28 Years Later (2025)

Posted on July 8, 2025July 8, 2025 by fenrisfil

These days it is never considered too late for a sequel. So it’s not a shock to see Danny Boyle and Alex Garland dig up their “28” franchise. Its been 23 years since the pair launched the series with “28 Days Later” in 2002. The first sequel “28 Weeks Later” came out in 2007. Boyle and Garland were largely uninvolved as they were busy filming “Sunshine” (2007). With an 18 year gap between sequels, they have opted to go straight for 28 years later and skip past the obvious “28 months” option. The thinking seems to be that after such a long period they can effectively give the series a solid reboot. Unsurprisingly everything you need to know about this world is explained in the movie. You don’t have to watch either of the previous movies.

Also returning alongside Boyle and Garland is cinematographer Anthony Dodd. Not returning however is composer John Murphy, who has been replaced by progressive Hip-Hop group “Young Fathers”. I’ve actually seen them live, supporting Massive Attack (Another group known to dabble in soundtracks). Unsurprisingly there are no returning characters (Though since this is a planned trilogy, rumour is there will be returns down the line). Instead this movie stars a young Alfie Williams as “Spike”, Jodie Corner as “Isla”, Spike’s mother and Aaron Taylor-Johnson as “Jamie”, Spike’s father. Support comes mostly from Raph Fiennes as the eccentric “Dr Ian Kelson” and Edvin Ryding as “Erik” a Swedish soldier.

Survival

28 years after the outbreak of the “Rage” virus a group of survives have built a community on a small island isolated from the mainland (Except at low tide). The rage virus turns humans into feral killers, but after such a long time the infected have begun to evolve somewhat. The most notable of these changes is the appearance of “Alpha’s”, far stronger monsters that are especially hard to kill. The Paris outbreak reported on in 28 Weeks Later appears to have been retconned. Instead the UK is the only place effected and as such has been placed in permanent quarantine. A naval blockade surrounds the country shooting down anyone attempting to flee. The survivors are truly alone.

Living on this island is Spike and his parents. His father Jamie is a scavenger, tasked with braving the mainland to find supplies. A dangerous job and Spike is set to follow in his father’s footsteps. Despite his young age, he is ready for his first foray out into the dangers of the mainland. Spike’s mother, Isla is suffering from a mysterious illness and appears to be on her deathbed. The island has no Doctor, so there is not much that can be done. After narrowly surviving his first trip outside, Spike discovers that there may be a doctor on the mainland that could potentially save his mother and so he sets out with her to find him, whatever the risk.

Three Unequal Parts

This is a movie of three distinct sections. The section is effectively an epilogue and lead in to the next movie. Fortunately that section is short because it doesn’t fit with the rest of the movie and is frankly… stupid. The entire tone shifts gratingly and we go from a dark, thoughtful apocalyptic movie to outright B-Movie action cheese and ridiculous parody in the blink of an eye. It’s a bit like if you watched “The Road” (2009) and then in the last five minutes it turned into “Turbo Kid” (2015). Two great movies, but their tone doesn’t mix well. I have no idea what Boyle and Garland were thinking, but I don’t have high hopes for the sequel.

Now, that out of the way it’s important to let you know the rest of the film is actually good. The other two main parts are Spike’s journey with his father and then his more personal one with his mother. The two journeys contrast nicely and in it’s own way the movie examines the very different roles of fatherhood and motherhood. The latter provides a far more emotional journey and is the highlight from an acting perspective. Both Alfie and Jodie are remarkably good in their very demanding roles. By contrast, the first half where Jamie is trying to train Spike is both a very solid father/son story and much more of what you would expect from a zombie movie.

Bones To Pick

Despite the emotional pay off of the second half of the movie, it does start to have issues with consistency. The tone starts to get a bit more silly with the introduction of a Swedish soldier, whose boat has sunk and is now stranded. It wasn’t a big issue, but given what was to come it probably was a warning sign. Another issue here is just how well and how quickly Spike went from panic and struggling to shoot straight when out with his dad to a confident mainland survivor. There is also one plot event that just felt… unlikely (But no spoilers). It’s not a deal breaker though and I still enjoyed this section. For most though I think the film will peak early.

One thing I definitely approve of here is that the zombies (I mean “Infected”) are not just a colourful background to post-apocalyptic humans being generally awful to each other. That is something that is so overdone in zombie stories (Largely thank to the endless stream of Walking Dead shows). The original 28 Days later had a fair bit of this itself, but was relatively well balanced. That’s not to say the film focuses on the infected, they are still somewhat of a backdrop but the story is a much more personal one. For me, a zombie film needs to have an element of tragedy to it and making the story smaller and more personal allows for that.

