Recensioni degli utenti

Is this film going to win any awards?,no. Will it keep you entertained for 90 minutes, yes it sure will.

If your looking for a popcorn, creature feature then this will certainly fit the bill.

There is a story (just about), plenty of blood and guts and a werewolf!!! I grant you it's a CGI Monster so it's not all that but it does fit in with the film.

The film kept my attention throughout and I genuinely enjoyed it. Visually it reminded me of Van Helsing and the like but thats where the comparison ends as this is pretty good!!

Recommended.

Nothing special, but more than a decent effort. Plus a few good actors are thrown into the mix. Stephen Rea being one of them. Acting is good overall. Nice make-up FX and nice story support that. There is not too much blood mind you and no nudity (just in case you were looking especially for those things, either because they interest you or appall you).

You can't or shouldn't compare this with a big budget movie though. It's what it's supposed to be: A nice little snack, an appetizer let's say, no pun intended. It is predictable and does not really make a secret of one of the (supposedly) big mysteries of the movie, but it still works nice enough

Good to see that some directors are taking the werewolf genre back to the originality and not just have some musclebound hunk of a teenage idol run around without a shirt and pass as a werewolf.

The story in "Werewolf: The Beast Among Us" was interesting and packed with action, not to mention a very large amount of mutilation and mayhem. A lot of people ended up dead in this movie, but the best part was the aftermath of the carnage (as the movie didn't really focus that much on the slaughter itself). There was a lot of good and interesting things here, such as severed limbs, massive bite wounds, tear marks from claws and the like. So it does have a good amount of gore, for all us gore hounds out there.

But back to the story, initially it is a story that takes places in a small 19th century village; a village that is terrorized by a beast unlike any other. The werewolf that is terrorizing the village is big, bad and hungry for blood.

However, there is an interesting twist to the movie that makes it interesting and stand out from the otherwise generic movies of the werewolf genre. I will not reveal what it is here, but I will say that I thoroughly enjoyed that take on the werewolf's story that the director and writer had opted to go for with this movie. Plus there is another big plot twist later on, with one of the hunters. Again I will not reveal it, as it would be spoiling the movie. Just watch and see for yourself.

The setting of the movie was great, lots of nice details to the costumes and sets. However, it was little bit confusing as to where they wanted the movie to take place, as the costumes would suggest somewhere in the Eastern parts of Europe, but for some reason everyone spoke fluently English; aside from the questionable accent here and there.

They had put together a rather good group of people for this movie. Lots of good acting on the screen and people really did work well in their roles, and the characters were nicely portrayed and came to life quite well on the screen.

Of course you can't have a werewolf movie without a proper werewolf. And the CGI effects in "Werewolf: The Beast Among Us" were working well for the movie, as the werewolf looked quite cool. Great transformation scenes, and a lot of good scenes where you get to see the actual creature, instead of just odd bits and glimpses here and there.

If you enjoy werewolf movies of the older type (classic style), then you should definitely check out "Werewolf: The Beast Among Us", because it is a lot of fun and a good movie to watch.

Twenty-film years after a kid inadvertently kills the werewolf that's attacking his family by setting his house on fire, he finds himself in the rural town of Dravicu on the hunt to kill more werewolves. Meanwhile, a local doctor's apprentice seeks to join up with the group of werewolf hunters much to the reluctance of pretty much everybody else.

The production values were a tad bit better than I expected and the acting, if over-dramatic, was still solid enough. The story was a bit on the predictable side, but I've seen many worse werewolf films in my life.

Werewolf: The Beast Among Us

Werewolf: The Beast Among Us is a 2012 action werewolf horror movie directed by Louis Morneau. The movie stars Nia Peeples, Steven Bauer, and Guy Wilson. While I usually like horror movies and movies with vampires and werewolves this one was so badly made I got bored very quickly. The special effects are not bad but the acting and the storyline are atrocious. After 15 minutes it is clear who the werewolf is and how the rest of the movie will go. The actors don't really convince me either. It is supposed to be set in 19th century Transylvania but the clothing and beliefs are all wrong for the region and much closer to Bram Stoker's Dracula. I managed to watch the movie till the end but won't buy the movie for my collection. I give it 3 stars for the visual spectacles even though it is sometimes a bit too dark and fuzzy. If you want to watch a predictable werewolf movie with some nice CGI and other fancy special effects stuff you'll like it. As a werewolf movie fanatic I found it quite dull.

