I think it's basically - vampire = sex, werewolves = drooling monster. The way it's been done anyhoo. Vampires are sexy, werewolves aren't.

Well, Blood and Chocolate the movie went some way to creating a real society of werewolves, and some of them were very sexy. (I could definitely spend some time with the alpha guy - just keep those contacts in buddy - grrrrrr ) And I know that that's the hope of Anthony's movie too - Freeborn. The world could definitely use more movies that explore the side of werewolf life outside of going feral and ripping throats out at random.

But they've been doing that for years for vampires.

Over the years there's been heated debates regarding werewolf movies and books.

Some think the werewolf on two legs are lame.. others think the ones that do a total transformation are lame..

I like both..

Then there's the Wolfen..

Not necessarily a werewolf movie.. more of a hybrid wolf story.. but it still can be loosely put into the genre..

Werewolves have been given the shaft..

One of my peeps used to say that werewolves were like the metal/punk dudes in horror.  They're more masculine, rough around the edges and not all that bright.  While vampires were more like the mods or goths, more androgynous, sexual, and cerebral.  In short, I personally believe vampire flicks attract both genders more than werewolf flicks so there's more put into the vamp thing. 

I think 30 Days of Night will change things somewhat. 

I mean there's been countless vamp flicks since Queen of the Damned, but nothing a shitload of promotion.

30 Days of Night is going to be seen by a lot of people most likely.  So maybe it'll help bring back the more brutal/horror like vampire image..

But that still leaves werewolves getting the shaft..

That's just the curse so to speak..

There's just nothing dark and sexy about someone who grows a shitload of body hair..

well, you heard the commentary about Kate Beckinsale, werewolf movies are pretty much a DON'T TOUCH. either that and vampirism added. You think about it, Underworld really was the last movie that made bank dealing with vampirism and werewolves. Ohhhh take that back Van Helsing, but that tanked (i don't know why either, i actually liked it and the prequel).

I think at the end of the day it takes a CRAP LOAD more money to make a werewolf or werewolves than a vampire (contacts and maybe teeth).  I liked the Ginger Snaps when they went back into time in the 1800s? those werewolves were pretty much new century versions of Americna Werewolf in London.

we'll see. I see everyone mentioning all these werewolf names but WHICH ONES are straight to video/homemade/high budget studio.

I think if Marvel's Werewolf By Night is done without so much drama (keep the romance/drama simple) and do action simple story (like TMNT the first movie) then that will put werewolves back on the map. But it depends on a lot of stuff.

Last edited by WereWolfH (2007-08-21 15:02:45)

Ginger Snaps was the last werewolf flick I actually liked on a deeper level.  I've seen Dog Soldiers, Big Bad Wolf, Dark Wolf, and a few others since I've seen Snaps, but those merely amused me.  Whoever wrote the script for Snaps managed to tie two curses together to add a nice impact.  Even the second flick wasn't bad, the third however I could have done without.  The time it took place in didn't allow for the same character development. 

Maybe the Canadians just know how to make a better horror movie ..

That was Ginger Snaps 3.

The werewolves looked cool, it was just the prequel vibe they tried to give the flick bombed.. imo.

I thought Ginger Snaps 3 was ok.  I haven't been to thrilled about its plot or the shape of the werewolves, but it was entertaining enough that if I ever felt bored and it was on, I'd watch it again.  I've seen 1 near the end, still didn't really like the form of the werewolf, though I'll admit; for a horror movie, it can scare the stuff out of people and it was somewhat suspenseful.

As for Werewolves getting the shaft, well, I guess there is some truth about how the image of werewolves go.  I personally don't try to be a fan of MOVIE werewolves too much because all they want is mainly a killer machine monster with no possible sense of humanity left in them tearing at throats and causing nothing but mayhem, for no reason besides hunger for flesh.  In the movie business i suppose that's ok since it can be directed as a good or bad person cursed as punishment or by dark forces to become a monster unwillingly.  But there is just way too much of it lately.  I've seen Blood and Chocolate (both watched and read the originally book) and despite how they become wolves was somewhat "meh", I understood the directors sense of "beauty" or "meaning" in how they change.  Plus the fact the society tried to blend in, had both human and wolf thoughts and instincts was a suitable change for once, though obviously there was nothing they could do about some of the renegades in their pack.
I haven't seen Skinwalkers yet, and something tells I won't unless its on cable television.  It already looked bad to begin with.  However I'm trying to decipher whether or not there was a good clan of wolves trying to stop the renegade clan...or did they both still despise humanity and still killed them for no reason?