Conclusion

Despite the horrendous misstep at the end, this is still a good story with enjoyable action. The visuals are good (Zombie wangs aside, I could have done without those), the acting is superb and the pacing is decent. The zombie evolution reminds me of a cross between Romero’s “Land of the Dead” (2005) and a video game like “Left 4 Dead”. I’m not sure how much it really added to the story. The first half of the movie is a good 7/10, the second a 6.5/10 and the final 5 minutes a 4/10. Fortunately the story is effectively over before the epilogue so it doesn’t ruin it. I’m giving this a strong 6.5/10

Review Roundup – May 2025

Posted on May 13, 2025May 13, 2025 by fenrisfil

Spring quite definitely here. I had a quiet month in April here on Screen-Wolf. I didn’t want to touch Snow white with a barge pole and Minecraft seemed more meme than movie. May is likely going to be quiet too. However, I’ve still got a few recent releases to look at. These are all pretty entertaining and just goes to show what you can find when you look under the surface. So let’s crack on with it!

Black Bag

“Black Bag” (2025) is the latest movie from director Steven Soderbergh and writer David Koepp. Soderbergh is what I would call a reliable mid-tier director. His movies are usually good, but not exceptional and while he has some misses he doesn’t have any major clangers to his name. Koepp meanwhile has credits to some exceptional movies along with a couple of clangers (The last two Indiana Jones movies). The pair have worked together previously on “Kimi” (2022) and “Presence” (2024). Soderbergh regular David Holmes provides the music and Soderbergh takes cinematography and editing duties (Under aliases). Michael Fassbender takes the lead role, with Cate Blanchette as primary support.

The plot involves a conspiracy within the British intelligence community. Lead by a directive to find a traitor that may have compromised a top secret project known Cerberus, George Woodhouse (Fassbender) is given a list of suspects and the task of determining who the traitor is. The big catch is that one of the suspects is his own wife Kathryn St. Jean (Blanchett), also a high ranking intelligence officer. As Woodhouse digs into the conspiracy he finds out that a more complex game may be being played. The game will test not just his skills in determining the truth but also test the strength of his relationship with his wife.

We’re Going to Play a Game

This is a pretty unique spy drama. There’s almost no action here, so don’t expect James Bond. This is all about the deception and about the characters. The first act largely plays out like a strangers in a room play as Woodhouse invites all the suspects around for a dinner party, where he cunningly stirs the pot encouraging conflict within the group. It’s a pretty good act in itself but it also gives us a great introduction to the characters and gets us straight in to the game of trying to figure out who the traitor is. Unfortunately when all is revealed at the end it’s not really something anyone would have likely guessed, but it still makes for an interesting first act.

After a purely character based first act, we move in to a far more plot based middle act which seems most of the actual events of the story play out before returning once again to a more contained final act. These two acts play out a lot like a murder mystery, with all the players returned the dinner table for a final “Game” where the murderer is revealed. By the end of the film they are literally a murderer too so it is basically a murder mystery within the setting of the British secret service. The spy stuff is all basically in the middle act, but it’s still very much a character based, dialogue heavy story.

Conclusion

Your millage will likely vary depending on expectations. If you want action you will be very disappointed. You may also be a little disappointed if you want a complex mystery with twists and turns, as it’s not really the mystery that makes this film. If however you like a group of interesting characters having conversations and playing psychological games with each other through conversation then you are on to a winner. That is the vast majority of the film. But it is also about how a husband and wife who’s careers are based on lies and deceit find a way to make their relationship work. So it’s a romance too. Personally, I enjoyed the film. This is a high 6.5/10 and a recommendation.

Working Man

Working Man (2025), is the latest in what appears to be a growing partnership between director David Ayer and action star Jason Statham. The pair had a solid amount of success last year with The Beekeeper (2024) and clearly work well together. This is an adaptation of legendary comic book writer Chuck Dixon’s novel “Levon’s Trade”, the first of a series of novels following the character “Levon Cade” (Played here by Statham). Potentially, given the reasonable level of success Statham could return to this character several times over. Interestingly Sylverster Stalone is also involved in both this movies script and it’s production. Shawn White provides cinematography and Jared Michael Fry provides the music. Statham is supported by Arianna Rivas, Jason Flemyng, Merab Ninidze, Eve Mauro and Emmett J. Scanlan.

The story folllows Levon Cade is a former Royal Marine ex commando that specialized in counter-terrorism. Now retired from that life and working as a construction foreman, while fighting for custody of his daughter “Merry” (Isla Gie). When his bosses daughter, “Jenny” (Arianna Rivas), is kidnapped, Cade is asked to find her. The apparently random kidnapping leads him to the trail of a rogue son of a Russian Mob family. However tangling with the Russian Mafia is never simple and creates a situation that puts not just him at risk, but also his own daughter.

Hard Boiled Action

This is a movie that definitely feels like something based on a novel written by a comic book writer. I don’t mean that as a negative, it’s just that each character is a lot more colourful and over the top than you would expect in this kind of movie. But while the comic influences are there, the plot is more complicated than you would expect if it was a comic being adapted and not a novel. The movie feels like what you would get if you took Philip Marlowe, mixed with him Rambo and moved him to a modern day version of Batman’s Gotham. Given the involvement of not just Chuck Dixon, but also Sylvester Stallone this is pretty much what I would expect.