I really don't understand the latest craze with classic beasts of horror. For some reason, they feel they have to sex it up; that's not a problem in and of itself, but it's usually done with zero substance. This film is a prime example of such a laissez-faire approach. Still, even film-makers have to pay the bills, I suppose.

Furthermore, this film doesn't even bother to excuse itself. Within the first fifteen minutes, you will know exactly what is going on, and there will be no mystery as to who the beast is among them.

What this film does have is a lot of action; so if you can turn a deaf ear to the crass dialogue and a storyline that randomly darts about, it's not a bad ride.

Unfortunately, I was paying attention, so I gave this film a 3/10.

This movie was far better than I expected. A easy thriller to get into, with a lot of action and intriguing twists and turns. The lighting and cinematography was very good, and the characters were intriguing.

The acting and special effects could have been better, and some may wish it to be more scary, but I don't think anything about this movie was poor or cheesy. Especially considering a cast of so few "big name actors".

I was never bored or disappointed. As action-thriller it did all I would want from the genre, it surprised, thrilled, was nice to view, and engaged me enough emotionally to care what happened. I was well entertained and think a rating of 5 or lower is very harsh when you compare it to other films with a similar rating.

This film was actually recommended to me by a friend who said it was awesome. I did see the film myself and I wouldn't use the word awesome to describe it but it is one of the better werewolf movies that I have seen in a while. During the first half it had the usual genre clichés that were in a way painfully obvious but later it pulls out a few very clever plot twist that actually manages to surprise.

Also, given that this is a made for TV movie the quality and production value as well as the special effects will certainly leave you thinking otherwise. The cast has a few familiar faces among them including Ed Quinn, Nia Peeples. Stephen Rea and Steven Bauer and all of them including the supporting cast give good performances.

Overall, awesome might not be the word I'd use to describe this film but in the end I did like it and I'd recommend it to fans of the genre.

It's amazing how many horror films open up with a pretty young lady running scared through a forest. At least the one that opens this film is allowed to wear some clothes. From those first moments, the pace never lets up in this hidden gem of a movie.

Louis Morneau directs events wonderfully well, creating a lush, eerily fairytale-type setting for the story. Everything is very moodily lit and the sets are wonderfully detailed.

The acting is powerful throughout, especially Adam Croasdell, who makes a powerfully, self-adoring Stefan - and it's always good to see Stephen Rea in these kind of productions.

My only gripe is the CGI, which comes into play for the more athletic lycanthropic scenes. I'm not a fan of CGI, unless there are enough millions of pounds or dollars to make it truly convincing. Otherwise, great fun. My score is 8 out of 10.

After reading some of the reviews, I was convinced that I would enjoy this film. I wasn't wrong at all. The characters were fun and interesting and the story was quite good at keeping me guessing all the way until the final act when yet another surprise was sprung upon the viewers. The scenery is quite good and the music compliments the movie. The actors all pull their weight and their are some really good fight scenes. I will be adding this to my collection.

If I had seen this in a theater, I would have been happy to see this in a theater. I think it was a lot better than the crap that has been regurgitated over and over again.

"Just so you know that's no ordinary werewolf were dealing with out there." A small village is being terrorized nightly by a savage werewolf. When a hunting party is formed the village hopes that the town will be able to finally rest. One by one the villagers are attacked and turned in to vicious beasts the villagers begin to wonder if it is someone among them causing the problems. I will admit that this was better then I was expecting it to be but this movie is still something that should have been on the scy/fy channel. The film quality and acting are a step above the scy/fy standards but it still has the feel of a movie like that. The best way to describe this is as a slightly more scary version of the Amanda Seyfried "Red Riding Hood", it's almost a direct remake in my opinion. This is a movie that many people may really like, movies like this usually have cult like fans, but for me this was just something I had a hard time getting into. Overall, a scy/fy channel-like version of Seyfried's "Red Riding Hood". Not awful but nothing to rush out and see. I give it a C+.