This is why I mainly stick to my own thoughts and feelings about werewolves and such, and hope that there are people out there with the same views in writings and drawings.  It is in the drawing and writing media that I have seen a change on the perspective at time, though very little but I've seen it.  If I haven't mentioned before, I'm a bit of a romantic viewer on the subject, that werewolves and either other particular creatures may not always be EVIL and NASTY.  Again I lean towards wanting to see more about the "what if", the what if someone is cursed or gifted to become a wolf or any werecreature for instance, and is not necessarily evil.  What if the animal and human mind and soul coexisted?  How would the life of that werecreature follow in the world of human society?  Would the person choose to retain a nature human life with some quarks, or would it be too much for him/would the need to fulfill animal instinct be too great and wish to retreat to the wild.  This is what I've seen some drawings and creative story writers explore more often then the movie media.  Of course, you'd barely see anything like that anyways in movies.  Werewolves are horror movie monsters to producers and directors, and if they make it scray enough, it brings in the movie (though only if the movie itself is any good LOL)

Well, maybe I need to see it again, but I thought the werewolves in 3 were the same as in 1...but I may be wrong.  Gotta a screenshot anyone?

Speedbump wrote:

It takes money to make a decent, on-screen werewolf. Most of the movies don't have the budget for that, or those that do lack the vision to pull it off properly. I thought Van Helsing had by far the best-looking werewolf in movie history (speaking only of the final scenes, not the Wolfman from the first 30 minutes), but it was a dorky plot that had no substance besides fluffy action.

Most werewolf movies botch the CG completely and settle for having their werewolves look like pitbulls with downs syndrome. It's a damn shame, but amazingly enough, we're all still dedicated to this genre despite all this.

I'm bored so I randomly picked a topic from page 9. I liked Van Helsing's werewolf the first appearance. It was scary and cool. Now tell me someone, why does there have to be this GRAND plot? A werewolf is on the loose, the town has to fight it. Show the scenes of it...... what else do you need, I'm confused? What would you have added to Van Helsing's werewolf scenes? I thought it was fine.

Van Helsing was awesome. It had Hugh Jackman, werewolves, and Kate Beckinsale with a horrendous accent. And David Wenham being funny. That's the most I ask for in a movie. XD

I don't bother with refined taste. If a movie has at least one sexy person and humor and violence, I'm completely satisfied. Heh heh . . .

There was a significant amount of werewolf sex in the Howling . . . that whole scene, remember? Also Meridian and Company of Wolves.  I think it's just easier to make a film about a monster than about how sexy a big, strong, aggressive critter could be.

KCat wrote:

WereWolfH wrote:

Now tell me someone, why does there have to be this GRAND plot? A werewolf is on the loose, the town has to fight it. Show the scenes of it...... what else do you need, I'm confused? What would you have added to Van Helsing's werewolf scenes? I thought it was fine.

It doesn't have to be a GRAND plot, but a nicely fleshed out one would be nice. The plot is what drives the story, and without a good backing story, it's just mindless action. And while mindless action can be nice from time to time, it's also nice to have something of substance.. something that picks at your mind, and makes you think.

okay well what would you have added for Van Helsing b/c they pretty much said what needed to be said.  Some movies you just enjoy for what it is. I thought this of Star Wars, but I can see how it relates to the world politically and religiously and other stuff, but I never thought that until this decade.

KCat wrote:

WereWolfH wrote:

okay well what would you have added for Van Helsing b/c they pretty much said what needed to be said.  Some movies you just enjoy for what it is. I thought this of Star Wars, but I can see how it relates to the world politically and religiously and other stuff, but I never thought that until this decade.

I probably would've added more to the back story; who Van Helsing was, what his motivations were, more of the connection between him and Dracula, etc. Also would've gone more into the werewolf curse, with why Dracula uses werewolves, and why werewolves are the only thing that can kill him.

Additionally, more scenes to spread out the important sequences, and to better pace what goes on. To me, it felt obvious that some scenes were a combination of scenes (such as Van Helsing's arrival at Transylvania), and some adjacent scenes should've had more in between them (such as Van Helsing's and Anna's escape from Frankenstein's Castle; the werewolf climbs back up and Dracula tells him to hunt them down and kill them, and immediately following that, Van Helsing and Anna are at the windmill which the opening scene shows is in visible walking distance of the castle). A bunch of the scenes were missing cohesion, and it seemed like the characters just ended up somewhere doing something because that's what the story told them to do, as opposed to being a logical progression from one place to the next.

the movie would have been toooooo longggg and it was dragging already. I'm wondering how this cost ssoooo freakin' much anyway.