The Wolfman (2010)
The Wolfman (2010)
In 2010, Universal Pictures released a remake of the classic 1941 film The Wolfman, which should have been a relatively easy film to remake, because the film had a great story, and wonderful sympathetic characters. But then again we know that no remake made now can just be a true remake to a successful film, there has to be added in over the top effects and action sequences, and complex and twisting story lines. Let me say this, and I wish that the film companies would listen, there is a reason that the original film was successful, and there is a reason that it has endured for so long, so to go an mess with that, and to expect people to love and praise you for it is a stupidity. The Wolfman is not an action film, it is not a gory horror film, and it isn't some complicated story about a dramatic family, and the original works, why not take that actual story from the original film, and just update the visuals, with the current technology, why not just fix what either didn't work, or can simply be done better, why drastically change it, and why bring in new characters, and make the old ones behave differently? I am so bloody sick of these shit remakes that take an amazing original work and then just crap all over its legacy...but I digress, I will discuss more specifics in a moment.
The Wolfman starred Benicio del Toro as Lawrence Talbot, Anthony Hopkins as Sir John Talbot, Emily Blunt as Gwen Conliffe, Hugo Weaving as Inspector Francis Aberline (yes, the character that Johnny Depp played in From Hell, yes, the inspector that famously worked on the Jack The Ripper case. Why? Why the hell knows, but here he is in The Wolfman.), Geraldine Chaplin as Maleva (the gypsy), Art Malik as Singh (Sir John Talbot's servant), Antony Sher as Dr Hoenneger, David Schofield as Constable Nye, Simon Merrells as Ben Talbot (Lawrence Talbot's brother who is murdered by a werewolf...wait what? when did that happen in the original film?), Cristina Contes as Solona Talbot (Lawrence's mom, who was also murdered by a werewolf when he was a child, though in his dreams he thought she killed herself), then there are doctors and residents of a lunatic asylum and...oh nevermind it just starts getting bizarre from here on. There was originally a scene with Max von Sydow, who the character of Lawrence Talbot beets on a train and he gives Talbot the wolf-head cane, but this was cut from the theatrical version, but it is on the unrated director's cut, which is what I watched for this review. Honestly with a cast including Anthony Hopkins, and Hugo Weaving, we should be in for a good film, however great actors can't fix bad writing. This film falls flat and fails, and I don't think it is the fault of the actors, and honestly I feel bad for Benicio del Toro, as I have read he is a huge fan of The Wolfman, and of Lon Chaney Jr, and then when he gets a chance to be in a film playing that character, the people in charge of making it, did a crap job at it.
So who can we blame for this insult to the legacy of the Wolfman? It was directed by Joe Johnston, after director Mark Romanek walked away from the project for "creative differences". The film was written by Andrew Kevin Walker, with David Self coming in to do rewrites when Joe Johnston was brought on, and the story is based on the original screenplay from Curt Siodmak. The film had music by Oingo Boingo frontman Danny Elfman, though at one point his score was rejected and a new score was written by Paul Haslinger. It was then decided that Haslinger's electronic score didn't go with the setting of the film, so they decided to instead use Danny Elfman's original score. However each time a new score was used, it required reshoots and edits to make the music and the film work together, and of course all of this costs money. The practical make-up effects were done by Rick Baker, who was inspired to get into the business because of the amazing work of Jack Pierce in the original Universal Monster films, however to his disappointment is became apparent that he would not be doing the transition scenes for either of the werewolves in the film, and instead it would be done through CGI effects, matter of fact much of the effects would end up being done through CGI, and sadly it was disappointing looking.
This film had the opportunity at every turn to be a great film, but it feels like the wrong decisions were constantly being made. They could have used great practical effects like those that were used in the original, with updated methods and tools, and could have made this a great horror film with practical effects. They could have stuck with original storyline that worked so well, and just make a few minor updates to make it updated, but keep the characters as they were. Then they could have actually stuck to the original script with just a few updates to make it work for modern audiences. They had a great cast, but honestly if they would have kept to the original, and let Rick Baker actually show his skill as a special effects makeup artist and do the film with practical effects, this really could have been, and should have been a great film. But what is presented in this film is not the Wolfman, but another in a long line of crappy 2000's era fantasy-horror films along the likes of Brother's Grimm, Dracula Untold (a film so terrible it makes me ill to even utter its name), and Van Helsing (though at least Van Helsing worked as a dark fantasy/horror action film).
