The WolfMan (2010)

i hate mike...

usually i really like your reviews, but you lost me a bit by looking so much down at the doc with notes, and not showing the scenes you are referring to.

how could mike not like the mummy remake

I actually really liked 1999's The Mummy and prefer it to The Wolfman.

I fell asleep somewhere through about 3/4 of the movie.

1 and 1/2 out of three.....2 and 1/2 out of 5......and 6 out of 10 bullets??? So, on a larger scale, it deserves a higher rating? What's up with the fuzzy math yall? Like it matters 1 year later!

it would be cool, when u do reviews like this, show scenes in background from movies

I think mike didn't really liked mary shelley's frankensteinbecause it actually isn't a re-make of the old universal movie, because the old movie is based for the better part of it on the stage play.
whereas mary shelleys frankenstein really follows the story or book through every scene.

the same thing goes for Bram stokers dracula.

I forgot to mention he was in the scene in the asylum and the chair transformation he talked to the wolfman in his costume being 7ft tall great review!

I love This film because my dad is in it and he met the guy from matrix and told me alot about behind the scenes that most of the scenes are made from wood and cardboard. great review

I love ur review on this. It is interesting to see what u have to say. IN my oppinion though, I thought the movie was really good. I did agree on some things u said like the cheap special effects, but over all, I would rate it 3 1/2 silver bullets out of 5. Or mabey 4 silver bullets! Nice review.

It's wierd. I kinda get why you think Dracula, The Mummy and Frankeinstein were just ok, because those films are a different take on classic Hollywood monsters, more based on the original idea, or more adventurous instead of horror films. But after watching this movie and finding out you had made a review, I really thought you were going to like it. It felt quite classic horror film to me, just a little more intense. But well, guess you can never tell.

my Main problem is the wolfman
he looks so shitty
i mean
c'mon man
the 1s in Van Helsing were awesome
they shuld have had those
even the 1 4rm harry potter 3 loooked beter

I know, this comment comes too late and most likely nobody will ever read it, but i still feel like writing it because i saw the movie for the first time just yesterday.

I found the movie very bland and almost boring.
I think the problem with it is that it breaks the first rule of horror films, just like most slasher movies do: If you want to scare people, make them care about the characters in your movie. When we see the wolfman kill a character, it is always somebody the audience either doesn't know, or doesn't like. Basically there is not one moment in the whole movie that warrants the audience to be scared and worried for one of the characters. Making the monster the protagonist just doesn't work, at least not when you want to make a truly scary horror movie.

Imagine how ALIEN would have been if the whole crew of the space ship would have consisted of total assholes the audience wants to die and characters the audience has no reason to give a shit about and to top that of tell the whole story from the perspective of the monster. That wouldn't have been a scary movie, would it?

Also i don't think that the victorian era setting helps much when the audience already has problems identifying with the characters. It only widens the gap.

I think this is why almost everybody says that this movie felt "meh" and unneccessary.

bram stokers dracula is one of the best horror films ever, certainly the best dracula picture besides nosferatu 1922. It had an incredible score, the best costumes ( by eiko ishioka (the red armor that dracula wears at the start comes to mind) ) and set designs of any dracula movie, and probably the best actors - gary oldman and tony hopkins, although keanu reeves' wasnt too good in the role of harker. and winona ryder was smokin hot in this picture. and coppola as director is right up there with fw murnau and werner herzog. the use of shadow puppets and other interesting optical effects are notable.

I agree!

Haven't seen the wolfman, but think the remake looks really awesome :D !!
But I don't understand why you don't like the mummy i think the whole trilogy is GREAT, they are some of my favorite movies :D !!!!!

House of Wolfman is on DVD. I just got one on ebay.

James, I know you`re busy...but in the future, can you do a review like this on the new Nightmare on Elm Street ?

I wanted to comment on the Werewolf Trivia but couldn't find a comment section - I'll leave it here.
I always thought it was funny that in "Frankenstein Meets The Wolfman", that when Larry Talbot is in the hospital he's wearing pajamas, but when he changes into the Wolfman and out killing he's in work clothes, then when he changes back he's back in pajamas. :)

They didn't try to make him look like Chaney, but more like Reed from Curse of the werewolf, as far looks goes, he looks very much like Reed in that film, and Del Toro's acting compliment Reed's. ^-^

I looked online and found out that House of the wolfman is being released on dvd on september 28.
you can buy it here http://www.amazon.com/House-Wolf-Man-Ron-Chaney/dp...

I did enjoy it. Worth seeing. Did not have high standards, but it was missing something. The cast seemed poor, with the exception of Hopkins. The rest just seemed like bad choices for this film. Other flaws may not be so obvious, but the film had B movie class. It was just fun. Looking forward to the Creature film do in the next couple years.

I liked the movie, didn't see it before now. I admit there were major flaws throughout it but as a whole I thought it worked.

I thought the movie was alright as well. The transformation scene was definitely a good one, one of the best. I liked Del Toro though, I thought he was good, and Hopkins goes without saying, because he bloody rocks.

I liked the review, but I actually enjoyed the Wolfman, I've never seen the Lon Chaney Jr. version though.
I also liked the Mummy remake and Bram Stoker's Dracula is my favourite film of all time. They're also remaking the Gill-Man movie.

I watched the movie, i thought it was decent.
I already had doubts since i knew the wolfman was going to be in CGI but- i think american werewolf in london is the best (;

I know what you mean about not caring much for the new Larry, i felt in the original the characters were easier to bond with, the new guy looks like an actor playing the part, just dosn't seem convincing, maybe it sjust me?

Also tooo much CGI, which was really shown up in the faster scenes. There is far to much CGI in these films lately, and it just dosn't work, a gome comparison would be the original salems lot, and the new, actually im supprised you haven't reviewed that for monster madness, maybe in number 4? :-)

good review, i still have`nt seen the movie,.. but i am gonna trust you for this one :D LOL

dude on a school feildtrip we went to see the lightning theif and my friend sked the teacher to go to the bathroom when the teacher went to the movie then my friend snuck in to see this movie.

I'm glad Jonathanw1987 is going to go into what he means by "interestingly enough" another time. I will be sure to tune in, as should you all! :D ROFL

It could've been better, I guess.

It's hard to make a good horror film these days because, interestingly enough, audiences are becoming more sophisticated, and the old tricks don't seem to have as much effect anymore. I'll go into what I meant by "interestingly enough" at another time.

nhey nerd! nice review i really admire ur work! i really admire u!

haha, they burn the shit out of kevin bacon in hollowman and he still just runs around the fuckin place cock and balls hanging out and all. like, what the fuck?!

good review