IMDb > DarkWolf (2003) (V) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
DarkWolf
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
DarkWolf (V) More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 7:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [Next]
Index 63 reviews in total 

21 out of 24 people found the following review useful:

One positive thing..

Author: filmfreak-5 from Denmark
14 July 2003

Well.....one positive thing I can say about this flick - it contains a lot of nudity, really nice chicks....but perhaps they should stick to getting naked, cause acting are NOT for them..

This is a good example of a bad story mixed with nudity because the director is well aware that it wouldn't sell in other ways..

The wolf looks like a chimpansee on the run, and the acting is horrible, especially on behalf of 'Samaire Armstrong' (qv) - she has her moments when she acts cute, which works for her - but in the scene where she tries to act tough - my god, it's a pathetic display of horrendous over acting..... stick to being cute, PLEASE!

In short, don't waste your breath on this film, you'll be sorry

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 8 people found the following review useful:

Hedren meets Hodder?

Author: jaywolfenstien from USA
28 August 2003

The opening titles took me by surprise. I knew Kane was in this film, but Tippi? The Tippi Hedren from Alfred Hitchcock's classic the Birds and underrated Marnie? Huh. Well, that is the highlight of the film, and the only pleasant surprise the film has up its sleeve.

What's kind of sad is the general premise of Dark Wolf could work well were it not written on the level of forth grade flunkies. The usage of color, lighting and camera work are above your typical bad-horror flick, and with a complete narrative overhaul and redistribution of the budget (cutting out the CG) it could go somewhere.

The two biggest weaknesses in this film are its CG usage and the low-level intelligence of the script. On the commentary track for Exorcist: Beginning, Renny Harlin observes that a horror film's effectiveness thrives upon the reality of its world – a reality that CG shatters. Dark Wolf proves him correct – watch the werewolf transformations in this movie. Transformation that look like a video game cut scene integrated into a live action film. Watch it and try not to laugh. Just try.

CG, done correctly, carries a pretty steep price tag, especially if the said scene involves a computer generated character. The reality of such effects rests within dozens upon dozens upon dozens of subtle details that the casual viewer cannot consciously identify, but even Joe-nobody off the street knows when its lacking. When the effect is artificial. I have a hard enough time suspending my disbelief for the likes of Star Wars II and Matrix: Reloaded whose team of CG artists outnumber Dark Wolf's cast and crew combined. Low budget horror shouldn't even screw with it.

The second biggest weakness, again, is the script's intelligence level. And yes, I'm aware of the genre's average film IQ. This film scored in the double digits on the specialized dumbed down horror SATs. If you marveled at the moron who drove miles out of his way to accidentally dig up and revive Jason in F13pt6, prepare to meet his mentor, grasshopper. "What's with the shiny guns?" asks a cop to an FBI agent, and I expected her to finish with "They're pretty!" Movies like this make me re-evaluate my expectations for horror, but I find myself asking "how can my expectations get any lower?" I absolutely loved a film as narratively retarded featuring shallow throwaway characters – and that movie's name? Freddy Versus Jason. I'm not looking for strong character convictions here, but convince me your cop has at least heard of Miranda for Christ's sake. Convince me the photographer knows something about photography. Convince me that the werewolves are actually a threat – a werewolf attacks and we can read a book then just plop the wolf up and carry it around like a bag of groceries? Sounds like a SNL skit.

Before too long, I found it more entertaining challenging the logic and questioning the events of the film than accepting the film's reality. For example, how do you lose the one relic that will ultimately explain everything and save the world? How does someone stand there and watch the heroine escape and lose her when his sole purpose in life is to locate her? Why did the wolf look eerily like an ape? Why is a naked Kane Hodder laughably unintimidating as he demands "Where is she?" Why does he go to wolf form before every kill? and why is he mysteriously naked for one scene in the middle of the film? I know better than asking these questions, but I couldn't help myself. Dark Wolf was asking—nay, begging—for it.

Winding down, the film shows Kane Hodder on a morgue table, and that's where I switched off the film. Anyone who's seen even one horror movie knows exactly what will happen, and as I ejected the DVD and returned it to its case I quietly noted how much of Dark Wolf I could have skipped and still know precisely the events that take place. In fact, the only thing I would have missed was the below average stupidity and the six minute MTVesque photo-shoot of some girls made up as werewolves.

On the plus side the film does have Tippi Hedren. It also has better than average camera work, a very colorful (though frequently inappropriate) atmosphere, and a few cool effects like the flash of red to wolf's perspective . . . before it became redundant . . . which was before it became obnoxious. Overall, though, the only way I can recommend Dark Wolf is to demonstrate why low budget horror should stay away from computer generated imagery.

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 12 people found the following review useful:

Kane Hodder!! Whhhhyyyyyyyy??

