The Wolfman (2010)

The Wolfman
JOIN NOW

Strong horror violence

Director: Joe Johnston
Actors: Benicio Del Toro, Anthony Hopkins, Emily Blunt, Hugo Weaving, Art Malik

With the help of special effects master Rick Baker (HELLBOY, MEN IN BLACK), Oscar winner Benicio Del Toro transforms into the hairy hybrid of the title. Directed by Joe Johnston (JURASSIC PARK III), THE WOLFMAN follows in Universal's grand tradition of horror movies, including the 1941 classic THE WOLF MAN, starring Lon Chaney Jr. and Bela Lugosi.

DVD
Status: QuickPick
Run time: 102mins
Origin: UNITED STATES
Aspect Ratio: 16:9
It's hideous!
by Simon Miraudo, 11/02/2010 9:47:00 AM

In the past year, we've been treated to two major films about werewolves: The Twilight Saga’s New Moon and this, The Wolfman. Never in my wildest dreams did I think that New Moon would be the superior film on the subject, and never would I have considered Taylor Lautner (hardly a master thespian) more adept at portraying a tormented soul than Benicio Del Toro. The only thing scary about Joe Johnston’s The Wolfman is that it exists. The fact that people, nay professionals, spent several years working on this picture genuinely upsets me. Even worse is the knowledge that audiences around the world will surrender two of their precious hours as well as some of their hard earned money to endure this stillborn mess. Benicio Del Toro stars as Lawrence Talbot, a celebrated actor from the London s...

In the past year, we've been treated to two major films about werewolves: The Twilight Saga’s New Moon and this, The Wolfman. Never in my wildest dreams did I think that New Moon would be the superior film on the subject, and never would I have considered Taylor Lautner (hardly a master thespian) more adept at portraying a tormented soul than Benicio Del Toro. The only thing scary about Joe Johnston’s The Wolfman is that it exists. The fact that people, nay professionals, spent several years working on this picture genuinely upsets me. Even worse is the knowledge that audiences around the world will surrender two of their precious hours as well as some of their hard earned money to endure this stillborn mess.

Benicio Del Toro stars as Lawrence Talbot, a celebrated actor from the London stage who returns to his childhood home following the untimely murder of his brother. It is ironic that Benicio Del Toro should play an actor in this film, because by the time the final credits rolled, I wasn’t even sure that Benicio himself was an actor. Lodging with his father (Anthony Hopkins) and his late brother's fiancée (the always reliable Emily Blunt), Lawrence pledges to find the man responsible for his brother’s death. The thing is, his killer is not a man at all, but a Wolfman! Soon enough, Lawrence too is bitten by the roaming werewolf, and finds himself also transforming into a hideous beast every full moon.

I can’t even begin to comprehend what Del Toro thinks he is doing in this movie. He shuffles through the motions as if playing a particularly charmless version of the Hunchback of Notre Dame. He doesn’t even attempt an English accent, instead seemingly taking acting cues from The Room’s Tommy Wiseau. At the very least, all that was required of him was to seem human in contrast to the beast that lives within. Acting like a natural human being has never seemed like such an onerous task.

Joe Johnston’s Wolfman was not always Joe Johnston’s Wolfman. Mark Romanek was originally slated to direct, but left the project due to creative differences in February of 2008. Then Johnston was brought aboard and the film was set to hit cinemas November 2008. This release date changed FOUR times, eventually landing (with a thud) in February 2010. Rumours of re-cuts and endless edits pervaded much of the film’s post-production. But that’s fine with me. If a film is good, I couldn’t care less about its troubled production. But The Wolfman is not good. Not even close. It’s a hatchet job, and it shows. The film seems to be completely aware of its own awfulness; it’s in a hurry to wrap itself up from the opening credits onwards. Characters are not developed far beyond their introduction; in fact, you’ll be hard pressed to even remember any of their names.

