The film begins with fairytale imagery, reminiscent of Pan’s Labyrinth (Guillermo Del Toro Spain 2006). The cinematography and colour exploration in the beginning scenes through the woods describe the ‘other worldliness’ that envelopes a young girl lost in an enchanted snowy place. Alas, the child is wrenched from her idyll as she and the rest of her family are attacked by an angry mob intent on killing them. Their wooden lodge is set ablaze and the little girl is the only survivor. As she runs through the forest her eyes change and this is the first indicator that she is different.

These opening scenes are visually beautiful and reveal what the rest of this film is really about: great art direction and fantastically ambient locations which emboss a story that asks questions about alienation, secret societies, forbidden love and guilt (albeit in a slightly stilted manner). What this film is not is a horror werewolf picture. Once that is acknowledged and the expectation for full on monster mayhem is quashed, this film actually has moments of tension and anticipation, which move the story at an adequate pace.

When the action is transferred to the present, the backdrop of Bucharest suggests a time and place that is steeped in the unconventional. The leading lady, Vivian is the little girl all grown up, nineteen to be precise and she is still running. She lives in a secret world that embraces the mysterious periphery of a city at night. The underground club she effortlessly enters, whilst ‘others’ struggle, is frequented by young adults that appear reckless and uninhibited, which is a sharp contrast to the morose yet smart loner. This is also where we are introduced to her cousin Rafe, a cocky, aggressive, self-confessed romantic. Vivian keeps him and his ‘pack’ in line, but she seeks solace in an abandoned church when her privacy is invaded too many times. Also inside the church, sketching, she meets a graphic novelist called Aiden who is researching the Loup-Garoux (human to wolf shape shifters). Unbeknown to him this is exactly what Vivian and her family are. Desperate to meet her again, he pursues her through the back alleys of Bucharest. She has amazing climbing and running skills so he quickly loses her. However, upon discovering that she works in a chocolate shop, he pursues her. As the title suggests, the contrast of two opposing food sources is a beautiful metaphor for Vivian’s duel personality: blood-her ancestry and her identity, chocolate-comfort, a desire/need. This also helps to describe the contrast of the two men that want her.

Every seven years the leader of the pack, Gabriel takes a new wife, and this year it is Vivian’s turn. Astrid, Vivian’s aunt, was once Gabriel’s wife, and father to Rafe. This causes conflict between her family and within herself. Vivian’s nature means she is continually fighting against who she is and all that it entails, and once Aiden stirs her more human feelings she becomes withdrawn and confused. Because of Aiden’s impact on Vivian, the rest of the pack has to asses how this situation will ultimately affect the lineage of the Loup-Garoux. She is almost repelled by an absinthe swigging Gabriel (Oliver Martinez) who represents all that she despises in her ancestry, so she begins to fight against the traditions which have always prevailed.

At first it appears that the werewolves pose no real threat to humans as their exposure would almost threaten to exterminate their existence. However in one scene a known drug dealer is used as prey for the Loup Garoux as they chase him to his death through the forest. This chase is where for the first time we get to see the transformation. They leap into the air (in slow motion) and with minimum special effects a bright, mystical golden glow poetically transmutes the human into an actual wolf. This hybrid was certainly a surprise as there was tension and a big build up to what exactly Vivian was suppressing.

Although initially a little disappointed when revealed, this has to do with the psyche of what a werewolf looks like; it actually starts to clarify the reasoning behind the behavior of some of the characters as well as questioning how they can control who they kill as wolves. There are big differences to other representations of werewolves, which includes their lack of transformation when there is a full moon and their bite is not infectious (they are however still at risk from silver). Vivian’s growing attraction for Aiden inflames a spiteful and jealous suspicion in Rafe; spying on the couple, Rafe’s pack sneak around and prowl, regarding humans as ‘meat’ and nothing more. Rafe tells Gabriel what Vivian is up to and is told to drive Aiden out of town. I really liked the idea of the Loup Garoux’s view of humans; they are merely play things and a good meal and I would have liked to have seen more development of the cat and mouse chase, it would have provided more of an insight into what kind of lives they lead, as well as contributed to suspenseful and tension filled scenes.

