I saw this move last night. Once in a while we do get a good horror flick – alas this one was no 5 star effort – but I’ll give it 3.5 since it made me think a bit.
Anyone remember “American Werewolf in London” or “The Howling” or better yet Jack Nicholson in “Wolf”. But seriously - how many versions can you watch teeth tear against flesh and not know the outcome? What drew me to this latest release was the screen presence and role played by Sir Anthony Hopkins.
In “The Wolfman” the story line is much as expected; the full moon, some howling, thick fog on the English moors, tearing flesh, screams and of course the locals with pitch forks and torches, etc. etc.. It has all that plus a hint of some romance. I won’t spoil it for you but there are some interesting twists in this version. The graphics in this version were excellent, the scene from the trailer is fantastic – best transformation I’ve watched, and the set up for that scene was well done.
IMHO - I think this version pulls no punches with the plot to accuse “MAN” (homo-sapiens) as the true “beast.” Maybe we should be offended – but if you really think about it – MAN is the most dangerous animal on the planet. Like I said, this movie hammers this view with many script and visual cues to enforce the indictment.
One noted cue is the script reference to the character “Abbeline” who is a detective is this flick with recent experience on the “Ripper” murders. Script referencing like this one is a common device writers use to link external similar themes to the movie plot for emphasis. Odd the writer chooses the “Ripper?” – Maybe not. It was deliberate and the reference was definitely not lost on the crowd.
But most outstanding cue in the film was the closing narrative: “It is a sin to kill man; it is not a sin to kill a beast. The problem is where does one end and the other begin?”
Anybody else get the same message?
Anyone remember “American Werewolf in London” or “The Howling” or better yet Jack Nicholson in “Wolf”. But seriously - how many versions can you watch teeth tear against flesh and not know the outcome? What drew me to this latest release was the screen presence and role played by Sir Anthony Hopkins.
In “The Wolfman” the story line is much as expected; the full moon, some howling, thick fog on the English moors, tearing flesh, screams and of course the locals with pitch forks and torches, etc. etc.. It has all that plus a hint of some romance. I won’t spoil it for you but there are some interesting twists in this version. The graphics in this version were excellent, the scene from the trailer is fantastic – best transformation I’ve watched, and the set up for that scene was well done.
IMHO - I think this version pulls no punches with the plot to accuse “MAN” (homo-sapiens) as the true “beast.” Maybe we should be offended – but if you really think about it – MAN is the most dangerous animal on the planet. Like I said, this movie hammers this view with many script and visual cues to enforce the indictment.
One noted cue is the script reference to the character “Abbeline” who is a detective is this flick with recent experience on the “Ripper” murders. Script referencing like this one is a common device writers use to link external similar themes to the movie plot for emphasis. Odd the writer chooses the “Ripper?” – Maybe not. It was deliberate and the reference was definitely not lost on the crowd.
But most outstanding cue in the film was the closing narrative: “It is a sin to kill man; it is not a sin to kill a beast. The problem is where does one end and the other begin?”
Anybody else get the same message?
