Review of Wolfman

Wolfman (1979)
3/10
So bad it's, well not really good, but...
4 February 2006
Look, give Earl Owensby some credit... the guy's a tool salesman, had a movie dream and is living it. Sure his pictures suck, but that's part of the charm. This mish mash has Earl (with his Elvis like accent) playing a Colin, a guy who comes back to his hometown in 1910 and becomes sort of a werewolf. There is something compelling about Owensby's movies because it looks like the kind of thing that you or I'd do if we had some rough film stock, a couple of cameras and a weekend to shoot a flick. Considering this, it's not quite as bad as it could have been. The female actresses are quite good, although our pudgy star is very hard to take as the hero. His wooden acting skills, monotone delivery and silly dialogue ruin any chance this film had. On the plus side though, the musical accents are quite effective and some of the shots are set up pretty well. There are far to many continuity mistakes, but Owensby does know a little bit about film making and sets up his shots pretty well. There is, at least, a genesis of what a film should be about here, and Earl clearly enjoys what he's doing. As far as EO Studios in North Carolina, it would appear that it is an adequate film making venture and has been used by some "A" list pictures, including "The Abyss", where the many of the underwater scenes were filmed. The highlights are ruined by bad acting and script problems however. There was just enough atmosphere to keep me watching to see how this train wreck would resolve itself. Owensby's films are unintentionally good in enough areas to keep it going along as a low-budget time filler. Go into this kind of thing with the right attitude and you won't be disappointed. Owensby does know his way around a camera.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed