Regie:
Joe JohnstonKamera:
Shelly JohnsonBesetzung:
Benicio Del Toro, Anthony Hopkins, Emily Blunt, Hugo Weaving, Geraldine Chaplin, Art Malik, Olga Fedori, Asa Butterfield, Elizabeth Croft, Max von Sydow (mehr)Streaming (5)
Inhalte(1)
Um bei der Suche nach seinem vermissten Bruder zu helfen, kehrt Lawrence Talbot (Benicio Del Toro) in seine Heimat Blackmoor im viktorianischen England zurück, wo eine mysteriöse Serie blutiger Todesfälle die Menschen in Atem hält. Es kommt zum Wiedersehen mit seinem von ihm entfremdeten Vater (Anthony Hopkins). Zusammen mit der Verlobten seines Bruders (Emily Blunt) begibt sich Talbot auf eine Spurensuche, die ihn tief in seine eigene, längst verdrängte Vergangenheit führt. Doch nachdem er selbst von der Bestie gebissen wird, muss er am eigenen Leibe erfahren, dass die Gerüchte von einem uralten Fluch, der einen Menschen bei Vollmond in ein mörderisches Wolfswesen verwandelt, blutige Realität sind. Um dem Morden ein Ende zu bereiten und seine neue Liebe zu retten, muss er die teuflische Kreatur in den Wäldern Blackmoors jagen und sich dem wilden Biest stellen, das in ihm selbst lauert. (Universal Pictures Germany)
(mehr)Kritiken (12)
Epic period horror with a badass atmosphere, nice make-up and good actors in the main roles. That’s a pretty good calling card, but The Wolfman is unfortunately missing a few key elements. It’s unable to generate fear or tension, it isn’t entertaining, or disgusting, or shocking. It just quietly wanders about in the background in a way that you can barely register, let alone remember. It’s not bad, but it’s a shame that with the money spent on it, you could get quite a few young, unpretentious filmmakers who’d be able to make about dozen better movies.
()
Im Hinblick auf die Vorgänger ausdruckslos und überflüssig. Die Schreckmomente und die Spannung funktionieren nicht, wenigstens hatten die Autoren keine Angst vor Blut. Die schöne Retro-Ausstattung und eine hochwertige Besetzung kämpfen mit dem Vanhelsing-Komplex von selbstzweckmäßigen digitalen Attraktionen. Und die Beziehung Vater-Sohn, welche der dramatische Antrieb des Films sein sollte, funktioniert überhaupt nicht. Die Oscar-Laureaten Hopkins und Del Toro sind hier leider nur deshalb, damit sie bei dem sommerlichen Hollywood-Häppchen den Anschein von höherer Qualität wecken. Die Zuschauer*innen freuen sich aber mehr über den Scotland-Yard-Inspektor – den "Nebendarsteller“ Hugo Weaving – als über Hopkins und Del Toro.
()
Es ist schon wirklich lange her, dass ich den Originalfilm gesehen habe. Ich kann mich an ihn fast gar nicht mehr erinnern, was gut ist. So konnte ich nämlich die beiden Filme nicht vergleichen und Wolfman aus dem Jahr 2010 genießen. Ich kann sogar mit ruhigem Gewissen sagen, dass von all den Horrorfilmen und "Horrorfilmen“, die in letzter Zeit auf der ganzen Welt entstanden sind (und die ich gesehen habe), Wolfman möglicherweise der beste ist. Es ist nicht der originellste oder gruseligste Film, er ist aber so gelungen, stimmungsvoll, dramatisch und fesselnd, dass er von mir fünf Sterne bekommt. Benicio Del Toro spielt perfekt, Anthony Hopkins natürlich auch. Bei ihm freut es mich aber umso mehr, weil er nach einer ziemlich langen Zeit endlich eine große Rolle bekommen hat… Die kleinen Auftritte von Max von Sydow (im Abspann ist sein Name nicht angeführt) sowie vom "Trickmeister“ Rick Baker, der eine der zerfetzten Figuren "spielt“, haben mir auch gefallen. Joe Johnston hat einen dichten und spannenden Film gekocht, Danny Elfman hat ihn gut gewürzt… Und ich mit großem Appetit verzehrt.