The question is, does it work? Well… Mostly. It has a lot of charm and feels relatively unique despite being a Jason Statham action movie. However, the plot seems to feel both more complicated than it needed to be and also a little rushed. It also suffers from what has become a standard Jason Statham issue. Namely, you never once feel he is actually in any danger. This was the same issue I had with The Beekeeper last year. Fortunately here there are still stakes thanks to situation of the daughter and that part of our story does keep you on edge. The action scenes themselves are pretty satisfying and there are plenty of them.

Conclusion

Ultimately this is an entertaining movie, but one that will likely be forgotten in the years to come. Lost in the vast sea of Statham action movies. Though a lot may depend on if Statham does revisit the character or not. Compared to the Beekeeper this is slightly weaker but I still had a good time with the movie and it is a recommendation. If you like action films you can’t go too far wrong with this. 6/10

Locked

Trapped is, excuse the pun, a vehicle for actor Bill Skarsgård, with the vast majority of the film taking place inside a car. Directed by James Gunn protégée David Yarovesky, and produced by Sam Raimi. Locked is an American remake of the Argentinian film “4×4” from 2019. Michael Dallatorre provides cinematography and the music is scored by Tim Williams. Bill Skarsgård is supported almost entirely by Anthony Hopkins. There are other actors, but there roles are tiny compared to Bill and Anthony, with the latter only on screen in the final act.

Eddie (Skarsgård) is struggling to make ends meet. He can’t even afford to have his van repaired so he can pick up his daughter. As a result he starts a run of petty thefts. This culminates in breaking in to an unlocked “Dolus Luxury SUV” to steal any valuables inside. After coming up empty though, he finds he cannot get out of the car and so he attempts to force his way out, even shooting at the windscreen. The car however is bulletproof and his shot ricochets and hits him in the leg. Bleeding and out of desperation he answers the call from “Answer Me” on the cars terminal. He is greeted by “William” (Hopkins), the owner of the car. William has decided to punish Eddie for his transgression. He is in the wrong place at the wrong time, but this is about to get very personal.

I’ve not seen the original movie, so can’t compare quality. However I have read the plot, so I know there are significant changes. The most significant is that Eddie, has very much had the Hollywood treatment to make him a sympathetic and redeemable character. In the Argentinian version, the thief “Ciro” has killed several people, usually during robberies. Eddie however is good at heart and while he is down on his luck and resorting to theft he is not a killer. In my view this makes the story a little less interesting, since there is no debate on if he deserves this kind of treatment. Instead William is portrayed as a touch psychotic and despite his trauma, very much in the wrong. It’s a shame to lose the gray morality.

What we do have going for the Hollywood version though are two very fine actors. Good job, because without that this kind of movie would collapse. A guy trapped in a car for an hour and a half could be quite tedious after all. Not here. The dialogue could perhaps be a little sharper but it’s fine. The run time helps too here as does the addition of a spot more action. Including a tense scene where William’s remote control of the car takes his abuse of Eddie to a whole new level. In places it is edge of the seat stuff.

Conclusion

This is a straight forward premise, well played out in a timely manner but lacking a lot of the morally grey arguments presented in the Argentinian original. It is however a compelling and relatively original 90 minute movie. As a vehicle for Skarsgård it won’t do his career any harm even if it doesn’t quite know where to park itself for much of the film, suffice to say your mileage may vary. Yes all those puns were intentional. I’ll get my hat. But before that I’m giving this a 6/10. See you next time!

Electric State (2025)

Posted on April 3, 2025April 3, 2025 by fenrisfil

Today I am reviewing the huge £320m budget “Electric State” movie from the Russo brothers on Netflix. It’s worth noting as these Netflix movies usually go straight to streaming or just have a limited release. That means they don’t need to spend the extra 50% of the production costs for P&A. This may explain why they are happy to pay so much up front, however without a full theatrical release the movie can only find value on the streaming service itself. I won’t be too critical of the business model because Netflix are by far the most successful streaming service, so they seem to know what they are doing. Plus, they are actually making original content. Even if it’s only because they don’t own many IP’s of their own, it’s still a good thing.

Anyway, the Russo’s are of course the directors behind some of the biggest MCU movies. They are returning to that franchise for “Doomsday” and “Secret Wars”. No doubt Marvel hopes they will change the MCU’s flagging fortunes. “Electric State” is based extremely loosely on the 2018 graphic novel by Simon Stålenhag. Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely provide the screenplay, Stephen F. Windon cinematography and the music is by Alan Silvestri. The cast includes Millie Bobby Brown, Chris Pratt, Stanley Tucci, Anthony Mackie, Woody Harrelson, Alan Tudyk, Holly Hunter, Giancarlo Esposito, Brian Cox and many more. The huge cast of relatively famous actors may explain part of the budget. Anyway, let’s dive in.

Man Vs Machine

The movie is set in an alternative 1990’s, after a war between humans and robots in the 1980’s. The aftermath of that war sees the robots all contained in one particular area “The exclusion zone”. Meanwhile the “Neurocaster” technology used to defeat them, which allows humans to jack into a global network and take control of their own robot drones, has gone mainstream. In this future the majority of people are happy to live most of their lives in a vegetative state while controlling their robot drones. Our protagonist Michelle (Bobby Brown) lives an unhappy life with her foster father after her parents and brother are killed in a car accident during the war.