This film begins promisingly enough with a werewolf wreaking havoc, but after that it kind of loses its way. Fast forward a quarter of a century and another - or perhaps the same - creature is decimating a small town in nowheresville Europe, or perhaps it is USA, whatever, this is an extremely powerful creature, not your run-of-the-mill "eras lupus", but happily a regular band of werewolf hunters happens to be passing through.

There is a fair amount of gore in this film, and a confusing dream sequence, but much of the action occurs in the dark, there is though a surprising twist or three towards the end. If you can understand the last one, best write your own review.

In the Nineteenth Century, when a werewolf slaughters the dwellers of a small town, a group of bounty hunters commanded by Charles (Ed Quinn) arrive in town and negotiate a higher reward. The apprentice of medicine Daniel (Guy Wilson), who is the protégé of the local doctor (Stephen Rea), joins the group and provides information about the beast that is intelligent and kills not only on the full moon, but also on the previous and the next days. Soon the gypsy leader invites Charles and Daniel and explains that in the solstice, the wolf-like creature will be able to control his transformation at will. Therefore they have only two days to discover who the beast among them is and destroy it.

"Werewolf: The Beast among Us" is an underrated and entertaining adventure of werewolf and hunters where their leader Charles is a sort of "Van Helsing" of werewolves. The movie will never be awarded with Festival prizes but it is pretty decent and funny. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Lobisomem – A Besta Está entre Nós" ("Werewolf - The Beast among Us")

It wasn't great. I'm not even sure if it made good. But if you were looking for a cheap park your brain and have fun blood and guts violence movie with some Eastern European charm and don't mind utterly flawed props, this will do.

The cast is hardly sterling. We have Nathan Stark from Eureka in the lead. But that was good enough. In this land of Transylvania and cowboy hats, we have The Mysterious Vampire Hunter in a cowboy hat along with the macho chick and their sidekicks, going after the super bad ones.

It's obviously Romania from things like signs being in Romanian and the reward poster being in the Romanian money. (10,000 Lei) What's more out of place are the anachronisms in the firearms. The rifle the hunter carried was a round receivered Mosin Nagant rifle. They started producing them in 1930 and that gun looks like a post war II version. The revolver he carried was a post war Smith and Wesson. The Mauser rifles the gypsies had were K98's, which were from World War II.

Despite the historical stupidities and the iffy CGI, it was fun.

I actually enjoyed this movie, quite a bit. Sure, some things were lacking, but nothing is perfect.

There's parts, like the others said, that are a little fuzzy - it's supposed to be set in a certain era, but there's parts of it that are obviously very modern - which I'll leave for you to find for yourself. There was also quite a bit of mutilated bodies and enough gore that it stood up to its genre - without being too over-the-top.

The thing that made the movie for me was the fact that it had so many twists, and until the "click" came along (the sudden understanding), I was constantly guessing - also - the ending is quite marvellous - I was thrilled. It doesn't leave you with the let-down feeling that 90% of modern Werewolf movies tend to do - this is MUCH better than its rating suggests.

So, yeah. For not being another let down as so many werewolf movies are - 9.

Interesting and entertaining werewolf motion picture, better than what the general video consumers say, with a fine introduction "a la Hammer", which evokes Guy Endore's "The Werewolf of Paris", and gives a new twist to the old tale of the man-wolf monster.

Partially damaged by a too melodramatic plot point that triggers the final act (not the revelation of the werewolf's identity, but of those behind its evolution), by actors who deliver their English lines with a slangy American diction that clash with the European tale and locations, and a very bad performance by Ed Quinn, the plot was handled with a firm hand and a fine visual sense by director Louis Morneau, balancing the development of the horror story and the action scenes. Maybe the special effects reveal the small budget of a B film (according to standards --it must be said-- exclusive to massive productions in which a significant part of the money is spent in expensive stimulants), but in general the production values are considerable high.

