Change Your Image
Upload An Image
Crop And Save
Somebody wrote here: '(Most) US reviewers find this mediocre or 'not interesting' and suggest we should see the American remake. European reviewers all like it! I like it too' Oh well, I'm European... so what? I love GOOD cinema of any kind but sadly I got really disappointed with this over-rated and feeble thriller. The story is so obvious and cliché-ridden as any Hollywood mainstream movie of this type and in the last 30 minutes it's like an idiot-plot compendium. It begins promising enough, there are a couple of superb scary scenes in the first half, tons of creepy atmosphere along the way (great locations and camera-work) and some decent performances. But that's all. OK, if the point with this movie was character development it fails with this, too. There's not a single complex or even sympathetic character. And that slight social commentary is uninteresting because it doesn't match with the thriller elements at all.
I haven't seen the American remake and I don't feel like to do it after seeing this one.
The Wolf Man (1941)
This is the second time I've seen this film and I can't understand the fact yet: WHY does it keep its classic status for many horror fans (most in America)? Because it was THE FIRST?. I don't think so: that was Universal's own "WEREWOLF OF London". Or because it was the first to play the subject straight?: Surely not, "Werewolf of London" also did it so as well before. Or cause this one set all that mythical stuff about werewolves? Oh, let's be serious folks!. One thing is enjoying "THE WOLF MAN" as it is - just an entertaining, sympathetic BUT feeble B-grade monster flick from a studio, Universal, caught in its low days- and other quite different pretending to give this a "classic" status. Any viewer with an eye for film quality can't get satisfied. I guess "The Wolf Man" was able to impress those teenager film-goers who saw it in the 40's and even those who watched it later on TV. Plus some kind of nostalgia. Sadly to say, as I wasn't one of them. And this is what I found sitting through "The Wolf Man" today: Simple-minded script (well... actually it's hard to find some Universal horror film made in the 40's that do not seem to be wrote by an 10y.o. child) Wooden performances (only Claude Rains and Maria Ouspenskaya save the show) -Carboard forest sets complete with that cheese fake mist. -Also cardboard 'European' folklore (any folk living in Wales couldn't believe his eyes!) -Continuity goofs galore... I don't really understand why "The Wolf Man" has to be a better considered film than "MAN MADE MONSTER" or "SON OF FRANKENSTEIN". And of course it is light-years far from Universal gems like "THE BLACK CAT", "BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN" or "THE INVISIBLE MAN" Of course, if we compare it to those terrible Paul Naschy affairs, "THE WOLF MAN" could even look like a Cinema Masterpiece. But if you are interested in something more substantial than pulp programmer fun and want to see intelligent old werewolf movies I rather recommend Hammer's "The Curse of the Werewolf", for instance. That with Oliver Reed is not perfect but at least it offers an adult approach to the story. It's a matter of taste.
Italian Horror Masterpiece
Definitely, this splendid movie is still the only one to match up to "La maschera del demonio" (1960, Mario Bava) as the most brilliant and complex Italian Horror film (in any age, of course).
Beautifully shot, with an unforgettable performance from Barbara Steele (arguably her best!) and outstanding macabre atmosphere.
As the Bava film, this one deals with such a taboo theme as necrophilia, in an even more morbid way. Although the story is located in 19th-century London, those magnificent sets are obviously Italian.
Not for the popcorn-eater kind of horror fans, they could find this just boring. OK, give them one of those dumb teen flick from Hollywood (any age, too)and leave Dr. Hichcock for keen cinema buffs.
German version = original voices
I've read a lot of mistaken reviews about this movie affirming that its original shooting language is in English. That's not true. Those who has been watching the English version were listening to a poor dubbing. "Anatomie" was actually shot in German and that's the original language of the players. Anybody who pays attention to the sound quality can easily notice that the German version keeps clearly the acoustics attributes and shape of direct sound recording on shooting. On the contrary, the English version just sounds like what it is: a poor, flat studio dubbing. Watching the German version with English subtitles is definitely the best option if you like seeing films in the shape its creators really made it.