One day a robot turns up at her house claiming to be controlled by her brother and asking her to go and find him. She leaves determined to find out the truth about what happened to him. To do so she has to find a way into the exclusion zone. The only person that may be able to help her is a black marketeer (Pratt), that has a business smuggling items out of the zone. What they find though is a scandal that could unravel society as she knows it. Something Ethan Skate (Tucci,), CEO of the company that created the neurocaster device and drones will do anything to prevent.

The Abused Robot

While this movie is visually imaginative, there is little truly original here. There is no real depth to the setting or story. The first thing of note is the robot sentience and war. There are basically two versions of a war between robots and humans you see in 99.99% of science fiction movies/tv. The first type is basically the Skynet version, where an AI goes rogue and just randomly decides to wipe out or dominate humanity. The trope predates The Terminator, but that franchise did it the best. The second version is the abused robots fighting for their civil rights. This is actually the more common trope and includes things like The Matrix (Revealed in the third movie), the Kaylon from the Orville and the Geth from Mass Effect. It’s worth noting, this generic trope was not in the source material. In that, it was a civil war between human factions both controlling drone robots.

The setting in the 80’s/90’s is however in source material. But here it feels very much like a gimmick. Ultimately, it doesn’t feel that different to the 50’s aesthetic of the Fallout franchise. Again, we’ve seen this before. It does give an excuse to play some 80’s/90’s tunes on the soundtrack, but they don’t really add much outside of being retro. Soundtracks like that are actually trickier to pull off than you may think. James Gunn does it well, as does Tarantino. Usually when someone imitates the vibe, it feels like they picked tracks at random off “Greatest hits of the decade” compilation albums. This is the case here. Random 80’s and 90’s songs thrown in just because. The goofy style of the robots meanwhile is just an 80’s version of Fallout. It’s fine, but there is nothing fresh here.

The Popcorn Factor

It’s important to note, none of the above is a deal breaker. The film is still entertaining. This is a family adventure movie with a sci-fi setting. These movies don’t really need to be ground breaking. Unique would be nice, but entertaining is more important. The characters here are all likable, if a little shallow. The robots do look good and the environment is well designed. The action is reasonable and there is a little bit of humour in the mix too (Mostly supplied by MCU Alumni Pratt and Mackie). The due is really the best thing about the movie. It does get a little strange at the end… but mostly it works. Pratt effectively plays the same character he plays in everything, but that’s most of Hollywood these days.

Giancarlo Esposito also plays generic Giancarlo Esposito. Woody Harrelson meanwhile plays a giant peanut, which ends up a lot less interesting than you may imagine. Both are descent in the roles, but you would expect that (At a bare minimum). Like much of this film it is uninspired, but well polished. Millie Bobby Brown is okay as the lead, certainly better than she was in Godzilla Vs Kong. I’m not convinced she should be leading a big budget blockbuster, but she did fine. Ultimately, this is a movie that kids should enjoy and parents won’t hate. It’s not great, but it’s a lot better than some reviewers have suggested. What it isn’t however is inspired, original or worth $300m. I give this a fairly strong 5.5/10.

The Gorge (2025)

Posted on March 18, 2025March 18, 2025 by fenrisfil

“The Gorge” comes to us from Skydance and Apple TV and is from horror director Scott Derrickson and action movie writer Zach Dean. Derrickson has a strong pedigree in horror with films such as “The Black Phone”, “The Exorcism of Emily Rose” and “Sinister” to his name. He also did pretty well with the first “Doctor Strange”, but was kicked off the second for wanting to go too far over to the horror side. I can only wonder what his sequel would been like. Anyway this film stars Miles Teller and Anya Taylor Joy with support from Sigourney Weaver. Cinematography is from Dan Laustsen and the team of Atticus Ross and Nine Inch Nails’ Trent Reznor provide a juicy soundtrack.

The movie tells the story of two elite snipers with pasts that haunt them. For personal reasons they have opted to take on a top secret job at an isolated location for an entire year. They are not given any information in advance, but on arrival are given the task of guarding two sides of a mysterious gorge and preventing the things inside from getting out. Despite their physical distance, the two form a bond and the beginnings of a romance. Eventually though they are plunged (figuratively and literally) into the mysteries and horrors of gorge below. Now they must face both the dangers within and from those that want to keep it a secret.

The Exposition Files

First and foremost “The Gorge” is a character driven romance movie. It is however set with a horror/sci-fi backdrop and one that is very well presented. The special effects here look great, especially the creature effects. The movie relies far too much on darkness though, often leaving the action scenes hard to make out. That seems an artistic choice, since they really didn’t need to conceal any of those creatures for them to be scary. The characters are good and the romance is well constructed. Anya Taylor Joy continues to impress me. Sigourney Weaver however is typecast and plays exactly what you expect. Fortunately her role is brief.

The sci-fi/horror plot is sadly somewhat generic and occasionally descends into outright cliché. Indeed at one moment they find an old film reel revealing everything you probably already guessed in an overdone exposition scene via old video. Figuring exposition into a movie is often a challenge and while I prefer this to dropping in a character to deliver all the exposition and then get killed off, it is still a cliche. Fortunately, none of this really matters for this character based movie. Clearly this is intended to be a romance, with a macabre backdrop. It’s not what most people were probably expecting, but it does work and it is original.

