VidMate
Free YouTube video & music downloader
ACTOR
Dustin FitzsimonsJeremie LonckaSara RafteryRodes Phire
DIRECTOR
Eben McGarr
SYNOPSICS
House of the Wolf Man (2009) is a English movie. Eben McGarr has directed this movie. Dustin Fitzsimons,Jeremie Loncka,Sara Raftery,Rodes Phire are the starring of this movie. It was released in 2009. House of the Wolf Man (2009) is considered one of the best Family,Horror movie in India and around the world.
Five strangers are invited to a castle under the pretense that one may inherit it. Little do they know what dangers await at the House of the Wolfman.
House of the Wolf Man (2009) Reviews
House of the Wolfman
Let me start with the good stuff. I grew up on Universal monster films and was eager to see this attempt at finishing the "House of..." cycle. It captures the atmosphere of the period quite well, the full-orchestra score is dead on, and the monsters all look terrific. So do the sets and the miniature castle shot at the open is as good as any from the classic movies. This movie was clearly made lovingly by true fans, and that warns my soul. Nods to Universal abound, such as cutaways to the Creature From the Black Lagoon skeleton on a table, alongside the glass dome contain the now dead and decomposed King homunculus from Bride of Frankenstein. However, the script is laborious, it rough going even at 74 minutes. When I was an hour and five minutes into it and still no monsters had shown, I knew we were in trouble. Up to that point, it plays more like one of those Monogram mystery films more than Universal. Things pick up when the monsters arrive, they look just great. You can see the seams on the Frankenstein make-up, but the design is terrific and the black and white photography obscures some of the flaws. There is no real setup for the monster, he just staggers in for the obligatory (and well staged) fight with the wolfman. Dracula appears, too, right at the end and for apparently no reason. The story falls apart when the creatures appear, but it's what we are here for, and the preceding hour is completely forgotten at that point. Apparently by the film makers as well. The acting from everyone is over the top, probably intentionally, but it is taken too far. Watch the old Universal films. The acting styles may be more stagy than we see today, but they are well-played by actors who believed what they were doing and consequently made you believe. These guys are playing a campy style, and it is at odds with my respect for the old films. Ron Chaney, here of course for his name alone, is the worst violator. His annoying monotone gets very old very fast and he is completely incapable of carrying the titular role. The sole exception the late Michael R. Thomas as Dracula, who seems to be channeling Lugosi. Too bad there isn't more of him. All that said, if you are a fan of these old movies, and they are your touchstone in life, as they are for me, then you can't afford to miss this uneven film with a big heart squarely in the right place.
I Really Wanted To Like It
It almost kills me to write a bad review for this this film that I so wanted to like. As a huge fan of The Universal Monsters, I can say that that this film tried to capture that old feeling, but ultimately failed. Shot on an extremely low budget, I can give this film a pass in certain areas. The black and white also adds a nice touch and a nod to the classic films. However the ultimate failure of this movie is all due to the terrible acting. And I mean really bad, over the top, Scooby Doo-type reactions. I cannot imagine any non Universal Monster fans sitting through more than 20 minutes of this film. 5 Strangers are invited to a Gothic castle by the host, Bela Reinhardt. As the movie slowly progresses, you find out that each of these 5 individuals has something in common and there is a reason they were chosen to come. The Dr. will choose one of them to be his successor. Who will it be ? The nerd, the jock and his brainy sister, the big game hunter, or the beautiful girl with the attitude? You'll have to watch to find out. See the mystery of the unknown footprints and many other twists and turns. If you can survive the slow pace and bad acting, at least stick around for the main event. The Frankenstein Monster takes on The Wolf Man in a knock down drag out slug fest! I liked the design of both monsters and the fight was a lot of fun. Worth the price of the DVD. Of course Dracula comes in at the very end to make an appearance that really makes no sense. And I also understand that the actor who played him in this film recently passed on. Like I said previously, the movie had its heart in the right place. It just did not deliver. I give it 4 of 10 stars and that is only because I loved the monster fight at the end of the movie.