()
Als ich zum ersten Mal hörte, dass es einen weiteren Werwolf-Film geben würde (was mich als Liebhaber dieser Kreaturen sehr gefreut hat), war ich sehr aufgeregt, denn die ersten Andeutungen sahen wirklich brillant aus. Leider wurde ich enttäuscht. Der Film hat tolle Bilder, düstere Musik und die Werwolftransformation war meisterhaft, aber andererseits war er manchmal sehr langweilig, als hätte er keine Seele. Es gab viele spannende Szenen, und die Pointe am Ende war wirklich gut. Das Ergebnis ist ein typisch mittelmäßiger Horrorfilm, der mehr von der Angst vor der allgemeinen Atmosphäre als vor der Kreatur beherrscht wird.
()
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.
()
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.
()
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.
()
It's a yawn. Considering the movie is 102 minutes long and I watched it from 6pm to 12:30am, I think it's clear how much it held my attention, how much I was interested to see how it would turn out. A werewolf straight out of Planet of the Apes. Death right after, thanks, and such a – ugh, bleh, ah; finito. The very end of the film couldn't have been more stupid. But I'd forgive it if – as I say – it wasn't such a yawn. I don't understand why I wanted to see this movie; good thing it's over.
()
The longer they postponed premiere, the more my concerns about the final product grew, but Joe Johnston handled it more than decently. This is not such a fundamental achievement as the first Wolfman, but, to be honest, who could expect it to be? The action is fast, brisk and (in the unrated version) good and bloody, the atmosphere is also good. Benicio Del Toro may be doing nothing more than usual, but Anthony Hopkins and Hugo Weaving (Abberline is probably the best character and I'd love a spin-off or a part two if he was in it) steal the show at times. Elfman's music perfectly complements the plot, and the main theme seemed to me to be a jauntier version of Dracula, which is not a criticism, but a compliment, because it sounds truly superb. It is said there is no sin in killing a beast, only in killing a man. But where does one begin and the other end?
()
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.
()
A film on the edge. I definitely count the graphic and at times perhaps a little explicit violence for effect among the pluses of the film. Also the fantastic production design and cinematography. However, The Wolfman falls down on the fact that Joe Johnston is not much of a director. He references classic Universal works with an almost irritating naivety and clichéd story, but then takes it out of context with scenes cut exactly in the vein of contemporary horror films, in particular the ubiquitous and (at least for me in this film) non-functioning jump scares really stink. Otherwise, the pretty good CGI effects don't offend, but watching it I kept thinking of the much better An American Werewolf in London, where the monster was also fantastic and yet it was just a matter of good masks. This way, for example, the fight between two werewolves reminded me quite a bit of Sommers' cockamamie Van Helsing. The last criticism belongs once again to the director and is most palpable at the beginning. The Wolfman has an awfully strong trio of actors at its disposal (Hopkins, del Toro, Weaving), but Johnson fails to lead them in any way. This is how, with del Toro in particular, we get theatrical overacting that is unlike anything he's done before, and it's clear that the problem won't be on his side. In conclusion, I have to admit that my cinematic experience was disrupted by a trio of misfit teenagers who just had to be super funny as usual, and while the scene was loud, their speeches were always flexibly adapted to ensure that no one in the theatre happened to hear them. Kill.
()
All the "finishing" elements were just right. But the creating ones honestly weren't worth much. Specifically, Johnston's "feeling" or the script drowning in grey average to below average... Tim Burton, with his sense of imagination and ability to create a good atmosphere, would have been a much better choice... Average, average, and again average...
()
Werbung