This finally came out on video this week and my wife and I stayed up and watched it together. A very interesting remake of a true classic; there were a number of things I really liked about it.
(1) They set the movie in the late 19th century, which preserved much atmosphere from the classic Lon Chaney version. This movie would have been much less effective in a modern day setting . . . not to mention everyone gets to wear capes this way. I'm still waiting for evening capes to come back into style.
(2) The transformation sequences were very cool and well done. Yes, they did use some CGI, but it was blended in very carefully with make up and prosthetics so that it never really LOOKED CGI except in a couple of dream sequences.
(3) Anthony Hopkins. Nuff said. The man's a genius.
(4) The kills. Over-the-top gore, but it is consistent with the "nature of the beast" and doesn't overwhelm the viewer.
(5) Solid performances by the entire cast. Yes, Hopkins outdoes them all, but there are no poor acting jobs in the whole film.
I can't get more specific without spoilers, but this movie is really worth your time.
All in all, a great movie. Check out the DVD if you missed it in the theaters!
Haven't seen it yet, but I'm sure Rick Baker's involvement helps make it work. Looking forward to checking it out.
I didn't find it to be terrible, but I found it disappointing. Anthony Hopkins was great, and I liked the gore, but the movie just felt kind of lifeless and blah all the rest of the time. I found the Talbot of this film to be far less likable and interesting than the original played by Lon Chaney Jr, and in general the characters were just less compelling. The look of the film was decent, at least. Good practical makeup too.
I will say it is worth a watch for werewolf fans though.
6/10.
However, you just saw the unrated version - which is almost 20 minutes longer (apparently the film was plagued with editing problems, to the point they brought in extra editors to work on the theatrical cut). I could definitely see the movie being improved quite a bit with the restored footage. I'm reminded of the extended version of the Abyss, which added about 28 minutes in and took a decent film and made it into a very good film. I'll have to get around to seeing the extended cut.
I liked it. (didn't see the unrated version)
To me it was OK, nothing more, there was very few characterization wich made the actors kind of boring, even though they did indeed a good acting job.
I've been meaning to check that out. It seems to get mediocre reviews, but that's fine with me.. I enjoyed Van Helsing and everybody was running that down into the ground too.
I saw it in the theater and liked it plenty although I thought there was only a luke-warm chemistry between Benicio and Emily Blunt.
Overall I liked what was on the screen but I couldn't help wishing for a little more. What with Anthony Hopkins I was hoping that the movie would be a little crazier, like "Francis Ford Coppola presents Bram Stoker's Dracula." And I was hoping that there would be a scene where the Wolfman fought that poor old gypsy bear. Or maybe they would team up and go nuts on the gypsy camp.
It was a nice change of pace from some of the werewolf movies they've put out lately.
I saw it in the theater too.
I agree with all your points indianasmith. I don't realy like remakes, like Firday The 13th or Nightmare on Elm Street, but that one is very good. Cool kills and transformation sequences and Hopkins was just perfect.
Worth watching.
8/10
~George