I am not alone in my disappointment in The Wolfman, the film received generally negative reviews from the critics upon release, and holds a below average score on film sites like Rotten Tomatoes. The film was also a flop in the box office, grossing $142.6 million, which seems pretty good, until you consider that the film's budget was $150 million. Make that $150 million wasted, and with the rewrites, reshoots, reedits, rescores, the budget keeps bloating, but if you are going to spend $150 million to make a film, it damn well be a good film that can draw people to the theaters, otherwise it is almost guaranteed to flop. The sad thing is, that Universal Pictures created the greatest franchise of Monster films in the history of motion pictures, they are so easily recognizable, but Universal keeps trying to update these classics with big budget effects and bogging them down with CGI, and artificially making them dark, and all the while losing track of what actually made the original Universal Monster franchise great. The last time the original Universal Monsters were brought to the big screen in a way that worked was with Bram Stoker's Dracula, and Mary Shelley's Frankenstein in the 1990s. But if you look at Dracula Untold, The Wolfman, and The Mummy (with Tom Cruise), and honestly even The Invisible Man (though that film was successful, I have some serious issues with it, but that is a discussion for another time), you can start to see that Universal seems to have forgotten what made the Universal Monsters franchises so great. Those films have stood the test of time, they are still recognizable, and loved by viewers after nearly 80 years, and that is an impressive feat. I think if Universal really wants to create the shared Dark Universe, then maybe they need to reexamine why those films worked, and maybe they should look could look at contemporary works like the television show Penny Dreadful for inspiration of how to make the Dark Universe successful. I do think that if they are going to do this, then they need to be true to what worked for the original films, and the original characters, and be true to it. The Universal Monsters included Dracula, Frankenstein's Monster, The Bride Of Frankenstein, The Invisible Man, The Mummy, The Wolfman, The Creature From The Black Lagoon, and the Phantom of the Opera, though in a shared universe they could also bring in Jekyll and Hyde, and a few of the minor monsters that Universal had released from the 1930s-1940s, a shared universe could work, and it could be great. What Universal needs to remember though is that these weren't action films, they are not the comic book characters of the Marvel and DC universes, and they should not try to make them that, they should re-examine what made them great and memorable, and make films that are true to that. But I don't think Universal cares about the Monsters, nor do I think they ever did, they were b-movies, they were talky film versions of penny dreadfuls, they were popcorn films, and nothing more to Universal. However think about what films people remember the best, if you say Frankenstein, Dracula, Wolfman, or the Creature from the Black Lagoon everyone can picture the classic Universal Monsters, and that is a really special thing, that these b-movies have left a bigger impression on pop culture than the majority of their high-brow films, and maybe it is time that the big-wigs at Universal actually start to respect that, and make remakes and build their "Dark Universe" in a way that respects those Monsters that have become such a huge part of pop culture.
I wanted to like this The Wolfman, and I think that maybe the first time I watched this film, that maybe I might have liked it, but as I come to the end of my "Wolfman" marathon of films, I see this film stood up next to the films that inspired it, and maybe because of that it is harder for me to enjoy this film. I loved Lon Chaney Jr, he was Larry Talbot, he was always Larry Talbot, there is this sadness and pitifulness to him, that made him an endearing character, this was this purity of heart to him, that fit the poem:
"Even a man who is pure of heart, and says his prayers at night
will turn into a wolf, when the wolfbane blooms and the autumn moon is bright"
I didn't see Larry Talbot in this film, I did feel that sorrow, and that pitifulness, I just saw a cheap imitation of it, and bad writing, and an attempt to create drama and story that was completely unnecessary...which describes this film, "completely unnecessary". This is not the worst film I've seen, or even the worst film in the Wolfman franchise, but it is completely unnecessary, and I do not recommend it. Well I don't recommend it to fans of the Wolfman, if you are into these CGI heavy, comic book esque horror/fantasy action films from the 2000's then watch it, you might very well enjoy it, I have many friends that would probably love it, but if you are a fan of the classic Universal Monsters franchises, then avoid this film, avoid Dracula Untold, avoid The Mummy, and avoid The Invisible Man, they are just going to show that Universal has lost touch with what made the originals great, and proves that they never really cared for the film properties that have become their most recognizable symbols of pop culture. So I guess watch at your own discretion, and enjoy it for what it is, and expect nothing more.
As I was finishing, I realized I had an after thought that needed to be added: The biggest sin that this film commits, is the sin of being too big and boring. The filmmakers tried to make the story too big, adding in too much, and way too much when it comes to the fight scenes, to the point that it causes a sensory overload. I have been trying to figure out why I always had a hard time staying awake when watching films like The Matrix, and I think that while reviewing this, I have some music playing in the background, and a Bad Religion song put a name to why this film and films like The Matrix make me so drowsy when I watch them. The issue is sensory overload, when films create huge CGI fight sequences, that have too much crap flying around, and too many bodies flying through the air, and the action starts just going so fast, it creates a state of sensory overload that causes my eyes to just start getting tired and I think that I have always thought that it was boredom. So there is a reason that big action films really turn me off, and it is because of the sensory overload. If anyone else gets, that please let me know in the comments, I'd love to hear your stories of it.
