The Wolfman

It’s been a fairly quiet week here so far. I’ve been plugging away on the novel and on edits for various things. All fairly standard stuff, really. On Wednesday though, I did go to see The Wolfman, so I thought I’d post a few thoughts.

Overall, it was enjoyable and about what I expected. Lots of action and gore and a few fairly creepy bits, wound around a predictable plot (I’d guessed most, if not all, of the plot within the first fifteen minutes). I’m not sure how much the film followed the plot of the original, but as it was a re-make, I think any lack of originality can be excused. What did seem a bit strange to me was the gore, which felt silly and cartoony and not really in sync with the darker bits of the film. I felt the same way about District 9, which I also saw for the first time recently – the darker aspects of the film got lost behind the OTT blood-and-guts. In District 9’s case, at least the gore was fairly convincing, but I can’t say the same for all of The Wolfman’s severed limbs and trailing guts.

On the subject of special effects, it took me a good two-thirds of the film to get used to the appearance of the wolfmen themselves (yes, there are two by the end and I don’t really think that’s much of a spoiler). I suppose I’ve become used to both the sexy urban fantasy type werewolves and the more-beast-than-human type that have appeared in a lot of films over the last few years. The Wolfman goes for much more traditional looking werewolves: humans with fur and fangs basically, who run on either four legs or two. I’m assuming this was another homage to the original film and it did work, but I was a bit disappointed that the wolves were so human when I first saw them.

One thing that really struck me about The Wolfman was the setting. Perhaps I’m being cynical here, but it really felt as if the film had been made to appeal directly to Americans who have never visited the UK. There seemed to be shots of as many British landscapes and landmarks (some real, some not) as could possibly be fitted into the film – historic houses, standing stones, forests, moorland, various bits of London etc. Also, was it just me, or did the front and back shots of the manor house really not fit together? I think the front was the very impressive Chatsworth, but the back looked much smaller. I can understand using more than one house for the purposes of filming, but the scales were so far out that it looked a bit odd. I also kept wanting to laugh at the vastly stereotypical, “It’s grim up North” picture of what I think was supposed to be Yorkshire (I’m guessing this from the voices of the regulars in the pub, but there was a weird selection of accents throughout the film).

Really though, I don’t think The Wolfman needed to be vastly historically or geographically accurate. It was fast-paced, full of action and kept making me jump. Whilst I wouldn’t see it a second time, it was a fun watch, especially on the big screen. If you’re looking for a gorey, entertaining hour and a half, it’s worth seeing – just don’t believe that Britain is really like that!