kellym40 film review

Another horror classic remade with ‘The Wolfman’

Rating 3/5

In 2010, Joe Johnston directed a remake of the 1941 horror classic The Wolf Man, written by Curt Siodmak. New writers Andrew Kevin Walker and David Self penned this remake and instead of updating to a more contemporary time, they set it in late nineteenth century England.

It can be said that The Wolf Man is to werewolves what Dracula is to vampires. So this remake is not just another horror film, it’s the Wolf Man. In that, there appears to be some big acting shoes to fill from Lon Chaney Jr’s performance in the 1941 classic. The role went to Benicio Del Toro, a fine actor in his own right, in this remake and did a fair job with the portrayal of Lawrence Talbot.

The story begins as Sir John Talbot’s (Anthony Hopkins) son has disappeared. Ben’s fiancé, Gwen Conliffe (Emily Blunt) writes to Ben’s brother, Lawrence, and pleas for him to return home to help find her fiancé. Upon arrival home, a body has been found. Lawrence sees his remains and then embarks on a hunt to find the beast responsible for his brother’s death. He is led to a gypsy camp and is soon attacked by a creature, which is half-man/half-wolf. A gypsy woman tends to his wounds, but pronounces Lawrence to be cursed. And, at the time of the next full moon, Lawrence transforms into the creature and goes on a bloody rampage.

Del Toro played the part of a tortured soul, caught between a normal life and a sort of living hell. He brought those characteristics to the character with a quiet desperation of needing to escape the hell in which he was living. The great Anthony Hopkins brought the right amount of caring and sentiment to the role as a man who has lost a son and wife. But he also had the mystery about him that were revealed in the climactic moments of the film. Blunt’s Gwen Conliffe had the spirit of the “damsel in distress,” but also a strong, courageous woman trying to uncover her fiancé’s disappearance.

What worked here in this film were the performances set against the time period and Danny Elfman’s music coupled with Shelly Jonson’s cinematography. It is settings like these that really bring more life into these horror stories with the vast countryside, foggy moors and a rocky waterfall. And although the performances were nothing extraordinary, they did have a sense of purpose and believability.

The CGI however, is what missed for me in the film. There’s something to be said for the old makeup special effects instead of the use of modern CGI. It does seem that CGI is used a lot in today’s filmmaking process, but sometime it can be overdone, and when not done right, it can appear sort of ridiculous. As with the case in this film, the effects made the werewolves appear more grotesque in nature and didn’t appear to fit in with the style of the film. This made the CGI a bit clumsy and out of place. But even with its flaws and average performances, the film did keep me entertained and hold my interest.

kellym40 film review

Weighing in on ’21 Grams’

Rating 4/5

The film is an older film released in 2004 from Focus Features. It runs about two hours and five minutes. Mexican film director Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, most notably directing last year’s Oscar-winning film “Birdman” with Michael Keaton, takes Guillermo Arriaga’s script and tells a beautiful story with heart and style. Inarritu does so with flashbacks weaving the characters’ lives together in a climactic end. You can view the trailer below.

21 Grams

The story involves Paul Rivers (Sean Penn), who is in need of a new heart, his wife Mary Rivers (Charlotte Gainsbourg), Cristina Peck (Naomi Watts), a former drug addict and housewife, Jack Jordan (Benicio Del Toro), an ex-con who has found Jesus, and Marianne Jordan (Melissa Leo), Jack’s wife.

After a tragic accident, these lives become intertwined, building up to the climax and tells each character’s story through unique non-linear storytelling. Much like “Memento” before, flashbacks and flash forwards tell the story, which honestly, I thought was a little distracting at first but I quickly bought into the convention and let the characters and story unfold before me.

The title of the film comes from a line from Paul as he says, “They say we lose 21 grams at the exact moment of death … How much do we gain?”

I believe that line sums up the context of the film as the characters struggle with their own lives and come to terms with the life changing moment that affects all of them in the film. The story develops to hint upon what we, as people, do in our own life that can impact others. Inarritu stated that he believes all people are connected in some way. He goes on to say how one person’s actions affect another and how that person’s actions affect another and so on and so on. It is a little mind boggling to think that we are connected in some way. That our actions seem to and can have a ripple effect upon the world. I guess it can happen. And it certainly happens in this film.

Penn gives a remarkable performance as in “I Am Sam” and “Mystic River.” Through the story, he became a lost soul who was desperately trying to hang on but thought there was only one way out. Watts was believable as a former drug addict dealing with her past demons and coming to terms with her family’s death. Del Toro gives a gripping performance as a born-again Christian who is trying to find his way before the tragic event that alters the characters’ lives. Gainsbourg and Leo give heartfelt performances, as Paul and Jack’s wives respectively, and show how their lives are together changed over the course of events in the story.

21 Grams

It is a classic piece of storytelling that brings together the emotional events in the story in a way that a traditional linear structure would not. It allows the viewer to follow the characters on the emotional ride throughout the developing story and by the end the audience can be in the moment with the characters.

The film was nominated through several American and International organizations and took home 34 awards.