Red Riding Hood (Review)

Spoilers Ahoy!

With my taste for myth and nightmare, mingled with sexuality, little wonder I eagerly awaited the film Red Riding Hood.  Several members of the cast inspired hope, from Amanda Seyfried to Gary Oldman and Julie Christie.  Now I've seen the finished film, what is my reaction?

Mixed.

The good in this film is very good.  Apart from the gorgeous imagery, and a genuinely compelling musical score, some performances reach the level of wonderful.  More, the plot--essentially a supernatural mystery--is quite fun.  On the other hand, the writer of this dialogue should be forced to copy by hand the works of Caryl Churchill, Stephen King, John Ajvide Lindqvist, Ray Bradbury--anyone who knows how to write dialogue.  Maybe it would rub off.  We can hope!

Another problem.  Given my love of history, I'm not very forgiving of wild historical inaccuracy.  Like the fact all these medieval peasants used hair conditioner.  The multi-cultural knights come to hunt the werewolf (and any witches that might be around) would be okay--were they explained.  When the local priest (Lucas Haas, in an underused role frankly) says he's sent for Father Soloman (a famed witch hunter) and that he'd be there tomorrow, all I could think was "How do you know that?  What, did he send you a text?"  Mind you, all that would be a lot more forgivable were the whole thing more stylized.  As the film appears now, it seems either too off-kilter for naturalism, yet too naturalistic to be a mythical world of werewolves and walking archetypes from the unconscious.

By far the biggest problem, though, remains a not-uncommon one.  Simply, the two male leads who vie for the the heart of our female heroine, are boring.  Unforgivable.  An old acting coach of mine once said "When  you become an actor, you sign a pact saying you're not allowed to be ordinary or dull any more."  Several members of the cast demonstrate this truth with great skill.  But instead of genuinely interesting, compelling characters in those roles we see a pair of male models--who suspiciously resemble Edward Cullen and Damon Salvatore.  Minus the charisma.  That one is supposed to be a blacksmith and the other a wood cutter yet both have slender frames makes for one more detail that yanks me out of the film and back into my seat in the theater.

Too bad.  Most (albeit not all) of the potential of this film bled away.  You can still enjoy it, especially in the right mood, but there are way too many drops of mediocre amidst the fine wine and juicy meat.  Make that a drinking horn or two, rather than drops.

Celluloid Anticipation Redux!

Movies I am looking forward to!  And why.

I've only recently learned that Amanda Seyfried, Gary Oldman and Virginia Madsden are starring in a motion picture version of Little Red Riding Hood.  To be honest, the poster here is not official in any way, shape, manner or form.  Just something I whipped together.  Here is the official synopsis:  Set in a medieval village that is haunted by a werewolf, a young girl falls for an orphaned woodcutter, much to her family's displeasure.You can read (a little) more about the film here, so there really isn't much I can say for certain.  Still, I like the whole idea of a retelling of this classic (and very Freudian) fairy tale, especially when linked explicitly with the legend of the werewolf!  As you can probably guess, I'm quite the fan of Neil Jordon's Company of Wolves.  It is supposed to be a "gothic" retelling and is directed by the same person who did the first Twilight movie.  Expected release date is March 2011.

One film I've know of for a little while is The Tempest based on Shakespeare's play, directed by Julie Taymor (who also did another Shakespeare film, Titus). Interestingly, the lead's gender is changed but that I don't mind at all.  The cast is stellar with Dame Helen Mirren as Prospera, Felicity Jones as her daughter Miranda, Alan Cumming as Sebastian and Russel Brand as Trinculo.  You can see the trailer right here.  I think it looks spectacular!  This was one of the Bard's mature plays, and has a slightly melancholy air despite the many hijinks and puns.  Film gives us the potential to see the magic, and frankly looks to put Harry Potter to shame!  Look for it December 10, 2010.

Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader surprised me, simply because I thought the decision had been not to make the thing!  To be honest, C.S.Lewis' works don't touch me as much as do Tolkien's but that doesn't mean they aren't fun.  Methinks (will have to check) this is the first adaptation of the third Narnia novel, about a quest to the very edge of the world.  If one thinks Ulysses, or the Argonauts with a few dashes of Sinbad but through a Narnian lens you won't be far off.  For me, having always loved to live near waves and the smell of salt air, this fantasy which comprises a sea journey holds a special attraction.  Take a gander at the trailer right here.

The Wolfman (review)

Spoilers ahoy!

Just got home from seeing The Wolfman, the first remake of the classic 1941 movie which created much of the now-accepted "lore" about the man who "becomes a wolf when the wolfbane blooms". Evidently the whole flick is a labor of love by and for its star, Benecio del Toro. It makes for a sweeping update of the story, beyond perhaps what was really advisable in the end.

But that sounds more harsh than intended. In truth the film has a few problems but almost entirely matters of nuance. For example, the character of Gwen (Emily Blunt) leaves the Talbot estate early in the film. In and of itself that makes sense, but since she exits and comes back two more times, it would probably feel smoother if she hadn't left that first time. As said, a nuance. Somewhat more problematical (but also more justifiable in terms of plot) is what almost (but not quite) feels like a detour to London.

Again, a nuance.

What is good about the film? A whole lot, honestly. Cast, including Sir Anthony Hopkins and Hugo Weaving, were uniformly excellent. When you think about it, the lead characters in this film are an extraordinary bunch. Laurence Talbot, estranged son of Sir John Talbot (their different ethnicities explained via Laurence's Spanish mother), does something that sounds brave. In real life, my own reaction would be to run if a monster showed up, ripping people around me limb from limb. But I did believe this Laurence would indeed grab his rifle and act. Just as I totally accepted that Gwen would bring a total focus to her situation, acting with the kind of loyalty and courage she does indeed display. As a writer, I do accept that the foundation of nearly any good fiction film is a superior script, but without good actors to bring it to life those words on a page stay there.