The entire project reeks of slapdash construction (plenty of supposedly spooky sound effects have clearly been added on top of scenes where they are not required; lazy, last-minute narration has been chucked in to help link one moment to another). The ability to compose a sequence with a variety of shots so that the viewer can understand what is happening seems to elude the editor(s). In one instance, Del Toro hears a voice in one of the manor’s many empty rooms. He ducks his head in, where he begins to flashback to his days as a boy. Cut to Del Toro getting into bed, where he once again has another flashback. Then cut to Del Toro closing the door he opened previously. Wait, what? I thought he was in bed! Was that part of the flashback? If so, why would he flashback to an insignificant event mere moments in the future? Come on guys, this is the first thing they teach you in Editing 101 – cut things together so they make sense!

There is no story here. Literally, no story. A man turns into a werewolf, and then what? It’s not scary enough to be an ethereal slasher film, and it’s nowhere near profound enough to address any of the inherit issues of the original, classic tale. Characters make decisions with seemingly no motivation. The creature designs (from the great Rick Baker) are impressive, but more often than not the Wolfman himself is a CG construction, and about as scary as a bunch of cats taped together. Worst of all, the film is drab, lifeless and boring. Halfway through the screening I attended, during one of the reel changes, the film began to be projected halfway down the screen. For almost 10 minutes, we could only see the tops of the characters heads. By this point, I was far too bored to muster any response other than mild inconvenience in having to slightly lower the direction of my eyes. It seems even the projectionist had fallen asleep. When the picture was corrected, no one in the audience cheered.

0.5/5

Check out Simon's other reviews here.

Read More

Member Reviews (25)

