Bark at the Moon

Benicio Del Toro got the part instead of Michael J. Fox. Which means no van surfing.

The Wolfman

starring Emily Blunt, Benicio Del Toro, Anthony Hopkins, Hugo Weaving

directed by Joe Johnston

Don’t deny it; it doesn’t matter what kind of movie genre you prefer, the announcement of a Wolf Man remake got you excited. If it didn’t, check your pulse and make sure you aren’t dead. With all of Hollywood’s botched attempts at new versions of the werewolf (yes, I’m speaking of Van Helsing, Underworld, New Moon,etc.) it only makes sense that somebody go back to where it all began. And from the get go, it seems they got it right; Benicio Del Toro is the only actor that could have been cast as the wolf man. Universal and the writers even set it in the 1800s, like the original. Excellent start; did they nail the follow through?

Lawrence Talbot (Del Toro) hasn’t been home to England in years; he was sent to live in America with relatives and has become a rather successful Shakespearean thespian. However, upon receiving word of his brother’s untimely death from his brother’s fiance Gwen Conliffe (Blunt), he returns home to help in the hunt for his killer. Sir John Talbot (Hopkins) receives his wayward son with open arms, but a deep and dark family history keeps them at a distance from one another. The townsfolk blame the death on a beast; what some are calling a werewolf. Lawrence doesn’t believe it, until he sees for the beast attack for himself. He attempts to shoot it, but the wolf bites him and leaves him to die. The wound heals unnaturally fast, and Lawrence finally realizes the truth; it is real, he is cursed, and the full moon is fast approaching.

One would expect the highlight of this film to be the acting, and let’s be honest; the cast’s names carry weight in the movie world. However, most of the performances fall awfully flat. Benicio Del Toro, for example; this is a dream role for the guy, and it seems he treated the role much like his former role in The Hunted. All of his lines were just spoken, the actions just a walk through; I felt absolutely nothing at all in his performance. Its not to say that it was bad; there is just nothing about it that stands out. It could have been any role he is portraying. Anthony Hopkins masterfully plays the dark and mysterious father, but even that role is a one dimensional stock character. Hugo Weaving is completely forgettable. The only true effort is put forth by Emily Blunt. She plays her part beautifully, with as much emotion as is needed. All in all, the acting could have, and should have, been much better.

The script is written well. The story sufficiently follows that of the original, and the liberties taken make sense and allow some air of suspense as to what will happen next. My number one complaint from films recently seem to be how unclear and convoluted plots are being written; this masterful rewrite proves that straight forward, simple story telling still works. Don’t over complicate simple tales. Don’t fix it if it isn’t broken. Kudos to the writing team for respecting the legend of the wolf man.

The best and the worst of the film lie in the directing. Joe Johnston is a capable director, with such films as The Rocketeer, Jumanji, and Hidalgo under his belt. This is what he did right; the feel of the film. Wolf Man is shot as dark if not darker than any film I’ve seen in quite some time; as it should be when dealing with a horror legend. It felt like the old 1941 original; even the wolf make up reflected that of the original, which scores as a win for me. Using CGI to give Lawrence a snout and a tale would have been awful. The gore was dead on. Not too much, but enough to know that this wolf wasn’t fooling around. Perhaps my highest praise, however, goes to the tone Johnston sets. The film feels like you are reading a tale by Nathaniel Hawthorne or Edgar Allan Poe. The mystery, the betrayal, the supernatural, the gothic…they work so well together, and the tone made the better part this movie exhilarating.

This is what he got wrong; most of the big reveals in the story come and go without much emphasis. It feels like you are perpetually waiting for the big climax, and it never really gets around to it. Perhaps the direction is a bit too straight forward; like the acting, the parts of the story that should have been WOWs fell flat. There is a dream sequence mid way through that I felt could have been left out; it didn’t fit with the rest of the film. The film is also book ended by twin monologue narrations that also seemed to just stick out as odd. It seems as if Johnston spent so much time on the look, feel, and tone that he forgot to make the important parts pop; its those moments that make the audience come alive.

A quick note on the wolf transformation: its good. Really good. Each time the transformation occurs, it is given enough screen time for the audience to see the details and brutality of the change. In fact, my favorite scene in the asylum revolves around the change. Lawrence is set before doctors and scholars, at full moon, to prove lycanthropy is false and that he is a mad man. Except that he transforms before their eyes and breaks free. It is stellar, and perhaps the best sequence of the film.

This is the type of remake that I welcome and love to see. I sincerely hope that The Wolfman is successful so that Universal will put some money into updating their other classic monster films. Joe Johnston kept if out of the ‘new’ slasher horror and really paid tribute to what horror began as; the unnatural and terrifying monstrosity. It really reminded me of an artsy film, and it worked; for the most part at least. It is worth the viewing, but unfortunately bits of it do come up short and it definitely doesn’t warrant a second watch. But that is the problem with stylistic films, is it not? Intriguing to see once, but there is not enough substance to keep you coming back. So is The Wolfman.