Conclusion

Don’t expect a deep story or big twists here. The plot is the weakest element. It is fairly generic and full of holes that many reviewers are unable to look past. What you should expect however are great creature effects and a strong character based romance. The action scenes that aren’t too dark to view are pretty solid too. The movie just about lands as recommendation and a narrow 6.5/10. It may not be a classic, but it is one of the better genre films of the year.

Mickey 17 (2025)

Posted on March 11, 2025March 11, 2025 by fenrisfil

“Mickey 17” is the latest movie from writer/director Bong Joon-Ho. It is his first feature as sole writer, though the movie is an adaption of the novel “Mickey 7” by Edward Ashton. According to Ashton the director made a lot of changes to the source material and those changes are not hard to figure out. Cinematography is provided by Darius Khondji and music by Jung Jae-il. The movie was originally scheduled to come out in 2024, but was delayed due to the strikes. The timing ended up being unfortunate because it’s pretty clear early in the film they thought the 2025 would look quite different….

Robert Pattinson stars as “Mickey Barnes”, a passive, low intelligence deadbeat loser. Mickey is dragged into trouble by his association with lowlife grifter “Timo” (Steven Yeun). After finding the need to flee Earth to avoid a loan shark’s vengeance Mickey signs up to be an “Expendable” for a colonization mission. This uses cloning and memory upload technology to effectively grant him immortality at the cost of having to do all of the jobs on the mission where death is all but guaranteed. His life would be bad enough but it is further complicated when an accident leads to a new clone being printed while the old one is still alive. This is considered a major crime. The colonization mission meanwhile is complicated by a first contact situation and the stupidity of the missions leader.

Afternoon Nap of the Clones

This movie is a major disappointment. The best moments are in the trailer. What isn’t in the trailer is all the cringe and really anything to do with the actual plot. Cloning ends up not really being key to any of it. Nothing to do with the cloning leads to either Mickey’s contact with the planets native species or the downfall of the movies antagonist. Rather it is just a gimmick, and as such is there to trick you into watching a largely unrelated film. Now to be fair, the first act is pretty focused on Mickey’s various deaths, but they are all in the trailer (Which mostly focused on this first act) and barely factor into anything. Mickey doesn’t develop as he goes on, instead his “Printing” just occasionally throws up personality quirks.

The question “What is it like to die?” seems something reasonable to ask Mickey. Yet we are told that he uploads his memories to a backup periodically, not on death. He shouldn’t remember any of his deaths or really any of the trauma involving his deaths. This presents many nasty plot holes and the movie doesn’t help itself by bringing constant attention to it with that recurring question. Indeed, it never really explores the technology at all. We are meant to believe they discovered immortality and instantly banned it for fear of duplicates. It’s pretty flawed logic. Having one expendable on the crew never really made sense. They use him for experiments and to cure a virus they could almost certainly cure via other means, but when another expedition member dies people seemed shocked that Mickey can’t just take all the risk all the time.

Two Dimensional Characters

None of these characters have any kind of depth to them. Mickey (1-17) shuffles through life (And death) like a zombie letting everyone else make every decision for him. He is passive and non violent, painfully stupid. His character barely evolves through the story and by the end he’s still letting others make decisions for him. His more renegade clone is the opposite as far as passiveness goes, he takes matters into his own hands at every opportunity. He is however, still and idiot. His girlfriend, Nasha is a walking cliché. Totally lacking any kind of charm, narcissistic, selfish, constantly horny and better at everything than everyone else. She controls every aspect of Mickey’s life that isn’t controlled by the company he signed his life to. Nasha and Mickey 18 are the actual heroes of this story and neither of them are likeable.

Steven Yeun’s “Timo” had potential to be an interesting character, but is pushed so far into the background you will probably need to remind yourself who he is half the time. The scientists are all largely cartoon characters, comically goofy or detached. The worst characters though is the painfully obvious Donald Trump stand in, horribly overplayed by Mark Ruffalo. As a primary antagonist, choosing a real life figure the writers clearly despise and have no respect for means that the villain of the story is also the biggest idiot. This gives the story no stakes as he literally just defeats himself. His wife does all his thinking for him and she too is an idiot. All these characters are idiots, but you do notice the women are always the less stupid and more capable. It’s as current year as you can get.

Any positives?

Robert Pattinson does deserve credit here. Pattinson is thoroughly convincing in this role. It’s just a shame his main character is the dampest of nothings to ever be in a movie. Where his talent comes through is in the contrast between Mickey 17 and 18. They are polar opposites of characters (Though neither are very bright) and they really feel like different people through his performance. Frankly Pattinson deserves to be in much better movies, but given the actor got his break from the “Twilight” series, I guess he is used to that. Sadly the rest of the casts performances range from barely passable to catastrophic.

