More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Marshall Fine

Marshall Fine

Posted: February 11, 2010 07:42 AM

Movie Review: The Wolfman

What's Your Reaction:

On the list of crimes against cinema, the remake stands just above the sequel as an offense against the artform.

The sequel, of course, is an indicator of a dangerous loss of imagination, though there are those rare examples of sequels that do more than simply repeat the formula of the original film.

But the remake blends both a death of imagination with hubris -- not just that an old product can be resold in a new package but that no matter how classic the original, the re-maker can somehow improve upon it.

Not that there aren't remakes that work; people have been reworking Shakespeare and other classics for years. The best remakes reimagine the material in a way that brings new insight; I always point to The Magnificent Seven as an example of a remake that stands on its own.

Most remakes, however, are simply crassly commercial projects. Someone somewhere said, "Hey, this is available and no one's seen it in a while. Let's cash in." Exhibit A: The upcoming film of The A Team.

Which brings us to The Wolfman, which attempts to retell the story that originated with a 1941 film starring Lon Chaney Jr. that was called The Wolf Man. The Chaney film isn't a classic in the sense that James Whale's Frankenstein or Todd Browning's Dracula are, as a formal piece of cinema. It was a corny horror programmer that happened to star Claude Rains and the wonderfully named Maria Ouspenskaya.

But it's a classic in the sense that it has legs -- that it's the werewolf story that spawned all cinematic werewolf stories. There's always room for a new one -- and there's no need to retell this old one.

Still, to be fair, Joe Johnston's remake isn't dreadful -- certainly not as awful as the commercials make it look. It's not a good movie, by any stretch -- but it could have been a lot worse.

What it's got going for it is Johnston's willingness to go for the throat with the action -- literally. When the title character runs wild, he doesn't just bite people or claw them -- he defenestrates them, dismembers them, decapitates them -- and all the other dis- and de- words that have to do with horrible things that can happen to the human body.

And this Wolfman isn't selective: Once he's turned loose by a full moon, he's a little like the Tasmanian Devil in the Looney Tunes cartoons -- a one-man tornado of violence cutting a swath through the closest available crowd of humans, leaving a wake marked by gallons of fake blood and rubber guts and limbs.

This review continues on my website.

 
 
 

Follow Marshall Fine on Twitter: www.twitter.com/hollywoodnfine

 
 
  • Comments
  • 9
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Tallulah Morehead
Award-Eligible Film Legend
11:11 PM on 02/11/2010
Well first off, I think the TV ads make it look like a good old-time hoot, souped up with modern effects. unlike say, the ads for SHERLOCK HOLMES, which made it look wretched, which it turned out to be.

Secondly, re: "The Chaney film isn’t a classic in the sense that James Whale’s 'Frankenstein' or Todd Browning’s 'Dracula' are, as a formal piece of cinema." No, Chaney's film (To me, forever, Curt Siodmak's film. He states in his autobiography, WOLF MAN'S MAKER, he was writing about people who were really wolves inside, like the Nazis he'd narrowly escaped.) is vastly SUPERIOR to Browning's DRACULA, which, after the great first 15 minutes, becomes a stultifying bore, a cinematic cure for insomnia. Whale's FRANKENSTEIN is a great movie, though still not as great as BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN, a perfect example of a sequel that deepens the material too-glossed-over in the original, and is essential. FRANKENSTEIN is incomplete without BRIDE. Siodmak's WOLF MAN is a B-movie that looks like an A-fim, due to a first-rate cast.

(Overlong comment contineus below)
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Tallulah Morehead
Award-Eligible Film Legend
11:11 PM on 02/11/2010
(Pt. 2)

In your full review (How annoying to make us click to a different site to finish reading it) you wrote: "in fact, an actual full moon lasts, at most, two nights." This will be big news to every astronomer on earth, since full moons ONLY last ONE night! There is no such thing as a two-night full moon.

In Siodmak's film, the full moon has nothing to do with Chaney's changes. The moon is never seen nor mentioned. The full-moon tie-in began in the sequel, FRANKENSTEIN MEETS THE WOLFMAN, in which the last line of the doggerel poem is altered to include the full moon. And yes, those movies often presented what they called "The Cycle of the Full Moon," which seems to last three nights. But the full moon is on ONE night each month. For a two-night full moon to happen the moon would have to halt in its orbit.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Tallulah Morehead
Award-Eligible Film Legend
11:20 PM on 02/11/2010
In THE WOLF MAN, the verse is:

"Even a man who is pure in heart,
And says his prayers by night,
May becoame a wolf when the wolfbane blooms,
And the autumn moon is bright."

In FRANKENSTEIN MEETS THE WOLFMAN, and in all thereafter, it becomes:

"Even a man who is pure in heart,
And says his prayers by night,
May becoame a wolf when the wolfbane blooms,
And the moon is full and bright."

I can not believe you reviewed the new WOLF MAN and never mentioned if the verse is in the movie or not.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Tallulah Morehead
Award-Eligible Film Legend
11:23 PM on 02/11/2010
Oh great. I batch-copied a misspelling. "becoame" should be "become".
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
situationcritical
SuperMegaUltraUberLiberal
09:23 PM on 02/11/2010
I can't wait to see it.

Frankly I prefer my blood and violence to come from werewolf movies - not from Quentin Tarantooty.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JAL12
Patriot, Humorist, Guy
07:18 PM on 02/11/2010
I'll pass. Too much blood, gore, entrails, limbs, etc in movies today. I am old enough to have my own imagination, if you please.
06:57 PM on 02/11/2010
Media companies remake old content for an additional reason - it helps extend their intellectual property ownership of catalog properties. It's like a re-boot that refreshes and reinforces their claims of legal rights. That's also part of the reason sequels get made - it's not just a dearth of creativity but the creation of a stronger IP claim over multiple properties. You're right, sometimes the sequel runs out of creative steam, but it's understandable why a company would want to build a franchise around a proven hit. Unfortunately, sometimes they suffocate the product the second time around with overcaution due to wanting to preserve a cash cow or overconfidence that they can repeat the magic on command.

I saw The Wolfman last night at a preview screening in LA, and I liked it. I didn't expect it to be more than an entertaining popcorn movie, and it delivered in that regard. I thought the film editing was really good - it was fast and drove the film relentlessly. I also really liked the set and costume design, the aesthetic use of the lunar cycle as a framing device and the imaginative plot elements incorporating Gypsies and a lycanthropy origin in India.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
gulopartisan
My micro-bio is empty.
11:43 AM on 02/11/2010
Based on the trailer, I was expecting more of an hommage to what I consider the greatest werewolf movie, The Curse of the Werewolf. Del Toro even looks like the young Oliver Reed -- both hairy and not. Given this description, I'll take a pass and go see Terry Gilliam's Dr. Parnassus instead.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
musselmanm
With Liberty and Justice for all
10:43 AM on 02/11/2010
Sounds good to an old time Wolf Man fan!