Goonie said:
I never read the book. How did it compare to Kenneth Branagh's Mary Shelley's Frankenstein with De Niro as the monster?:confused:

One thing that ticks me off is that they still haven't released that movie in widescreen on DVD.:mad:

the creature talks for one. the creature like haunts frankenstein's life by killing off all his loved ones because frankenstein refuses to make the creature a partner. and the creature isn't slow and dumb, its fast strong and very smart. it's actually really really really creepy.

i actually haven't seen that movie, but i understand it was closer to the book but still pretty far off.
 

Cole

New member
Here's some exciting news for 'Frankenstein':

Jones laughs a bit when he explains that "Guillermo did say to the press that he's already cast me as his monster, but we've yet to talk about it. But in his mind, if that's what he's decided, then it's done. He's got a four-picture deal with Universal, so once he's done with The Hobbit, I think the first thing that's up on the docket will be Frankenstein. And reinvention is going to be the name of it, because he's going back to the Mary Shelley book and starting fresh with it."

Already known in the industry for his cavalcade of prosthetic-based creature characters in everything from TV's Buffy the Vampire Slayer (in which he played a creepy, silent Gentleman in "Hush") to the terrifying Pale Man in del Toro's Pan's Labyrinth, Jones says he's overwhelmed by the mere idea of playing Shelley's iconic creature as interpreted by del Toro.

"I go weak in the knees, and I lose blood in my brain," Jones enthuses. "It would be a dream come true. Boris Karloff as Frankenstein and the Mummy are two films that haunted my childhood. To be equated with him or to be in a property that he started on film is daunting and intimidating but also such a huge honor."

For now, Jones says he will meet with del Toro very soon.

"We are starting makeup tests, actually, in a couple weeks," Jones said. "We are going to do some tests just to see, because he has five years to play with this. He's taking that luxury of time to make this absolutely perfect. This is his dream. He was inspired by Frankenstein when he was a kid. It was the monster that made him want to make monsters. So, because of that, it's been [a] lifelong [dream], and he wants to be perfect with him."

http://scifiwire.com/2009/06/the-star-of-guillermo-del.php

Doug Jones is so amazing at making these creatures come to life.......again, I really recommend checking out 'Hellboy 2' and 'Pan's Labyrinth' from Guillermo del Toro. Doug Jones plays many characters in those films.

Glad to see others who enjoyed the book as much as myself.......I just read the novel of 'Frankenstein' last year for a Western Civilization history course since it deals with themes from the Industrial Revolution.

Coming from someone who almost never reads books and first looked upon this as a chore.........the novel is absolutely excellent.

Del Toro is the right man for the job and his passion is obviously evident, and I'm glad to hear they are going to the roots with the novel. It's gonna be great.
 
Last edited:

eazybox

Member
Thanks for posting the info on FRANKENSTEIN. "IT'S ALIIIVE!!!"

FRANKENSTEIN is credited by many scholars as being the first science fiction novel ever published-- another reason to stand in awe of Mary Shelley.

I would also highly recommend reading DRACULA to any fantasy or horror fan who hasn't already done so. Bram Stoker may not have been the greatest at character development and/or dialogue, but he was absolutely tops at creating creepy atmosphere-- every bit Poe's equal, at least in this one book.

The movie that probably came closest to Stoker's vision was the BBC production COUNT DRACULA, starring Louis Jourdan; but again, they took too many liberties to suit me. Christopher Lee also made a COUNT DRACULA which attempted to be faithful to the novel, but unfortunately lacked the budget to pull it off successfully. Still worth seeing, though, IMO.

Jack
 

eazybox

Member
One more interesting factoid: the hairy howls heard in THE WOLFMAN were voiced by Gene Simmons of KISS, who has "fulfilled a childhood dream" by achieving this Silver Scream milestone.

Jack
 

DocWhiskey

Well-known member
Anybody see this film?

I seen it last night with a few friends and it was pretty good. Good special effects, great makeup, nice score, fantastic look/mood. There was an element they added that I wasn't too crazy about, but overall it was a fun movie to see and very entertaining.