There really is only one significant stalker scene and it revolves around a woman in a red dress (again playing on the Little Red Riding Hood tale), who rejects the supremely confident Rafe. Rejection and jealousy induces the destructive side of him, which sees him intent on destroying Vivian’s relationship in frustrated retaliation. Essentially this is the catalyst which enables Vivian to confront her lineage, which ultimately cements her future.

Lack of identity is this film’s biggest obstacle when trying to connect with the main characters and their circumstances. Vivian is the heroine of the piece, as she is the one who ultimately changes the history of the Loup Garoux- given this, perhaps Vivian should have a persona that radiates this strength and determination. Sadly, Katja Von Garnier neglects Vivian’s stance as the character that holds the power, even though every scene that Vivian appears in she is responsible for the cause and effects of many of the male characters.

Unfortunately, Agnes Bruckner (The Woods-Lucky McKee; 2006) who plays the permanently nonplussed lead looks so despondent and indifferent throughout that she is very difficult to care about, which is a problem as the film revolves around this character. Aiden played by Hugh Dancy (Shooting Dogs-Michael Caton-Jones; 2006) does however possess a charm that is easily translatable and believable. His charm works well against Bryan Dick’s annoyingly self important Rafe, who seems to really enjoy his dual personality and pushes others around him to their limits. Oliver Martinez (Unfaithful-Paul Martel; 2002) as Gabriel, is simply not strong enough. As the pack leader he seems to suffer from the same disease as Vivian- he is completely uninspiring.

Overall the film contains questions and dilemmas which are very interesting but never really addressed; it is easy to see how this may have alienated many of the young fans of the book who perhaps engaged with the turmoil of self identification. The whole look and feel of the film is well shot and realised, but regrettably the lack of horror leaves the film confused as to what it wants to be. It does give the impression that it has dark qualities, yet, like most aspects of this film it is never really explored in detail. The direction is sensitive to its atmosphere and the visual depiction of a crumbling society is beautifully translated. It is worth watching for its imagery, and at 98 minutes running time it is reasonable to suggest that if disappointed by lack of horror content, its fragmented gothic inspired milieu provides an alternative to current hormone driven teen horror/angst pictures.

Unfortunately for fans of The Wolfman, Universal Pictures misinterpreted the “less is more” concept to mean less substance, less story, less continuity, less suspense, less… well, less everything… except gore.  What director Joe Johnston’s remake of the 1941 Universal classic lacks in coherent plot, character development, and rudimentary editing it makes up for with breakneck pacing and miles of small intestines.

That’s not a winning combination.

Unlike the original – wherein scenes actually played out and audiences were able to acquaint themselves with the characters – Johnston’s version is less a movie and more a manic succession of inter-spliced images overlaid with snippets of cringe-worthy dialogue.   According to Johnston, seventeen minutes of additional footage (largely comprised of finishing touches to existing scenes) “had been removed during the third editing pass to push the story along so that audiences would get to the first Wolfman transformation sooner.”  (Said transformation, disappointingly, is completely rendered in pulse-deadening CGI.)

As a result, the film never has a chance to breath.   Key plot-points fall flat and sequences meant to build tension collapse in on themselves as if the meat of the film’s performances were left on the cutting room floor.  Speaking of meat, a horror film completely devoid of suspense is just not scary and, when it seems that characters are introduced solely to be ground up into puppy chow seconds later, it’s almost impossible for the viewer to care.  Thus, the disemboweled, dismembered, and disfigured bodies that litter the ground following the endlessly repetitive Wolfman attacks barely elicit a shrug from the audience.