The Hearts in the Right Place but the Film is Still Weak
House of the Wolf Man (2009) * 1/2 (out of 4) In case the title doesn't give it away, this homage was meant to complete the "House" trilogy with the first two films being HOUSE OF FRANKENSTEIN and HOUSE OF Dracula. The filmmakers did their best to try and make this fit in with those Universal films of the 40s and this includes shooting this film in the 4x3 aspect ratio, in Mono and in B&W. We even get Lon Chaney, Jr.'s son Ron playing the mad doctor. Fans of the classic monsters will certainly have to tip their hat to the filmmakers but in the end the idea was certainly a lot better than the final product. The story is pretty simple as Dr. Frankenstein (Chaney) invites five people to stay at his creepy mansion for what the people think is a contest. It turns out that Frankenstein, going under a different name, plans on bringing the monsters back to life. There was a lot of hype going into this film as the filmmakers were promising another monster mash like we hadn't seen since those glorious Universal days. The monsters do eventually get into a bash but sadly you have to wait for over sixty-minutes to get to the action. I don't fault any movie for keeping the good stuff until the end but at the same time you have to get everything leading up to it right and HOUSE OF THE WOLF MAN doesn't do that. The first hour is full of annoying characters doing annoying things that no one watching will care about. They fight about the reasons they're at the house. They fight about those mysterious paintings in their rooms. They fight about this and that and this and that and not a single thing is interesting. Even the weakest Universal film at least gave us some sort of monster, mystery or murder but that doesn't happen here. The entire first hour is nothing but these characters barking at one another and one can't help but get bored of it very quickly. The screenplay could have benefited from a re-write because we're left with characters you can't care for and have no reason to be interested in. The performances are for the most part on the decent level but some seem to be playing the characters as if they're some sort of spoof. The sister role is incredibly over the top and the vamp portion doesn't work at all. Chaney certainly isn't as great as his father or grandfather but how could he be, really? When the monsters finally appear they do bring a mild smile but that's about it as the film has simply lost everything up to this point. I'd recommend most people just watch the final fifteen-minutes as a short as this is where most people will be most interested. The wolf man and Frankenstein's monster make-up effects were pretty good and I enjoyed the look of both. They don't try to get the wolf man to look like Chaney, Jr., which I didn't mind and the monster had a few resemblances to the one in Al Adamson's Dracula VS. FRANKENSTEIN. Again, I appreciate what the filmmakers were going for but if you're going to sell a monster bash then you need to deliver something more than bland characters and dialogue hacking away for over an hour. HOUSE OF THE WOLF MAN has a couple good touches and its heart is in the right place but you can't help but see it as a wasted opportunity.
What you would probably expect, little else.
I saw this movie at the Ligonier screening a few weeks back, and I just wanted to comment on the film. First, I believe the filmmaker's hearts were in the right place, and overall, the movie is entertaining for what it is. Having said that, the film definitely has its flaws. First,the acting. I understand that working on a small budget won't yield Pacino-like results, but the acting was unnecessarily hammy. I'm not sure if they were directed to be so over-the-top, but it took away from the film, I think. Second, the story. The first 40 minutes or so set up a film that would probably require at least another 50 to properly end, but this ended at a little more than an hour. The ending was too abrupt, and quite frankly, confusing. But that's only my humble opinion. And third, the use of Ron Chaney. Now I've met him several times at conventions, and he's a super-nice guy, but unfortunately, the acting gene wasn't passed down. I think his performance GREATLY took away from the film, and really he was only there for name recognition, so that was unfortunate. Lastly, the monsters. They all made the briefest of appearances, and I think calling the film "House of the Wolf Man" definitely wrote a check the movie didn't cash. Although I thought the makeup for the Wolf Man and the Monster were very well-done. I really hate to say anything negative about this film, I wanted so bad to like it (including driving 5 hours to the premier). But I want to be honest. Again as a classic monster fan, I truly appreciate the effort of the filmmakers. I just wish that they would've put a little more thought into making a good product, and not so much effort trying to be a period horror film. The horror movies from the 20's to 60's are all great to me, but lately they are mostly terrible. I think a modern, well-done "HotWM" would've sufficed.
Would Have Rated It A Six (6)...
...for sentimental reasons, but that would have been cheating myself and/or future viewers. What we have here is a competently made 'fan' homage too the last of the Universal Horror films of the 2nd generation. HOUSE OF FRANKENSTEIN (1944) and HOUSE OF Dracula (1945). HOUSE OF THE WOLFMAN (2009) has the feel of a film made in 1946. With about the same technical competence. Just above that of MR. B.I.G. The make-up and physical effects are done too the level of that era. The film stock, degraded, is a nice touch, reflecting its alleged age. The miniature back-drops were in line with movie making at that time. Costuming could have been better. Somebody should have informed Emily Hastings (Costume Design) that Womens Stockings of the 1940s' had a prominent Heel, Seam & Sole. Mary Chapel (Sara Raftery) needed a far better wig, one that fit and blended in. The 'Prop Rifle' was not of the period, having almost 21st Century features. Music score good, reflecting the style of Hans J. Salter. Where the film falls down was the Acting. Starting with Ron Chaney, his name may have had value, but his acting limitations did not. Sara Raftery also was less then competent. The rest of the cast could at best be described as earnest! Playing their roles with a fans enthusiasm. For that is what the film is, a 'super' fan production. Glad it was made and added too our collection, something to pull out twice a year with the rest of the Universal Legacy series.