In the original, Claude Rains is the uncomfortable father of Lon Chaney Jr. (a full head and half taller). Yet Del Toro and Hopkins could easily be related. More, this Sir John (presumably a baronet) is a more specific character--a big game hunter and world traveler who has turned the beautiful Talbot Hall into his den, an almost fetid lair instead of a home. We get details to explain the nature of the estrangement between father and son--details unpleasant but logical. More, we can see in Laurence a child of this particular parent, but a better and in the end braver man.

I will admit the flick has a lot of red herrings, of which the biggest is the presence of Gypsies. In the original, they were the source of the first werewolf to appear. Not so, this time. The medallion of the mysterious Saint remains a secret (although methinks maybe Laurence's brother might have begun to suspect the truth). Hugo Weaving's character, a Scotland Yard Inspector partially suggested by Frederick Abberline (of Jack the Ripper fame), seems a tad under-used. Frankly some of the criticisms of his part I've read make no sense. He does not, in fact, believe in werewolves until he sees one transform in front of his own eyes. Up until that moment he clearly assumed the killer to be a madman.

Yes, the flick is gory. I've seen worse, much worse. Myself, I don't much care for gore. But it didn't bother me. The pace at the very start was almost disorienting but made increasing visceral sense as the story went on. I was suitably impressed by references/homages to classic werewolf movies of the past, including The Werewolf of London and Curse of the Werewolf. And I found myself vastly intrigued about what might have happened if Gwen and the Wolfman had not been interrupted at the very end.

Methinks the movie has also created at least three options for a sequel:

1. The Inspector was bitten by the werewolf and lived. When next the full moon rises...
2. Gwen must might have been scratched with the werewolf's teeth there at the end. Again, upon the next full moon...
3. It is almost too easy to see some nascent coroner performing an autopsy and removing that silver bullet from Laurence's body...

I"ll admit it, my hope is for a blend of #2 and #3. Werewolves in love. I like it.

Are Werewolves Sexy?

I have a friend who, like me, really enjoys vampire stories. She likes her vampires erotic and dangerous--interestingly, she feels werewolves have gotten short-changed in that department. Methinks she has a point. Lon Chaney was certainly never the icon of attractiveness that Bela Lugosi managed to be. There've been plenty of vampire t.v. series with a more-or-less constant romantic element--from Forever Knight to Kindred: The Embraced and Blood Ties to Moonlight to Angel and so on.

Werewolves? Well, there was the short-lived series Werewolf, but that had more in common with The Incredible Hulk or The Fugitive. And She-Wolf of London, which frankly is better left forgotten. Quentin Collins on Dark Shadows, Oz on Buffy, etc. Not too bad a line up.

Let us also turn to recent portrayals. The upcoming motion picture New Moon not only features a bevy of very attractive young men who sprout fur, fangs and claws but the advertising campaign is clearly intended to make the most of this fact. Indeed, the "lead" werewolf in the movie had to buff up to retain his part. The biggest problem with these lycanthropes is that they don't really retain much of the danger that seems proper for the whole idea. Whereas vampires in Stephanie Myer's books are too dangerous for words (even if the Cullens themselves are relatively pacifistic), her werewolves retain their full minds. Barring accidents, they really aren't that dangerous at all. Not so with the upcoming remake of the The Wolf Man with Benecio del Toro and Emily Blount. The trailer clearly captures the idea of the female lead in love with a man who has become a ravening monster hunting her. While not exactly a prototype for totally functional relationship, this is interesting and exciting and (let me honest) at least to some extent sexy.

A similar flirtation exists in an independent trilogy of werewolf films about a pair of sisters, titled Ginger Snaps, Ginger Snaps Again, and Ginger Snaps Back (this last is a prequel taking place circa 1750). All three have a sensual air about them, with the idea of sex simmering under the surface. Most obviously this is true in the first film, when a changing Ginger begins to practically put boys into heat by walking down the hall, and again in the second when Ginger's sister is desperately trying to ward off her own transformation while avoiding a male of the species who wants to mate with her.

Nor should we forget the under-rated Wolf, in which three of the finest actors on screen end up in what could be described as a werewolf triangle of sorts. This, like other sexual depictions of the werewolf, goes with the idea that there's something primal these creatures stir up in others. Not necessarily evil, but untamed and so uninhibited. Amid all the sterility of good manners, rigid protocols, rules against telling the truth and a clinical approach to marriage as well as coupling, the werewolf can be an avatar of pure, unfettered LIFE.

Technically, it remains a bit tricky to have too many portrayals of werewolves for two reasons: (1) The special effects are expensive. For a vampire all you need is pale makeup and some fangs. Werewolves are a much more elaborate proposition for someone looking at a budget. (2) The usual "trappings" of werewolf stories tend towards formula--woe is me, I'm a monster, can somebody stop me from hurting others, etc. Not a bad idea, really, and full of potential, but less obviously so than the vampire.

I should also point out that a little bit of research turned up some steamy romance novels that use werewolves as a background. Rebecca York has written a whole series centered around a werewolf detective. I found a whole list of romance novels involving shape-shifters, including those of the lupine variety. There's also Blood and Chocolate by Annette Curtis Klause, Racing the Moon by Michele Hauf and Lauren Dane’s Cascadia Wolves.

And I frankly find encouraging that Jack and Diane, a film about lesbian teen lovers one of whom happens to be werewolf, is now in pre-production.