This movie had a budget of $118m, which is at least visible on screen. The environment does look good and the alien (*Ahem*, sorry, “Native”) species looks both sufficiently “Alien” and relatively original. Sadly, the species is largely used for laughs. Their plot treds it’s most obvious path and fills up the final and most predictable act of the film. The confrontation is never offered any real tensions and certainly no stakes. The audience is fully aware of the species intentions and things are only escalated by the unbelievably over the top level of stupidity from Ruffalo’s Trump parody and his advisors.

The cloning concept would also be a positive, but it is barely explored, mostly used for laughs and ultimately just an excuse to have Pattison play two characters. It eats up the entire first act and while this is the best part of the movie it is also, as previously mentioned, perfectly summarized by the movies trailer. The brief look at the history of the technology gives a glimpse at a different story, one frankly far more interesting than this.

Post Mortem

The novel this movie is based on is more focused on the relationship between the two Mickey’s. The other characters are very much in the background and lacking the extreme cringe of the film. Mickey isn’t a complete idiot in the novel either. Instead he spent his youth studying History, something his world no longer considers a skill. That Mickey would have been a far more interesting character. The novel does examine what it means to be immortal in such a disposable way and goes a lot deeper into the perils of colonization. Basically, it is actually a science fiction story. The film however is not genuine sci-fi. It fails to ask questions and just spams the viewer with things that have already aged badly. It could just as well be any low tier genre TV show or movie of the last 10 years.

Sadly, this has taken over from “Wolf Man” as the most disappointing movie I’ve seen in 2025. I wouldn’t say it is worse than that film, but I had higher expectations. This was after all from an Oscar winning director, but then the Oscars aren’t what they used to be. However, I’ve enjoyed several of his movies before. Directors can have missteps, but this isn’t just a bad movie. It is filled with every modern day cliché you can shake a stick at. Worst of all, the film is painfully boring! This doesn’t give me much hope for future films from the director. This is a low 4/10. When the trailer is better than the movie, all you have is a missed opportunity.

Companion (2025)

Posted on March 6, 2025March 6, 2025 by fenrisfil

Companion is the feature film debut of writer/director Drew Hancock. The movie stars Sophie Thatcher and Jack Quaid with support from Lukas Gage, Megan Suri and Harvey Guillén. A near future sci-fi/horror about AI sex companion “Iris” (Thatcher) that becomes self aware. This happens after her owner (Quaid) hacks her systems to encourage her to kill the rich, lecherous Russian Sergei (Rupert Friend). Iris wasn’t aware she was a “Companion”, but now must deal with the shocking reality of her situation. Not only this but also the fact she has been set up to take the fall for her owners crime. The reveal of Iris being an android is early in the movie, so I don’t consider this a spoiler. I think it was pretty obvious from the trailer too.

Over the last half century we’ve seen several films and TV shows about androids that pass for humans. The trend began in the 1970’s with movies like “Westworld” (1973) and “The Stepford Wives” (1975). The latter of which clearly had a big influence on this movie. Here though the “Perfect partners” are male and female and commonplace. While the Westworld androids achieved some kind sentience, it wasn’t treated sympathetically. For that we need to head to 1982 and “Blade Runner”. Rachael from that film has to deal with suddenly finding out her entire life is a lie. Combine that with the Stepford Wives and you basically have “Companion”. In the last few years there’s been flood of androids gone rogue movies including “M3gan”, “Tim” and “Subservience”. It’s into this overly saturated sub-genre we get “Companion”.

AI Horror

The movie is a reasonably entertaining ride. It is well shot and has a good pace. The acting is passable, but I can’t say I was convinced by Sophie Thatcher as a character whose entire world has turned out to be a fabrication. That may be more down to the script than the actress though, it just didn’t seem that interested in dealing with the trauma. Sadly, this film is riddled with plot holes and things that simply don’t make any sense. The movie relies on you not questioning any of it. For a start, the scheme required super rich Sergei to attempt to rape Iris (Which is a bit like stealing a strangers inflatable sex doll) and for Iris to accidentally kill him using a planted knife (Despite having the strength/speed of a regular human).

While Iris attempts to escape her situation, at no point does the film deal with the consequences of a rogue Android wandering around. Yet logically, her freedom would be short lived, making her struggle a little pointless. Indeed a big problem with this film is the lack of world building around the androids. The androids can be easily hacked and turned into killing machines and yet there is nothing in place to police this (No “Blade Runners”). As is all too often the case with this kind of sci-fi, the movie feels set in the present day and yet there are perfect AI replications of humans everywhere. Straight out the door this presents a nonsensical world and it’s done simply because androids are cheap and easy. In many ways it reminds me of the TV series “Humans”, which struggled with similar issues.

Conclusion

Ultimately, there is nothing original here. This is just a modern Stepford Wives riding the recent wave of android horror movies. The truth is, these are lazy movies. When the only sci-fi element are android and they are just awkwardly inserted into the modern day, it severely limits possibilities for both the story and subtext. Everything that can be achieved with that has already been done in Blade Runner, done far better and within an actual futuristic environment. To do anything more, you need world building and these android horrors never find the time or budget for that. However, the movie is fairly entertaining and well made. My final verdict is a narrow 5.5/10. Decent enough for its run time, but a movie that’ll be forgotten as soon as the next android horror comes out.