When all is said and done, it’s Universal’s drive to update not only the plot but also the presentation that causes The Wolfman inevitably to disappoint:  the choreographed wire-works finale is so cheesy it would make Ang Lee wince.  Older fans who fondly remember the original are likely to be turned off by the remake’s excessive gore, while younger audiences watching this film won’t have any inkling why the 1941 classic was so beloved.

Sadly, what could have been a truly great horror movie has, instead, become just another indication that contemporary attention-spans cannot process the luxury of characterization, while modern sensibilities are ill-formed to deal with subtlety.  Perhaps we’ll have to wait for Hammer to set things aright.

The anthology format by its very nature presents micro-narratives that are brief, but offer short sharp shocks to the audience. Amicus would later on go on too employ talented scribes such as Robert Bloch and R. Chetwynd Hayes, and even mine the gore soaked world of EC Comics. Unfortunately Subotsky is more an ideas man than a brilliant writer. The basic kernel of each story is very good, and the bridging segment which concerns five passengers in a rail carriage having their fortunes told by a mysterious stranger known only as Dr. Schreck (German for ‘terror’ – played by the superb Peter Cushing) ultimately provides an excellent payoff. But generally the stories lack depth, detail, and any efforts at characterisation are purely cosmetic. This is not necessarily a criticism of Subotsky, with the anthology format he made a rod for his own back, but the strength of the ideas just about pulls the film through in the end. The fogbound railway setting is superb, claustrophobic train carriages often make for evocative spaces. This is probably the most successful setting in the film, the later stories all suffering from a weakness in art direction that would plague Amicus throughout its history.

The first tale of terror is set in a gothic mansion in the countryside of Scotland, and is a nice little story concerning a Werewolf. For once the production design works, with plenty of dry ice, eerie crypts and a few surprising plot twists. The second tale “Creeping Vine” is probably the films most notorious. The weakest segment by far it involves a family trapped in their horribly modern home by the rapacious plant life outside. Despite the presence of Bernard Lee (M in the Bond films) the premise is so utterly daft that one even forgets about the awful acting of British DJ Alan Freeman. Light relief follows in the shape of “Voodoo” – a tale of a musician (Roy Castle) who decides to plagiarise the music he witnesses at a voodoo rite in Jamaica. For some the over acting of Castle might be an issue, but at this juncture in the film this comedic segment is most welcome. What follows is the films most famous story “Disembodied Hand”. A pompous and pretentious art critic (Christopher Lee) gets his comeuppance for his withering reviews, when the disembodied hand of an artist takes its revenge on him. This might sound as daft as killer plants, but the performances of Lee and Michael Gough as the tormented artist make this a joy to watch. The final story “Vampire” featuring a young Donald Sutherland is a witty final entry, with a clever twist.

By requiring just a few days work from big star names Amicus were able to fill their marquee with actors who drew audiences without breaking their budget. Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee were at the pinnacle of their popularity in 1965, and Donald Sutherland was just on the cusp of stardom. Some of the casting choices such as Alan Freeman can seem peculiar now, but Freeman was also a very popular figure in mid 1960’s Britain. The stories are transparent genre clichés, but director Freddie Francis enthuses them with atmosphere and with a keen eye for visuals that echo his exemplary efforts as an Oscar winning cinematographer. Dr. Terror’s House of Horrors remains a popular and fondly remembered film from a golden age of British horror that succeeded commercially with mild scares rather than body horror and gore.

Further viewing – Amicus Anthologies
Torture Garden (1967), The House that Dripped Blood (1970), Tales from the Crypt (1972), Asylum (1972), From Beyond the Grave (1973), The Vault of Horror (1973), The Monster Club (1980).

In 2000, A film came to video called Ginger Snaps.  At first look, it’s a film about two young sisters, and one night, one of them is bitten by a furious werewolf.  Coincidentally, it sounds like something that should be easily passed off as a safe watch for your 14 year old, but this couldn’t be further from the truth.  It’s not a “teen drama” horror film, by any means.  Ginger Snaps’s themes run too deep and the film’s characters demand much more attention than any character Wes Craven has ever written into even his earliest films.  But, the theme is werewolfs…right?  Well, yes…but underneath the films furry skin lies a metaphor, and it’s this that makes Ginger Snaps stand out, as what I believe to be, one of the best films this sub-genre has to offer, if not, the best.  I mean it!

