VOD (1)

Plots(1)

In The Wolfman, a film inspired by Universal's timeless horror classic, Benicio Del Toro plays Lawrence Talbot, a troubled aristocrat returning to his family's estate after a plea from Gwen Conliffe (Emily Blunt), the fiancée of his missing brother. Reunited with the father (Sir Anthony Hopkins) he barely knows him, Talbot goes in search of his brother. That's how he finds out that a bloodthirsty creature is wreaking havoc on the village. Also the suspicious Aberline (Hugo Weaving), an inspector of Scotland Yard, is investigating the matter closely. What Talbot discovered during his hunt for the monstrous creature, is his own gruesome destiny. (Umbrella Entertainment)

(more)

Videos (3)

Trailer 2

Reviews (11)

lamps 

all reviews of this user

English Some passages are brilliant and it can be said that they even exceeded my expectations. Johnston moves exquisitely in a foggy setting where even Reed would get lost, and when he wants to, he can stretch the audience's nerve strings in a very intense way. Unfortunately, all that stands between a successful and properly bloody horror filler is utterly uninteresting screenwriting and dramaturgy, mired in an unconvincing family drama that doesn't even seem to exploit the huge potential of its stellar cast. Ditching the family soap opera and focusing more on Detective Hugo Weaving, by far the film's most likeable character, could have made The Wolfman a big hit. This is just very professional craftsmanship. ()

D.Moore 

all reviews of this user

English I saw the original film so long ago that I remember almost nothing of it now, and I think that's a good thing. I avoided comparisons and I enjoyed the 2010 version of The Wolfman. I can even safely say that of all the horror and "horror" movies that have been made in the world in recent years (and that I have seen), The Wolfman is quite possibly the best. No, it's not the most original or unexpectedly scary, but it's so well-done, atmospheric and dramatically gripping in every minute that it simply deserves the highest rating from me. Benicio Del Toro is perfect, Anthony Hopkins too, of course, but I'm even happier for him because after quite a long time he got a big role again... I also liked the mini-performances of Max von Sydow (not mentioned in the credits) and "master of the trick" Rick Baker, who "played" one of the unlucky torn apart men. Joe Johnston cooked up a thick period tension-filled film, and Danny Elfman spiced it up... And I ate it with great gusto. ()

Ads

novoten 

all reviews of this user

English I expected a horror flick; I anticipated an homage to the original. But what I didn't expect was a complex drama that combines more genres than I could ever have hoped for. The script hints from the very beginning that we're going into the darkest waters, and the transformation into a monster is shown through advanced mental decay. At first glance, the "fake" scary moments may seem like clichéd flaws, but in the context of the film as a whole, these scenes serve as progressing traumas. Like a nightmare from which the main hero jerks awake, only to wake up to a real, creeping, and inevitable reality that is just as terrifying as the imagined horrors. Moreover, Joe Johnston's directing amplifies all of this into a depressive second nature. And when Benicio Del Toro and Anthony Hopkins share dialogue together, there's nothing left to discuss. A very unique work has been created, which is certainly not for everyone, but those who can look at it differently than just a monster movie can take away more than they ever expected. ()

DaViD´82 

all reviews of this user

English Despite not being faithful to the original, Johnston is more true to its spirit and atmosphere of classic horrors from Universal. Both the well-known and well-made, and also those magical naive “such-and-such versus something-or-other" B-movies. I couldn’t ask for more. And it’s also evident that the creators love these movies (there is endless proof of this, e.g. the scene with the medical symposium where they nod at the initial aim of the original, before the studio stepped in). And not just because my heart beat away in utter delight for the entire movie (quite appropriately, since it was Valentine’s Day), which prevented me from making a valid comment about the fact that in some places it was really rather obvious that they didn’t see eye to eye with the producers as to the final cut. ()

Isherwood 

all reviews of this user

English It is in fact possible to make a mediocre film with a bloated wallet, a returning screenwriting legend, and a cast of actors perfectly cast to the last extra. The sets, and in general the whole set design, the special effects, and the technical aspects are perfect, but it's all told in a kind of lazy way. The entire time I couldn't shake the impression that it was "skimming the surface," where everything goes according to a perfectly ordered plan that can't surprise and unfortunately doesn't even try to. For two hours, you're in a blissful state of mind about how nice it is to watch, then the credits roll, and now you want to try to remember something about it... and all that pops into your mind is a hairy man with a lot of bloody gunk lying around, nothing more. 3 ½. ()

Gallery (93)