WOLFMAN - nothing to howl about. (Based on advance press preview on Wed. Feb. 10, 2010)

Written February 12, 2010
WOLFMAN is a disjointed badly edited albeit high-quality production that was approximately 1hr 45mins in length - and not 2hr 5min as incorrectly posted by Fandango. Other than the few 'action' scenes - it was plain outright BORING. Nevertheless, I enjoyed the man-to-werewolf transformations and I have to give high marks for make-up and costumes. Oh - and by the way, don't expect a plot - there is NONE. The majority of the audience was laughing at the cheesy howling. The lack of chemistry between Emily Blunt and Benicio Del Toro was glaringly apparent. Anthony Hopkins was sinister as Lord Talbot but Hugo Weaving was unconvincing as a Scotland Yard inspector. Benicio Del Toro had wayyy too much screen-time - with much ado about nothing. VERDICT: This putrid re-imagining of the lycanthrope is a dismal cinematic failure that lacks bite while relying on cliched 'sound' effects to conjure up scares. Aim your silver bullet at this one and pass. Grade: C
455 out of 463 found this helpful. Did you?

What is wrong with you people

By jokers_wild
Written January 02, 2017
Usually I don't do stuff like this. But, reading the re****/pelled me to make a account just so I could tell you your all NUTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am a huge werewolf fan and this movies was on of the best I've seen yet. It has a good solid storyline, it was a movie that kept me jumping out of my seat. The special effects were awesome. As for the wolfman probably one of the best I've seen in a long time. In the future its going to be a classic just like The Wolfman starring Lon Chaney Jr. Thank you for reading and if your planning to see this movie GO don't listen to these other people.
15 out of 24 found this helpful. Did you?

If you are a fan of the original...

By maxcredits
Written February 21, 2010
I am a fan of the old Universal horror movies so I waited with great anticipation for this version. There has been much criticism that the movie is predictable. To those people I say so was the Titanic. We all knew the ship sinks in the end. There have been countless retellings of The Wolfman but none remaining this true to the original. I was ecstatic to finally see a film paying homage to the original. The acting is well done, the scenery and mood are dead on. The film takes advantage of today's effects while holding tightly to its origins. The Wolfman is awesome in appearance. Finally someone has done it right as Talbot's alter ego is just a bit more man than Wolf and is an excellent upgrade to Lon Chaney, Jr's. Transitions are top-knotch. One slight critique - attacks are so fast and savage that you sometimes do not have time to feel the anxiety build before the deed is done. But that is the nature of the beast. Rating - My wife left 4 1/2 fingerprints out of five on my arm.
15 out of 20 found this helpful. Did you?

Not Interesting... Laughable at times due to the writing

By jboyer21
Written February 14, 2010
I went to the movie expecting for it to have good actors, good special effects, and a good plot. The only thing i got was good actors out of the movie, and in reality the film makes me respect those actors less than before i saw it. The movie is campy without trying and is so corny at times that the crowd in the theatre actually laughed out loud at the emotional climax. I would not recommend this movie to anyone, and i hope this review persuades you to never see it.
14 out of 22 found this helpful. Did you?

interesting take on a old story

By Songzjunkie1987
Written November 19, 2011
I loved every moment of it, I loved what each member of the cast brought to the table. There were different twists and turns at the end but I loved it.
14 out of 23 found this helpful. Did you?