25 Member Reviews
Hank
says
A bit different, but well worth a watch.
Posted Wednesday, 22 May 2013 See my other reviews
joffa
says
this i liked (alot), my kind of entertainment. Would of got 5 stars in my book with a little more content. (at times a 'little slow')
Posted Wednesday, 22 May 2013 See my other reviews
Andrew
says
Anthony Hopkins, Hugo Weaving, Emily Blunt. Good names and I enjoy them all on screen, particularly Miss Blunt, but this one falls well short. Benicio is poorly cast ( I think in his own movie) and the special effects other than the transformation are poor.
Posted Monday, 24 December 2012 See my other reviews
Pieta
says
This movie was just okay. It's set in the 1890's, London. It's a little slow and sort of boring, having said that I didn't want to turn it off and wanted to know how it ended. Not scary at all with a bit of blood and guts. Not a sit on the edge of your seat horror/thriller. Watch it for something to do on a rainy day.
Posted Wednesday, 23 November 2011 See my other reviews
Lou
says
To have a cast of actors of the calibre of those involved in this production and still manage to produce a movie THIS bad takes a certain amount of skill! It was truly awful - one of the worst movies I have seen in a very long time. To sum up: Don't bother!!! 0.5 stars out of 5 is generous
Posted Tuesday, 27 September 2011 See my other reviews
Pfurball
says
This was a pretty crappy attempt at a werewolf horror movie. Lots of gore and good actors but just not that scary or gripping and very predictable.
Posted Thursday, 15 September 2011 See my other reviews
Dean
says
The old common Dad turns son into werewolf, Dad is anthony hopkins playing evil man story again. watch the film without expectations and you will enjoy it. Not even close the american werewolf in london, but it's a reminder of the 70's and 80's horror films. designed to make you jump out of your chair.
Posted Wednesday, 14 September 2011 See my other reviews
mu
says
Serious case of overacting here, only chose it for the star cast, but what a let-down.I can't believe seriously good actors go for this twaddle, surely they're not ALL strapped for cash.
Posted Thursday, 9 June 2011 See my other reviews
Pip
says
Once again, another slow moving movie, The story line was good, just took too long to get there.
Posted Wednesday, 30 March 2011 See my other reviews
rosz
says
This is an interesting film - a remake of the Wolf Man. I didn't realize when I was watching it that it was a remake and thought it, while beautiful to look at, didn't offer anything new to the genre, that it was more of an homage film. It makes a lot more sense knowing it is a remake. I didn't remember the plot of the first movie, but the monster is definitely the Lon Chaney Jr style. This is not a bad movie - it's just not very exciting unless you like homages. Perhaps this might be one of the few movies where the sequel is better than the first?
Posted Thursday, 27 January 2011 See my other reviews
Shaun
says
A lot of style, no substance. The movie looks great with some fantastic shots of 1700's London. The warewolfs look ok and the transformations are good. The movie has a "big reveal" of the plot twist despite being a remake and it being painfully obvious anyway. Went for an hour too long...
Posted Monday, 22 November 2010 See my other reviews
Ben H
says
Only gore, no story, I just wanted them to kill the werewolf so it would be over.
Posted Tuesday, 19 October 2010 See my other reviews
tom
says
i do enjoy remakes of the old bnw classics, theres better acting and and quality for sure, it was worth the watch and i enjoyed hopkins character
Posted Wednesday, 25 August 2010 See my other reviews
Rena
says
Very nice remake of a classic. Great effects, excellent cinematography and good story. Definitely worth watching.
Posted Thursday, 19 August 2010 See my other reviews
Sarah.
says
Well I thought this was a great movie! I'm not a fan of horror movies at all, but I was totally hooked by this movie. I lost track of time when watching it. I thought the makeup was good - it looked like a part wolf, part man. Same with the old gloomy background shots etc. It was done very well in the "old style" of horror movies that you see in the early hours of the morning. It had plenty of cover your eyes gore and scary bits. A nice change from all this new style techno gadget movies out today.
Posted Wednesday, 18 August 2010 See my other reviews
Granger
says
This mvie was very disappointing,what I saw of it. It lacked the movitation from the actors in the movie, which became dead boring for me. Even thow tis might sound harsh but Im gald the moive disc was faulty as I would of turned it off it wasn't. If you want to find some thing to put to sleep right away this would be one.
Posted Saturday, 14 August 2010 See my other reviews
Lharry
says
4 1/2 stars. This movies achieves all its goals for the viewer, old school, ketchup violence and gore, dramatically themed music with the classic love story amongst the horror. wasn't bored at all.
Posted Monday, 2 August 2010 See my other reviews
mick
says
Do not bother, starts slow and disjointed and does not get any better
Posted Wednesday, 28 July 2010 See my other reviews
rash
says
slow moving, not the best
Posted Saturday, 10 July 2010 See my other reviews
Waylon
says
A true “Wolfman” movie the way it’s meant to be… Finally with out overdoing the whole Werewolf effects. Although quite different from the classics, it certainly holds true. If you are looking for a wham bam thank you mam movie then, this is not for you. The movie is moderately slow (as is expected of all good horrors), but contains quite a lot of gory action. A must watch for “Wolfman” fans. All roles are played brilliantly. The make up is done rather well in my opinion because it makes the beast look rugged and not prim and proper like most monsters that are made these days. The “dodgy” makeup mentioned in previous reviews refers to the fact that they still have human features and not completely wolf. Don’t let that keep you from getting this movie. After all let’s not forget it’s a wolfMAN. The animation of the other animals could have been better but all can be forgiven at the end.
Posted Tuesday, 6 July 2010 See my other reviews
Melissa
says
Slow start better ending...
Posted Monday, 28 June 2010 See my other reviews
Matthew B.
says
A good gothic horror in the manner of Dracula. Anthony Hopkins is as good as ever. Hugo Weaving performs brilliantly.
Posted Saturday, 26 June 2010 See my other reviews
Sunet
says
What a disappointment! The visual and make up were quite dodgy, the acting from Del Toro and Hopkins were embarassingly bad. It was terribly long and slow. The storyline had nothing original. The dialogues were quite awkward at times. Frankly not the best werewolf flick and certainly not worth your time.
Posted Monday, 21 June 2010 See my other reviews
Daniel M.
says
Really has not much to do with the original and it seems pointlessely to long however i did very much like this movie very gory the storyline could be a bit out at times however 4\5
Posted Saturday, 12 June 2010 See my other reviews
Marg
says
Hmmm, I'm undecided on this one! There were parts I liked but then parts I didn't get at all. The story was very disjointed and I was not impressed with Del Toro or his character. Only Hopkins and Blunt kept the movie interesting. Needed to provide a more clearer background story and the relationship between Del Toro and Blunt's characters was flat and rushed, no chemistry at all. An interesting watch for werewolf genre fans but could have been much better.
Posted Friday, 11 June 2010 See my other reviews