I am not alone in my disappointment in The Wolfman, the film received generally negative reviews from the critics upon release, and holds a below average score on film sites like Rotten Tomatoes. The film was also a flop in the box office, grossing $142.6 million, which seems pretty good, until you consider that the film's budget was $150 million. Make that $150 million wasted, and with the rewrites, reshoots, reedits, rescores, the budget keeps bloating, but if you are going to spend $150 million to make a film, it damn well be a good film that can draw people to the theaters, otherwise it is almost guaranteed to flop. The sad thing is, that Universal Pictures created the greatest franchise of Monster films in the history of motion pictures, they are so easily recognizable, but Universal keeps trying to update these classics with big budget effects and bogging them down with CGI, and artificially making them dark, and all the while losing track of what actually made the original Universal Monster franchise great. The last time the original Universal Monsters were brought to the big screen in a way that worked was with Bram Stoker's Dracula, and Mary Shelley's Frankenstein in the 1990s. But if you look at Dracula Untold, The Wolfman, and The Mummy (with Tom Cruise), and honestly even The Invisible Man (though that film was successful, I have some serious issues with it, but that is a discussion for another time), you can start to see that Universal seems to have forgotten what made the Universal Monsters franchises so great. Those films have stood the test of time, they are still recognizable, and loved by viewers after nearly 80 years, and that is an impressive feat. I think if Universal really wants to create the shared Dark Universe, then maybe they need to reexamine why those films worked, and maybe they should look could look at contemporary works like the television show Penny Dreadful for inspiration of how to make the Dark Universe successful. I do think that if they are going to do this, then they need to be true to what worked for the original films, and the original characters, and be true to it. The Universal Monsters included Dracula, Frankenstein's Monster, The Bride Of Frankenstein, The Invisible Man, The Mummy, The Wolfman, The Creature From The Black Lagoon, and the Phantom of the Opera, though in a shared universe they could also bring in Jekyll and Hyde, and a few of the minor monsters that Universal had released from the 1930s-1940s, a shared universe could work, and it could be great. What Universal needs to remember though is that these weren't action films, they are not the comic book characters of the Marvel and DC universes, and they should not try to make them that, they should re-examine what made them great and memorable, and make films that are true to that. But I don't think Universal cares about the Monsters, nor do I think they ever did, they were b-movies, they were talky film versions of penny dreadfuls, they were popcorn films, and nothing more to Universal. However think about what films people remember the best, if you say Frankenstein, Dracula, Wolfman, or the Creature from the Black Lagoon everyone can picture the classic Universal Monsters, and that is a really special thing, that these b-movies have left a bigger impression on pop culture than the majority of their high-brow films, and maybe it is time that the big-wigs at Universal actually start to respect that, and make remakes and build their "Dark Universe" in a way that respects those Monsters that have become such a huge part of pop culture.
I wanted to like this The Wolfman, and I think that maybe the first time I watched this film, that maybe I might have liked it, but as I come to the end of my "Wolfman" marathon of films, I see this film stood up next to the films that inspired it, and maybe because of that it is harder for me to enjoy this film. I loved Lon Chaney Jr, he was Larry Talbot, he was always Larry Talbot, there is this sadness and pitifulness to him, that made him an endearing character, this was this purity of heart to him, that fit the poem:
"Even a man who is pure of heart, and says his prayers at night
will turn into a wolf, when the wolfbane blooms and the autumn moon is bright"
I didn't see Larry Talbot in this film, I did feel that sorrow, and that pitifulness, I just saw a cheap imitation of it, and bad writing, and an attempt to create drama and story that was completely unnecessary...which describes this film, "completely unnecessary". This is not the worst film I've seen, or even the worst film in the Wolfman franchise, but it is completely unnecessary, and I do not recommend it. Well I don't recommend it to fans of the Wolfman, if you are into these CGI heavy, comic book esque horror/fantasy action films from the 2000's then watch it, you might very well enjoy it, I have many friends that would probably love it, but if you are a fan of the classic Universal Monsters franchises, then avoid this film, avoid Dracula Untold, avoid The Mummy, and avoid The Invisible Man, they are just going to show that Universal has lost touch with what made the originals great, and proves that they never really cared for the film properties that have become their most recognizable symbols of pop culture. So I guess watch at your own discretion, and enjoy it for what it is, and expect nothing more.
As I was finishing, I realized I had an after thought that needed to be added: The biggest sin that this film commits, is the sin of being too big and boring. The filmmakers tried to make the story too big, adding in too much, and way too much when it comes to the fight scenes, to the point that it causes a sensory overload. I have been trying to figure out why I always had a hard time staying awake when watching films like The Matrix, and I think that while reviewing this, I have some music playing in the background, and a Bad Religion song put a name to why this film and films like The Matrix make me so drowsy when I watch them. The issue is sensory overload, when films create huge CGI fight sequences, that have too much crap flying around, and too many bodies flying through the air, and the action starts just going so fast, it creates a state of sensory overload that causes my eyes to just start getting tired and I think that I have always thought that it was boredom. So there is a reason that big action films really turn me off, and it is because of the sensory overload. If anyone else gets, that please let me know in the comments, I'd love to hear your stories of it.
Comments
Post a Comment