Can't beat the original though. But a very good remake.
 

eazybox

Member
A great old-fashioned monster movie, and better than I expected. The ending sets up the possibility of an interesting sequel.

I didn't care for the added twist to Anthony Hopkins's character, but it was telegraphed long ago in some advance reviews, so I knew what to expect.

Rick Baker's makeup work was outstanding as always. Benecio Del Toro was good, but didn't have much of an opportunity to build the same kind of pathos that made Lon Chaney, Jr. so sympathetic in the original. Chaney Jr. still owns the role of Lawrence Talbot, but this remake is definitely worth seeing.

Jack
 
Last edited:

Peru1936

New member
It was fine. There was a lot of ambition present, but it seemed to suffer from not enough follow through.

It looked good, I loved the atmosphere, and the makeup was great (as eazybox said, done by Rick Baker, who won an Oscar for his work on An American Werewolf in London). Other than del Toro, the performances were top shelf. Hopkins stole the show and Weaving was great as the inspector.

There were a few booboos that the film makers should've noticed. I also would have enjoyed more indepth scenes in the asylum with more dialogue about lycanthropy.

Ultimately, it did what it was supposed to do: entertain. I love the classic horror films, and the original Wolfman in particular. I've also always been very intrigued by werewolf lore. I think this remake did a decent job of bringing the lore into the movie-going present. It was spooky and horrorful enough to convince me to see it twice (yes, I've seen it twice already...:rolleyes:). It could've been better, but it didn't disappoint.

I certainly see why it got a February release, but I had lots of fun watching it just the same. I haven't watched the original since Halloween, time to bite into it again. :p
 

TheDarkCrusader

New member
I loved the movie but hated the CGI, it ruined the wolfman running and the transformation scenes. Other than that it was just about right, can't wait for the dvd.
 

AndyLGR

Active member
I got to see this eventually tonight on dvd. I'm a big fan of the orginal and I think this update did it justice.

As already mentioned the mood was perfectly captured in the settings, bleak moors, the village and olde London town. The performances were very good too, with Del Toro underplaying his role I would say. Hopkins was easily the star of the show and I quite liked the selfish side of him that enjoyed letting the beast free.

I didnt think the CGI was overly intrusive either, the effects were excellent. I think this film is one of the good examples on how to update a classic and not tread all over its memory.
 

Goonie

New member
AndyLGR said:
I got to see this eventually tonight on dvd. I'm a big fan of the orginal and I think this update did it justice.

As already mentioned the mood was perfectly captured in the settings, bleak moors, the village and olde London town. The performances were very good too, with Del Toro underplaying his role I would say. Hopkins was easily the star of the show and I quite liked the selfish side of him that enjoyed letting the beast free.

I didnt think the CGI was overly intrusive either, the effects were excellent. I think this film is one of the good examples on how to update a classic and not tread all over its memory.

I picked it up on DVD and finally saw it for the first time last week. I really enjoyed it. I got the original from that Legacy Collection with the sequels. Comparing the two, i thought it was a much better remake/reboot than Stephen Sommers' Mummy. But I'm wondering... why didn't Hugo kick Wolfman in the nards? ;)
 

AndyLGR

Active member
Goonie said:
I picked it up on DVD and finally saw it for the first time last week. I really enjoyed it. I got the original from that Legacy Collection with the sequels. Comparing the two, i thought it was a much better remake/reboot than Stephen Sommers' Mummy. But I'm wondering... why didn't Hugo kick Wolfman in the nards? ;)
I really enjoy the original Mummy purely because they added an Indiana Jones twist to it :whip:

But speaking of Stephen Sommers movies his re-invention of the Frankenstein / Dracula / Wolfman with Van Helsing was probably a worse movie.
 

Randolph Carter

New member
The original Wolf Man is one of my all time favourite horror movies, and I actually liked the 2010 remake, too.

Was cool to see the great Max Von Sydow's cameo in the director's cut!
 
Top