Thread: I'm beginning to wonder...about werewolves

Tweet

My generation and the one that follows it are starting to bother me.
I saw the remake of the Wolfman and I liked it. It's wasn't some over the top, Oscar winning, deep thought provoking movie and that is what I liked the best, aside from the look of the Wolfman himself.

And that is what is bothering me about people. A lot of reviews from critics and individuals are trashing the film for the look of the Wolfman. Apparently Hollywood has too good of effects and ability they shouldn't be making "were-gorillas". All werewolves must either be complete wolves (or at least a really big dog) or some wolf headed towering monstrosity with a tail. (And yes I have found many complaints about a lack of a tail.)

I thought the transformation of the Wolfman was logical in being slow and painful, much like Rick Baker did with American Werewolf in London. I also thought the look of more man than wolf made better sense for a werewolf look because the human body would more readily change to that shape than to go from 5'9" to 12' tall. I really liked the fact that it was slowed down with close up shots so you could see what was changing and it wasn't just some blur of CGI and poof he's a wolf.
But apparently I am wrong and the whole movie was campy and stupid, the effects were cheap and the makeup for the Wolfman made him look like a chimp on steroids.

My only issues with his look are the same issues I have with nearly every werewolf. The claws were absurdly long and useless looking; and the teeth just didn't sit well with me in the end. The underbite from hell was just silly when he was snarling and snapping his jaws. Claws should be reasonably sized and teeth should fit in the head.

I know that many have come to accept vampires that are in nearly every shape, power level, and can do anything, even (regrettably so ) sparkle.
But are werewolves doomed to always be overly huge, slobbering, beasts with hardly a hint of man in them, rendered all in CGI from a clay and faux fur model?

On a side note: Because of the reviews and box office earnings from The Wolfman, another unsettling idea is that major changes may be made to the Creature from the Black Lagoon remake (2011) to appeal better to audiences, meaning another classic creature may have a whole new look, completely different from what it once was.

I was disappointed with the film overall, but tend to disagree with you regarding the look of the beast. The underbite is, I believe, in acknowledgement of the old Lon Chaney Jr. look. Same as the black nose. Sure, the make-up won't please everyone, never will. But I was glad to see they didn't go over-the-top in the way that some recent films have.

I understand that the underbite is a part of the original look they wished to keep, but it just seemed far too over pronounced. I was really happy with the makeup overall, and quite surprised with how seamlessly they blended in the CG for the transformations.

But you do have a point about not pleasing everyone. Some however, get so upset they start to say things they may later regret.
For example: News: Taylor Lautner Fan Letter To Universal: Your Wolfman Ripped Off Twilight | Latino Review

As for the link of the review, That guy in the Taylor Lautner link is a waist of good oxygen. The wolfman/ Werewolf is one of the oldest of mans myths. It combines human and wolf. I loved the keeping the feeling of the old movie and keeping the look of Lon Cheney's portrayal and look. That piece of excrement stated that the Wolfman movie had villanized the wolfman and only the New Moon look of a giant wolf should be the only portrayal. The wolfman is an icon. the Universal Lon Cheney jR PORTRAYAL IS AN ICON. The new movie of the Wolfman keeped the original feel and costuming. You can't please everyone but people with costuming. NEW Moon and the entire Twilight saga is a slap in the face4 to the entire supernatural ganra. Monsters have evil in them. They may have some good, but they are monsters. No one is villanized by this portrayal. The Wolfman is an icon and this new film did it justise. Quit whining about its imerfections and New Moon. The Wolfman ROCKS and this attack against Universal is uncalled for.

I'm pretty sure whoever got a hold of that email at Universal had a laughing fit that probably could have hospitalized them before spreading the email all over the internet.
I have nothing against Twilight as a series. I haven't read the books, or seen the movies, as they don't appeal to me. Part of the lack of appeal are the people that have massive freak outs like that letter and constantly obsess over the characters. Superfans will make anything unappealing.

I want to see a werewolf movie that keeps the iconic werewolf traits and explains them and shows them in a true physiological approach. I want to see an good explanation of how the body can actually change it's shape, why it is (or isn't) painful, why they go onto a rampage after transforming, and a honest approach at changing the human body to have the traits of a wolf.
The over exaggerations have been done time and again, with 8-12 foot tall bipedal monsters, to more human sized beasts with teeth and claws that are so huge they are useless, and let's no forget those that look like a wolf pumped up on steroids.
I want a werewolf that is visually realistic and has an honest explanation as to how and why it happens, not just "it's a magical curse" or "it's a blood mutation". If they can add on a story that pushes werewolves out of the B movie genre, that would probably encourage more quality werewolf movies instead of churned out of the mill, same old story werewolf movies we have.

the key the the wolfman is in the name. Part wolf and part man. I like that they kept the old school concept. As for a full on wolf transmutation, I think that is more in the relm of a shapeshifter as a skinwalker. But of course that is my opinion. I agree that the email was crap and that Universal got a good laugh out of it. LOL Where do these people come from.