The sisters are both at that time in their lives where puberty begins to show it’s ugly face.  Within the movie, and while they are both going through these bodily changes, we’re given a chance to explore the lives and the relationship that these two sisters share with one another.  They are gothic, outcasts in school, and seen as “troubled” by their parents.  What they do in their lives, they do together.  They don’t find themselves in much trouble, but then again, they don’t seek out trouble or any other kinds of public display.  It’s the writers intent to closely examine these siblings and to have the audience see them as if they are going through some kind of an adolescent phase.   This phase, puberty and all, then coincides with werewolfism.  Luckily, at the surface, Ginger Snaps is a werewolf film that has all the necessary ingredients that can lead to an outstanding genre based film, but what makes it so very much unlike any other werewolf film is the fact that it explores werewolfism hand and hand with the transformation of a girl, to a woman.

With everything aside, Ginger Snaps has a lot of good scares.  The blood continues to flow throughout the entire film and the beasts themselves look incredibly fierce and much more lifelike than many other film that has tried to portray a proper looking werewolf.  This film is an entertaining ride from start to finish.  The script is dead on and never stops at capturing the right dialog that you’ll swear came right out of your old junior-high hallways.   Also, enough can’t be said about every actor in the film.  The family, of which the two sisters belong to, are fitting in a way that is almost too satire, but still welcoming in the sense that the film’s main focus is to entertain as well as horrify it’s audience.  In the end, that’s what makes Ginger Snaps so enjoyable.  It’s fully entertaining as a high school satire, but it’s also a damn good werewolf film.  The fact that the film ties these two genres of film so seamlessly, while still weaving in the other previously mentioned themes, is extraordinary, to say the least.

Ginger Snaps is a horror film for everyone and it is a must see for any werewolf film fanatic.  Don’t be fooled by the simple synopsis on the back of the DVD cover.  This production is much much more than any other WB horror film.  For one, it doesn’t star Freddie Prince Junior.  So there ya go!

The plot is pretty simple: Tony (well played by Adam Arkin) goes over to Transylvania with his Father (Ed McMahon, in a pretty funny and boozy cameo) circa 1961, so Ed McMahon can do some Cold War era spying. He gets bit by a werewolf, ends up with the curse, and when he gets back to the States he abandons his life and school before the ‘big game’ to wander the earth, cursed as it were. Needless to say, 20 years later he turns back up to reclaim his glory on the Football film. Of course, circa 1980/81, times are a lot different, and some of the students (and one crazed ex-girlfriend) that he went to school with have all aged and grown up, unlike Tony. Will Tony finally win the big game against the school’s hated rival, and more importantly, be able to get his life back on track? Or at least figure out how to get rid of the fleas?

Horror and DELIBERATE comedy usually don’t go too well together. Sure, you get unintentional horror/comedy ala Ed Wood, or over the top slapstick gore like the excellent Evil Dead 2 and Dead Alive, but in general most simply don’t work. This one pretty much works: there are some slow parts and some dull parts, but it’s still pretty funny with a lot of great in-jokes and humor. It moves at a decent pace, pokes fun at a lot of horror conventions, and has so many odd cameos and B actors (even the father from the awful ‘Just the ten of us’ TV show), that the final result is a pretty funny film. It’s not on par with ‘Young Frankenstein’, but it’s still a good way to waste a hour and a half.

There are a few knocks on the film, of course. Some gratuitous nudity and a LOT more gore would have helped. Some of the cameos are great, but could have been fleshed out more. And some of the jokes are more ‘puns’: a lot of this film comes across as a sort of Catskills comedian humor. That being said, this film is still a hoot. I’m recommending this one, if only for Alan Arkin as a psychiatrist who preaches negative thinking.