TheHande

The Wolfman brings back Universal's classic horror-icon back now more amped up that before. The A-list cast consisting of Benicio Del Toro, Anthony Hopkins and Hugo Weaving give a strong back bone to what is essentially a very entertaining movie.

Stylistically the film achieves its own interesting atmosphere with the dark late 19th century look and the psychedelic mind effects. At times the more psychedelic moments do seem to cross the point of unintentional hilarity but the effort is still quite good.

Looking from the view-point of horror films The Wolfman is very weak on suspense. The movie resorts to making the audience jump with sudden, loud audio-bursts and with the unexpected appearance of people, animals etc. This is a very cheap method and I felt it crossed to the point of preposterous from time to time. There is of course some blood and gore but due to its over-the-top nature serves more as a visceral fuel for the film's actions and not really as an element of horror.

However, the werewolf effects have been achieved extremely well. The film balances nicely between actual physical human-performance and CGI use. Because the film clearly attempted to stick true to the classic image of the Wolfman, the werewolves with their hunched look may occasionally remind you of the 1970s Hulk-series, but at least they look decidedly different from most other werewolves that have been seen in recent films.

Sadly, as I have not seen the original Wolfman films I can't really measure how well this remake did justice to them. The script is okay, meaning the talented cast of actors actually get to show off some *acting* ability and not just move their jaws to meaningless words like in so many other contemporary horror-films. The heavy CG use is something I'll probably never get used to and there was even some redundant usage of it in this film but generally I can see why the film-makers would want to make the film-making process a bit easier with it.

The Wolfman is thankfully a thoroughly entertaining movie even though it has its few weak spots. It's not, in my view, a true horror-film by definition but more of a supernatural, romantic action-film.

In The Good, The Bad and the Ugly Sergio Leone perfected his epic western. It's key is the trio of main characters who all bring something different to the table and all serve as integral ingredients to a film that might appear a mere adventure film on the surface, but which is both a comedy and character drama as well as a great war movie at the same time.

Clint Eastwood's the Man with No Name, this time called Blondie, continues somewhat on the more ruthless note he took on from the previous film (For a Few Dollars More). However, he's not a truly malicious character but more of jerk-friend who is also extremely observant and at the end of the day doesn't stab anyone in the back so hard that they wouldn't get up again. This creates his rather odd relationship with Tuco.

Lee Van Cleef's Angel Eyes is the very embodiment of evil as far as characters go. He wipes anyone who's in his way, is entirely devoid of any morals and generally manages to create a menacing mood with his presence. This is a stark contrast to the character he played in the previous film and made all the more unsettling by the fact that his appearance is almost identical to this character from the previous film, right down to the pipe.

Eli Wallach as Tuco the Rat is easily the most memorable character from the film. Appearing at first filthy, amoral and without any redeeming qualities he is suddenly thrust into a wavering partnership and later, one could even say, a type of friendship with Blondie. We find out that there is more to Tuco than meets the eye though he never stops being the seemingly greedy scum that he is at the start, by the end of the film the viewer is even able to sympathise with him to a degree.

What truly sets this film apart from other westerns and as well as the rest of the Dollars trilogy is that even in its close-to-three-hour length, the film doesn't feel excessively long. The length is justified. You 'want' to spend the 170 minutes with the main cast of characters.

The second film in the Dollars Trilogy sees the Man with No Name become a Bounty Hunter and compete for the bounty of a notorious criminal with another talented and prepared hunter. The movie is a step up in scale from A Fistful of Dollars but a step down in coherence and pacing.

The film's moments of comedy are what make it stand out. Whereas the first Leone movie was a very somber piece, For a Few Dollars More displays the West as being inhabited by quirky characters. Even Eastwood and Van Cleef's heroes aren't quite as serious as their majestic and iconic appearances would let on. The comedic elements however don't always come off very cleanly which is a bit of a shame.

Stylistically the film remains consistent with the Dollars trilogy. However El Indio is not the most compelling antagonist and for this reason his part in the movie comes off rather uninteresting. Between Manco and Colonel Mortimer there's a bit of a void to be filled by a more interesting character and this begins to show in the film's pace. The film feels too long with not enough material to fill the running time. Even the catchy theme song begins to feel repetitive at times.

However, Leone's distinctive style and I think especially Van Cleef's sympathetic performance are what make this movie worth watching, but personally I think it's the weakest film in the Dollars Trilogy.