|
I first saw The Wolfman in theaters and I enjoyed it a lot. The movie stars Benicio Del Toro, Anthony Hopkins and Emily Blunt, and features Hugo Weaving as the inspector from Scotland Yard and a cameo by Max VonSydow (only in the unrated cut). My favorite parts where when that guy ran out of bullets before trying to kill himself to escape death by the titular Wolfman, when the Wolfman threw the smug psychiatrist out the window, and when Hugo Weaving shocked everyone at the tavern by declaring it was the best place to stake out potential victims of the mysterious killer. I recently rewatched the movie and, upon looking it up, I discovered apparently the movie was unpopular with both critics and audiences. I can understand why to a certain extent. I think the decision to graphically depict much of the violence on screen actually detracts from both the suspense and the actual impact of the violent acts. The movie would certainly have been better with more discretionary cuts to give the violence actually shown on screen more impact, IMO. Benicio Del Toro was also sort of meh but Anthony Hopkins and Hugo Weaving more than make up for his too-subtle performance. Overall, I think it's a pretty good movie. I liked the Victorian family drama and I thought the dialogue did a good job of evoking an atmosphere like something from Jane Austen or Bronte, only with werewolves. I think the filmmakers made a good decision to go with the classic Wolfman design even though 2010 effects would have been up to the task of making the monster more wolflike. The movie isn't perfect but I think it strikes a good balance between the corny premise and the dark family drama. It takes itself seriously but not too seriously to remember to have fun, and there is an undercurrent of subtle humor woven throughout the movie. Not great cinema, but a decent monster flick that I feel was unfairly ignored in its time. 7/10. -3 points for showing us too much and not being brave enough to play up the interpersonal drama instead of action.
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2022 17:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 20:59 |
|
|
I don't think it does deserve another chance and I will best with a slap many who say otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2022 17:37
|
|
|
The monster in this movie did not delight me, sexually. PASS!
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2022 17:40
|
|
|
I saw this thing in the cinema, and have heard noone talk about it since which is a shame since it's an amazing mess. I think the story about why it's so weird is that there were three directors, only one of who was actually good, leading to these wild swings in quality and tone. There are whole extended sequences which are genuinely extremely good, followed by utter crap. Benicio del Toro is somehow lacking in all charisma, and this is the worst performance I've seen from him. The costume design for him stands out as being particularly bad, and he looks like uncle fester in his weirdly bulky greatcoat. Hugo Weaving gives a performance so serious it curves back to campy and is delight on screen. Anthony Hopkins I'm not sure knows he's on camera, but his weird detached acting gives the best laugh of the movie when del Toro with deathly seriousness gives the big twist of the movie that Hopkins unintenionally killed his own wife, and Hopkins responds "Why... yes I suppose I did", with the same tone as someone hearing they'd left their glasses in the toilet. I'm convinced it was ad libbed it was just so out of place. One of the most memorable cinema experiences I've had, even if it's not a "good" film.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2022 18:54
|
|
|
Yeah, it's silly and rules extremely hard. The first chaos scene with the travelers has a guy running around on fire like in every riot scene in any movie ever and another where a guy hears vicious sounds coming from the shadows so he investigates by sticking both arms into the shadows and then pulls them back and they're just bloody stumps. It's good as poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2022 18:58
|
|
|
Max von Sydow is only in the unrated version? Does he do full frontal nudity or something? Do we see the old seventh seal?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2022 19:12
|
|
|
Does the wolfman have a wolf boner or man boner? Or something in between?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2022 19:16
|
|
|
I can't remember anything about it but I remember thinking it was alright
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2022 20:02
|
|
|
Sourdough Sam posted:The monster in this movie did not delight me, sexually. PASS! Personally I would be more turned on by a woman fighting the wolfman and winning than if the genders were reversed. Why would I, as a straight man, want to watch another man kill a hot monster girl?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2022 20:09
|
|
|
Somehow that's some good post/av synergy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2022 20:10
|
|
|
I’d been kind of okay with the idea of Del Toro being a movie star until this thread arrived, whereupon I checked out his career on IMDB and realised he’s been in maybe two good films in his life, both of which would only be marginally worse if he wasn’t in them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2022 20:53
|
|
|
I checked, and the 2010 Wolfman film is not part of the Dark Universe, the recent reboot of the Universal Classic Monsters setting. I can't believe you'd try to waste my time like this, OP. I do not watch films that aren't part of The Metaverse.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2022 21:03
|
|
|
Really coulda used an Xbox tie-in game too
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2022 21:22
|
|
|
I was fairly big into movies in 2010, and just learned this movie exists. Must have had terrible marketing
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2022 21:25
|
|
|
Torquemada posted:I’d been kind of okay with the idea of Del Toro being a movie star until this thread arrived, whereupon I checked out his career on IMDB and realised he’s been in maybe two good films in his life, both of which would only be marginally worse if he wasn’t in them. He is a trick directors use to get corporate people to sign things. "Del Toro is involved with this project", they'll say, and now there's more money for Wolfmen. Corporate people are very busy and can't check which Del Toro it is or in what role.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2022 21:36
|
|
|
The Wolfman isn't even REAL, op. Like, get a drat clue.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2022 21:58
|
|
|
Mumpy Puffinz posted:I was fairly big into movies in 2010 In what way? As in, you were employed in the movie industry or influenced it? You were attending film schools or traveling internationally to film art festivals? In what way were you 'big into movies' that wasn't 'watching a lot of them'? Because if that's the criteria I'm 'big into jacking off' and 'eating whole fruit rollups at once'.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2022 22:01
|
|
|
Big Beef City posted:I'm 'big into jacking off' *Raises paw* Same.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2022 22:02
|
|
|
Big Beef City posted:In what way? I went to the theater a lot, and had the internet and a subscription to EW. 2010 was a different time
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2022 22:06
|
|
|
The monster who really deserves another chance is the female mummy from the newest movie so she can find someone who actually wants to bang her instead of Tom Cruise.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2022 22:11
|
|
|
Blurry Gray Thing posted:He is a trick directors use to get corporate people to sign things. "Del Toro is involved with this project", they'll say, and now there's more money for Wolfmen. Corporate people are very busy and can't check which Del Toro it is or in what role. Maybe he’s fabulously attractive in real life but unremarkable as an actor, like Clive Owen. I just moot this possibility since he allegedly banged Scarlett Johanssen in an elevator once.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2022 22:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 20:59 |
|
|
Yaldabaoth posted:The monster who really deserves another chance is the female mummy from the newest movie so she can find someone who actually wants to bang her instead of Tom Cruise. Once the origin story movies were done, the first team-up crossover would naturally involve a love triangle with the Mummy, Dracula, and Carmilla.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2022 22:25
|
|