Werewolf Triple Bill – Part II

Posted on February 18, 2025February 18, 2025 by fenrisfil

The full moon is up again here at Screen-Wolf, so it’s time for another werewolf triple bill. I think I’ve finally washed the bad taste of “Wolf Man” (2025) out of my mouth, so this will be the last one for now. Here are three more reviews of this difficult to pull off sub-genre of horror. Tonight I present you with “Bad Moon” from 1996, “Wolf Cop” from 2014 and “The Wolf of Snow Hollow” from 2020. One thing these all have in common is they are all from writer/directors (In the case of Snow Hollow also the star). So these are very much one man’s vision, yet each vision is radically different. I love the posters for all three of these by the way. It’s always nice to not have to share generic giant head posters. Anyway, let’s take a bite out of these movies shall we?

The Wolf of Snow Hollow (2020)

“The Wolf of Snow Hollow” is from actor/writer/director Jim Cummings, who also stars in the movie. This black comedy horror is his second feature, after his acclaimed “Thunder Road” (2018) debut. He is supported by Riki Lindhome, Chloe East, Jimmy Tatro and Robert Forster (In his final performance). Cinematography is from Natalie Kingston and music is provided by Ben Lovett. The 2020 indie movie was made for a mere $2 million and clocks in at only 84 minutes. Cumming’s plays Jon Marshall, a Deputy Sheriff and struggling alcoholic with anger management issues and young daughter.

After a vacationer discovers the mangled body of his girlfriend at their rental house in Snow Hollow, the police begin a manhunt for her killer. Deputy Sheriff Marshall takes the lead. When a second victim is found with her head and arm torn off and wolf fur found at the scene the investigation takes a turn for the macabre. Marshall refuses to believe this can be a werewolf. He is hampered though by his struggle with alcoholism and his conflicts with those around him, including his daughter. No one seems to have faith in Marshall’s ability to solve this case, least of all himself.

Anger Management

This is one of those horror comedies that forgets to be either funny or scary. As a dark comedy, you expect this somewhat as usually the humour comes from quirky characters and odd situations. Here though it seems the comedy is meant to come from the incompetence of the police, and it just doesn’t land for me. Dark comedies are tricky though, as are werewolf movies, so they set themselves a difficult task here. The movie also falls prey to a lot of the cliches of more recent film making. None of the characters are likeable and the movie seems to be trying to present a message about toxic masculinity. It’s not preachy, but it is a bit too on the nose. Possibly the problem is the movie is a little too focused on it’s lead (and writer/director).

That said, the movie has some positives. The attacks are well filmed (For the budget). The cast is reasonable and the identity of the killer isn’t obvious. The only problem was the character wasn’t really involved in the plot much, so you had no reason to suspect them. Honestly I didn’t actually care who it was by the end. This tends to be a problem with “Guess the Werewolf” films. There is another twist in regards to the werewolf that was a bit more predictable, given the nature of the film. Ultimately the ending fell flat for me. The rest of the film I’d call solid, except for actively disliking the protagonist. Creatively that is fine, but it is harder to like a movie when you think the protagonist is a dick. Anyway, this is a solid 5/10. Not terrible, but not a recommendation.

Wolf Cop (2014)

“Wolf Cop” is a low budget Canadian horror comedy from writer/director Lowell Dean. Staring Leo Fafard and Amy Matysio. It is very much a Saskatchewan production, shot entirely in Regina, Saskatchewan, largely featuring natives of the area and with a soundtrack from “Shooting Guns”, an instrumental Metal band from Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. The production budget of $1 million was granted through a canadian film contest. The concept won through social media engagements and fan votes against nearly 100 rivals.

The movie follows “Lou Garou” (Fafard), an alcoholic cop in the small town of Woodhaven. Lou is mocked and disrespected by most of the locals, especially the criminals. He spends most of his time sleeping or at a local bar (Even when on duty). After investigating a report of devil worshipers he stumbles upon the murder of a local politician and is knocked out. He awakens later with no memory and a pentagram carved into his stomach. That isn’t the only change as his facial hair is now rapidly growing and his senses are heightened. That is just the start of it as eventually Lou finds himself turning into a Wolf Man. Not a feral beast though, but one that is still very much Lou – A alcoholic and a cop. As he looks into what happens he begins to discover a vast conspiracy.

It’s the Fuzz

If the name was not a give away, this is very much on the “Fun B-Movie” side of horror films. It is fully aware of what it is, but doesn’t go so overboard. They avoid falling into the trap of trying too hard to be bad. The movie actually starts out somewhat like The Wolf of Snow Hollow, with a small town, a washed up alcoholic cop as the lead, a more competent female deputy and a Sheriff that is largely uninvolved for most of the movie. That’s where the similarities end though. The comedy in this movie is obvious, the gore over the top and the identity of the Werewolf… well, it’s in the title of the film! The film offers few surprises but generally delivers exactly what you would hope for.