Apart from all this, producers should start reflecting on what they have turned the werewolf film into... Now the creature simply looks like a big, bad wolf that possesses great strength, and it has been deprived of its essential monstrosity: the mixture of man and animal features in a body beyond description. From the Lon Chaney Jr. Creature, it did not develop in that direction, but evolved into a four-legged thing with big teeth.

Then you'll love this. There is not much to be said for this stinker other than, what the hell is Stephen Rea doing in it?! Seriously, I thought his career was over when I saw him in this. A quick check of his IMDb page says otherwise, so that's good news.

Bad costumes, bad sets, bad writing, bad direction, the lighting looks like it belongs on one of those terrible TV fantasy series.

Seriously, was Stephen Rea tricked into being in this movie?!

Weak movies can do more than just leave an audience disappointed, they can leave you with an understanding of what you'd like similar movies to miss and what you'd like them to have. It is like learning from mistakes.

The visual effects are weak, the werewolf and the violence scenes look bad, but this doesn't stop the movie from adding other supernatural elements to the mix, elements that require, obviously, visual effects. So, lesson one, if the resources are not great, do not bring more than necessary to the table. If you are "a werewolf movie", only work with werewolves and keep other fiction out. Concentrate your limited resources on the core element. Few can be as good as 2004's "Van Helsing" when it comes to working with multiple well-known fictional creatures. Don't aim too high. And if you think one monster isn't enough for one film, go watch 1979's "Alien". And if you think it is bad for a monster movie to barely have the monster on screen, then go watch 1979's "Alien". The might of that film might prove you wrong.

There is a settlement terrorized by a werewolf and there is a group of specially equipped "werewolf hunters" hired by the local authority to help. On the one hand, there is a prologue in the movie that gives one of these heroes a little backstory, and that is not a bad thing. But on the other hand, because the movie is in a rush, it does not focus much on them, and little is known about them both as a team and each separately. What could have helped is a scene where they are shown successfully killing a werewolf before the main hunt of the film begins. A scene like that would have given the audience an understanding of what this team is, how good they are and how they work. Their experiences could then contrast what they are challenged with now. And there is no need to be in a hurry. So, lesson two, take your time and pay attention to detail.

I wish I could say "the movie looks good" because the lights and the colors are good indeed, the cinematography is good, but the visuals in general are not, because the werewolf and the violence scenes are a part of them, and they look bad, and they are the key visual element here because this movie is a werewolf story. I wish I could say "this movie has a good story" because it isn't that simple and has a plot twist I didn't see coming, but there is a lack of focus and precision, there are simply more elements than the movie can handle and it isn't organized well.

Finally, this movie got me thinking about something. And for that particular thing, I am grateful. It made me realize what I wish I could see. The werewolf movies usually tell stories where werewolves are no discovery because they have been a part of the human culture for a while now. In most movies it's like "We're dealing with werewolves here but aren't they only supposed to be in fiction?" and there is no discovery to make. Or it's like "We're dealing with werewolves here and they are a well-known part of our world" and there is, again, no discovery to make. I wish I could see a Hollywood level werewolf movie that has werewolves be a discovery to everybody in the movie. Perhaps, that movie would have to be set in a time period way before now. As for this one, it doesn't look good but it could have. The story it tells isn't all that good but it could have been. Whoever likes werewolf movies and still hasn't seen this one, may as well give it a try.

This movie isn't good but its spinoff/sequel among us is way better and more sus.

First things first, it's a B-movie, right? Correct me if I am wrong. A typical monster hunter mercenary team with unknown story background. I spent some time to figure out, from the weapons, that it should be roughly 18xx. But where was that village? Can't tell. Mixed accents everywhere.

The story has nothing special to say. Characters are dull. No suspension no thriller no eye catching actions. The whole production is hollow.

I barely give it a pass. And I definitely won't recommend it to my friends. I insisted watching to the end coz I like shooting werewolves.....