2/10
Author: ResidentHazard (romerodawn@yahoo.com) from Plymouth, MN
11 November 2005

Dark Wolf (Quick Review) Let's get right to it: This is a repugnant piece of rotting roadkill with cow sh*t on it. It's just an awful movie. It's an urban werewolf movie with some of the worst acting imaginable and a story as weak as any gangly nerd from an 80's high school drama film. What's worse is that poor Kane Hodder was duped into playing the gigantic evil werewolf. Kane f*cking Hodder. Someone's trying to ensure that playing Jason Voorhees is the height of his film career...

Anyway, former Playmate Jaime Bergman is also in the movie and she eventually becomes a werewolf, too. It's kind of a crappy cop drama with the world's worst looking werewolf in it. But it does have moments of near-rampant nudity. But that's about all. Want to know more? Okay, the werewolf is generally an ugly-looking black blur zipping around the screen. And when we're privileged enough to actually see a transformation sequence, we're presented with something that resembles a full-motion video from a video game made during the early stages of the Playstation. The first Playstation. The CG animation is really that primitive. Only good for horror hardcore fanatics that want to see small moments of nudity surrounded by rampant visual vomit. 2/10

www.ResidentHazard.com

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 12 people found the following review useful:

B-movie hindered by cheap special effects and acting!!

Author: jrat6200 (jrat6200@yahoo.com) from San Antonio, Texas
7 April 2004

Why the hell was Kane Hodder cast in this?! He has much better potential with the Jason character, and hopefully he will be recast in the next Jason movie. Also, FILMMAKERS PLEASE RECAST KANE AS JASON AGAIN. I'M A LOYAL FAN!!!! Anyway, back to Darkwolf. This movie sucks!! The girls are pretty, I can say that at least. I don't understand why the power ranger chick decided to do nude scenes. But hey, got to make money right? The only person who tried to act, in my opinion, was the cop. I can't say that for everybody else though. The creature CGI effects were horrible. It's like the creators of the film tried to get a quick release. Do it right the first time!! But wait, I guess you have to have movies like this to laugh at right? The photo shoot was great might I add. My advice, leave this on the shelf and go rent Howling I or Dog Soldiers if you want werewolf entertainment!

Final Judgement: */****

Was the above review useful to you?

13 out of 20 people found the following review useful:

So very, very bad.

3/10
Author: Noel (Teknofobe70) from Bromsgrove, England
6 April 2005

Hip. Erotic. Wickedly sexy ... whatever. It's "The Terminator" with werewolves.

No, seriously. The cop saves the girl (waitress!) from the big monster and refers to himself as her 'protector'. The lead actor Ryan Alosio does a pretty good job of emulating Kyle Reese ... there's a massacre in a police precinct ... the bad guy is muscular with red eyes ... and it even contains dialogue along the lines of "You said it yourself, he won't ever stop. Never." The dire script comes from a first-time screenwriter who, thank God, hasn't sold anything since this, and it's all thrown together by famously bad director Richard Friedman.

The movie opens in a strip bar (always a good sign), and a mean-looking biker guy bursts in for no apparent reason, pursued by three cops. One of them is black, and (shock horror!) he's the one who gets killed in the first five minutes. The film goes downhill for the next hour or so, then picks up a little with some decent action sequences, before rounding it all up with an abysmal ending.

For the most part, the cast come across as competent actors doing what they can with a bad script and a director who's willing to settle for less. If nothing else they appear to be learning how to act in this movie and Alosio, along with some of the supporting cast, shows signs of talent. DarkWolf in his human form is played by gargantuan Kane Hodder -- famous for his numerous portrayals of Jason Vorhees in the 'Friday the 13th' movies. He's decent enough, especially considering he isn't used to speaking roles.

It's become famous amongst groups of horny teenage boys for the lesbian rooftop scene between Andrea Bogart and Sasha Williams, who gets her kit off a couple of times in the grand tradition of former 'Power Rangers' actresses. And it's unnervingly clear that the editor spent WAY too much time on that scene ... anyway, the main redeeming feature is that the physical werewolf effects are rather good, and the design of the wolf isn't bad at all.But the CGI is bad. Just plain bad. I mean seriously, if you can't reach some level of realism - why bother? Just throw a little extra money into the make-up! Aside from the terrible script, this movie does have it's moments, many of which are unintentionally funny. It's good for a laugh if you don't have anything better to do, but just don't spend any money on it. Please.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Whahahaha

2/10
Author: gerben12 from Netherlands
1 May 2009

This move was on TV last night. I guess as a time filler, because it sucked bad! The movie is just an excuse to show some tits and ass at the start and somewhere about half way. (Not bad tits and ass though). But the story is too ridiculous for words. The "wolf", if that is what you can call it, is hardly shown fully save his teeth. When it is fully in view, you can clearly see they had some interns working on the CGI, because the wolf runs like he's running in a treadmill, and the CGI fur looks like it's been waxed, all shiny :)

The movie is full of gore and blood, and you can easily spot who is going to get killed/slashed/eaten next. Even if you like these kind of splatter movies you will be disappointed, they didn't do a good job at it.

