• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot, especially our Own the Source rule. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Please read our Rules & Guidelines

The Wolfman (2010)

Gaith

Well-known member
Faneditor
Messages
5,785
Reaction score
291
Trophy Points
123
the_wolfman.jpg


Del Toro. Hopkins. Weaving. Werewolves. "Blackmoor, England 1891". $100 million spent on fog, brambles and one crackerjack London sequence. How can it go wrong?

Here's how it could have: by taking itself seriously. Dean Ebert, take it away:

Gothic horror stories seem more digestible when set in once-great British country houses and peopled with gloomy introverts, especially when the countryside involves foggy moors and a craggy waterfall. This is, after all, a story set before the advent of modern psychology, back when a man's fate could be sealed by ancestral depravity.
Nailed it again, Rog. This isn't a grand, nation-hopping adventure like Dracula, nor is it a romantic, operatic adventure like 1999's The Mummy. It's about a werewolf who rips men's guts out, not because of any particular reason, just because. The hero is doomed not only by ancestry, but because he looks like a werewolf from the start! No Keanu-in-Victorian-England piffle here - taking notes, Francis?

And the movie delivers, with a blessedly short running time (100 min.), a babe who's beautiful but not distractingly pretty, excellent actors in Del Toro, Hopkins and Weaving, in his best post-Matrix/LotR role, and plenty of solid jump moments. There's also lots of MTV-style quick cutting and other modern editing tricks, but they give the movie a welcome kick. Also, in a fun detail, look for Charlie Chaplin's daughter as the old gypsy woman!

The only flaws? A brief but pointless intro and outro voiceover and an unnecessarily protracted death scene. (Can't anyone die in movies without giving a speech?) That, and I kept expecting Brendan Fraser to show up. Does it have fan-editing potential? Removing the narration and shortening the death scene wouldn't merit a TF on their own, and at this running time, there's not much to cut. So, probably not.

This is a B-movie done right, so a B it gets. It's not a modern classic like The Mummy, but it earns a place on the same shelf.
 

Uncanny Antman

Well-known member
Faneditor
Messages
2,800
Reaction score
4
Trophy Points
48
Personally, I enjoyed it a hell of a lot more than The Mummy, but I can legitimately see why many would not agree.
 

Gaith

Well-known member
Faneditor
Messages
5,785
Reaction score
291
Trophy Points
123
The Mummy's my second-favorite movie ever, so now way was this going to come close, but I liked it nonetheless. :)
 
Top Bottom