By Olivia Turner | Arts & Life Editor
It may not be spooky season now, but that’s never stopped me from satisfying my craving for a scary movie with a trip to the theater in the dead of January. This time, the movie to satiate my hunger for horror was “Wolf Man,” released on Jan. 17.
I had high hopes for this movie, considering the hype it had received on social media and the fact that The Julia Garner was starring in it. I can still confidently say I have yet to see a film or series in which Julia Garner doesn’t dominate every scene she’s in. The actual film, however, was a mediocre horror movie at best.
*Beware! Spoilers ahead.*
“Wolf Man” successfully startled, shocked and horrified me, but at what cost? What scare factors this film showcased were balanced out by several frustrating and predictable moments, which caused me to not take the movie as seriously as I’d hoped.
To start off, the idea for “Wolf Man” is nowhere near original. Not that there’s anything wrong with a remake, but this movie had two predecessors: “The Wolf Man” (1941) and “The Wolfman” (1966), which held this version to pretty high standards.
What “Wolf Man” did well was seen in the cinematography, set design and effects. The majority of the movie takes place in the rural forests of Oregon, although the actual filming took place in New Zealand. The eeriness of this Pacific Northwest setting was perfectly portrayed in the chilling, greenish-blue-hued shots of Blake’s father’s house and the deep, dark forest.
The effects were well-calculated with nothing too unbelievable or over-the-top. In fact, Blake’s transformation actually involved no CGI at all, opting for makeup to create a more realistic look.
The portrayal of the gradual transformation from man to monster seen in Blake (Christopher Abbott) was very well executed. Blake’s pale, sweaty complexion signified the start, which then led to the magnification of his senses, the loss of his hair and stiffening of his jaw, the growth of his fangs and eventually his final transformation — the morphing of his body, his acquisition of night vision and his loss of humanity. The presentation of Blake’s night vision was very creative. I enjoyed watching the comparison between what he’s seeing and experiencing — the babel-ification of language and the glowing eyes and blurriness — to the sadness and helplessness that his wife, Charlotte (Julia Garner), and daughter, Ginger (Matilda Firth), are experiencing.
Also, the part when Charlotte unwrapped Blake’s bandages to reveal his festering arm especially grossed me out to the point that I physically cringed, so kudos to the makeup crew!
Now let’s discuss the plot. If you’re a fan of slow burns, this might not be the movie for you. I found myself a bit taken aback at the pace of the film, as it goes from zero to 60 very quickly, causing much of the beginning to feel rushed.
The storyline of this film was altogether pretty predictable. The foreshadowing introduced at the beginning when Blake is hunting in the woods with his dad was anything but subtle. I soon guessed both their fates were sealed from the start — that they would both soon end up as the monsters they feared. This becomes crystal clear in the conversation between Blake and Ginger about how sometimes people become the very thing that hurts the loved ones they are trying to protect.
I found it exceedingly frustrating when Blake asked Charlotte to join him in moving his dad’s stuff out of the house in Oregon. Of course, this was inevitable and essential to his fate in becoming a wolf man, but I’m sorry— any man in his right mind would never take his precious family to a place where he has first-handedly experienced being hunted by vicious monsters. This could be explained by the fact that Blake was looking for a way to mend the rift that had started to grow between him and Charlotte, but come on. This was definitely one of those movies that had me shaking my head at some of the characters’ decisions.
In terms of script, dull is the best term to describe the dialogue in this movie. While I think it was in the best interest of the film to make “Wolf Man” one with a sparse script since much of the communication is not done through words, they could have made the few words the characters did get so much more tailored to the characters and weighty to the situations they were placed in.
If what you’re looking for in a horror movie is a good scare, I can’t lie — “Wolf Man” is a prime pick. But if you seek originality, engaging dialogue and an unpredictable plot in addition to scare factors and effects, I wouldn’t suggest you spend your money on a ticket to see this movie in theaters.