Don't even get me started on the actors... Very corny lines and the girls scream at everything about every 5 seconds. But then again, if someone asked me to do bad acting just to give me a few bucks, then hey, where do I sign up?

Overall boring and laughable horror.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

A great movie

3/10
Author: damittaja from Finland
9 June 2013

Yes, I call this movie great for a reason. It is so great because it is so horrendous. The acting is terrible, the special effects make your eyes bleed, the plot is absolutely stupid, the camera work is amateurish and apparently the characters in the movie can't see things that the camera cannot.

I watched this movie with a group of few friends while slightly intoxicated and it was a truly fabulous experience. I was laughing half the time so hard that it was hard to watch due to the serious hurt in my stomach muscles. We had to pause the movie two times due to one of my friends starting to hyperventilate on the floor because he could not stop laughing.

Why is the movie so funny? They've tried to make a serious horror movie with a *slight* nudity twist but they've failed miserably in almost everything. We could not stop laughing when we imagined how the actors and other people involved in the production of the movie must have tried to do their best and this was the result.

This movie works fabulously when watched in a relaxed atmosphere with friends. Preferably in a guys only event. Don't let the critique stop you - the movie is horrible but that makes it worth watching with friends.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Just when you thought it was safe to watch a direct to video movie...

Author: moviechic_Carrie (moviechic3@yahoo.com) from The Softer Side of Hell (NC)
30 September 2003

Synopsis : A new breed of horror roams the streets of Los Angeles. It's the Darkwolf, a vicious werewolf with a thirst for blood ~ and a lust for Josie, a sexy, unsuspecting woman with a mysterious power she in only beginning to understand. once the Darkwolf catches Josie's scent, nothing can stop his insatiable hunger to mate with her....and he'll kill anyone who gets in the way!!

Overview : This movie did have some potential but it was lost somewhere along the way. The movie did move smoothly from beginning to end and the story was decent, but the acting suffered and the special effects weren't very special at all. The transformation scenes from human to wolf made me feel I just jumped into an XBOX game as I looked around for my controller. I did enjoy the few scenes were we SEE the wolf and the leftovers it strew behind him but that alone wasn't strong enough to hold this movie together.

Jekyll's Rating : Some people are fans when it comes to the direct to video movies...I suppose I am not one of them. This one gets a 2 star rating from me....get it as cheap as possible if you must.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

Farfetched, low-budget genre entry in need of a more polished script and a less-irritating ingenue in the leading role.

Author: TheVid from Colorado Springs
30 May 2003

This quickie, shot with high-definition Pananvision 24P cameras, isn't as unwatchable a werewolf movie as some reviewers have stated, but it's nothing to howl about either. The centerpiece is a swell lesbian nudie number (poorly edited with one of the werewolf attacks), but it's about the only really satisfying bit of exploitation found in this hokey horror flick. The dialogue is too humorless and contains way too much expository blabber for a werewolf genre script. The male performances are generally acceptable, but there's virtually no acting on the part of the casted females. Samaire Armstrong is particularly annoying in the lead role as Josie. DARKWOLF is essentially the product of a noticeably uninspired team of filmmakers; at the very least, they didn't seem to have their hearts into making a fun monster movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 13 people found the following review useful:

How do films like these ever even get funded?

2/10
Author: MrGKB from Ohio
28 July 2005

The only reason I even watched this was because I found it at my local library (and will berate them mercilessly for having wasted public monies on it), and despite the plethora of tits and ass, it didn't take long to realize that the fast-forward button was my friend. Terrible direction, pedestrian camera work, sporadically bad-to-nearly-passable acting, chintzy effects, and one of the worst screenplays I've had the displeasure of seeing brought to life (such as it was, horribly crippled and mutilated) in a long, long time. Best laughs actually come from the "Making of..." featurette, in which the poor saps involved with this HDV mess attempt to justify their lame efforts as if they had been working on something special, instead of something that won't be utterly forgotten next week. Wait! Except for the fact that somehow someone lured Tippi "The Birds" Hedren, of all people, into doing a bit part, along with Kane "Friday the 13th" Hodder! How this came to pass, I'll never know, and to be honest, I don't really care. Watch at your own risk, and don't say you haven't been warned. This is film-making at its pretentious, craven worst. It only gets a 2 from me for having some good-looking naked women, and even then, just barely.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 7:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
External reviews Parents Guide Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history