Unsurprisingly they have gone for more of a “Wolf Man” werewolf instead of something more wolf-like or monstrous. That approach is usually chosen to allow a little bit more humanity in the character. This is the case here, however it’s not for sympathy but rather to allow Wolf Cop to deliver the occasional one liner and to use his gun. Yes, this film features a werewolf that shoots people. It’s also the rare situation of a werewolf that is basically good, even in monster form. The movie still provides monstrous villains however. Despite the comparatively straight forward make up job of the “Wolf” form they actually do put effort into a unique and impressive and quite funny transformation. This is a fun movie that is much better than it probably had any right to be. Shockingly, I’m giving it a solid 6/10.

Bad Moon (1996)

“Bad Moon” comes from writer/director Eric Red. Eric is best known as a writer and penned the horror classics “The Hitcher” (1986) and “Near Dark” (1987). This is another Canadian movie, this time from Morgan Creek Productions and with a significantly higher budget (Especially with inflation) of $7 million. It is based on the novel “Thor” by Wayne Smith. The movie stars Mariel Hemingway, with support from Michael Paré and Mason Gamble. All reasonable mid tier actors that never quite made it to the big time. Paré is all over genre entertainment and usually safe casting, so no surprise to see him here. Cinematography comes from Jan Kiesser and the score is provided by Daniel Licht (Who is most famous for scoring the TV series “Dexter”).

During an expedition to Nepal, photographer Ted Harrison (Paré) and his girlfriend are attacked by a werewolf. Paré survives but as a result now carries the curse. He returns home and hides away in his remote lakeside cabin to try and find a way to cure his condition or live with it. After reaching out to his remaining family, his sister “Janet” (Hemingway) and her son “Brett” (Gamble) he agrees to move his trailer to the back of their house and stay with them. While he struggles with his condition in secret, the families dog “Thor”, suspects the truth and instinctively wants to protect his family from the danger.

Man’s Beast Friend

Of this round of reviews “Bad Moon” is undoubtedly the most traditional werewolf story. We know who the werewolf is from the start and he transforms into the standard “Howling” style beast. The creature actually looks pretty good, better than I expected. But then, back in 1996 there were a lot physical effects masters around and no drive to use CGI (For this kind of film anyway). Although we see a bit of the tragedy of the cursed lycanthrope, the focus is more on his sister and nephew. It’s not really their story either though and that is the real twist with this movie. The lead of this movie is the families’ dog “Thor”. It’s a novel approach that isn’t without issues, but it did make this werewolf movie stand out from the pack.

The plot itself is stripped down and straightforward, but it didn’t really need to do anything more complicated. The characters are likable enough and have a little depth, mostly from the conflicted nature of dealing with a loved family member turning into a monster. The tragic aspect of the story could have had a little more to it. Ted flips at some point from a sympathetic character to an outright villain and the change is a little jarring. Part of the reason for this is that he isn’t the focal character. Janet fairs a little better and you do feel her internal conflict in the situation. Thor though is the star, but even this could have been explored a little more thoroughly. The truth is this straight forward movie does just enough to make it work. Not outstanding, but just about worthy of a 6/10.

Werewolf Triple Bill

Posted on January 30, 2025January 30, 2025 by fenrisfil

Rather than doing a regular review roundup for January, I’m going to take a bit of a swerve. Continuing the trend from my previously posted reviews, I’m reviewing three werewolf movies. So, if you follow this blog (Or my social media posts), you know I didn’t like the new “Wolf Man” (2025) movie. That’s an understatement. But it has driven me to find an actually good werewolf movie or two from the many that have slipped me by over the years. I’ve said before there are only five werewolf movies I think are truly great. There’s a handful more that are pretty good, but most of these movies are not worth bothering with. Perhaps sometime I’ll do a top ten.

I’ve always been keen on the werewolf as a horror character. Wolves actually have a lot in common with humans. Nature has only ever created two persistence hunters, the wolf is one and humans are the other. They are the ultimate feral mirror of ourselves. But beyond that the transformation from man to wolf provides the opportunity for all kinds of metaphor. Last but not least they always provide a challenge for effects and filming. As a result, these movies are often more about what you don’t see. They tend to have a very old school horror vibe to them. So for this round up I’m looking at “Wer” (2013), “Late Phases” (2014) and “Werewolves Within” (2021).

Werewolves Within (2021)

I’m going to start of with my least favourite. “Werewolves Within” is from director Josh Ruben and writer Mishna Wolff. Wolff is clearly a fan of the genre as she is also behind the series “Wolf Like Me”. Ruben has made one previous feature film, the horror “Scare Me” (2020). This horror comedy stars Sam Richardson and Milana Vayntrub and is an adaptation of the computer game of the same name. That game is basically a variation of the Werewolf social deduction game, itself a version of the game “Mafia”. Right off the bat you can tell the focus of this isn’t really the werewolves. It’s also worth noting, that set up somewhat similar to the movie “Cry Wolf” (2005), another film that bares a striking resemblance to “Mafia”.

“Finn Wheeler” (Richardson), is a Forest ranger assigned to cover Beaverfield, a small town where the residents are divided over a pipeline. The town is populated by a bunch of colourful and somewhat bizarre characters, the sanest of which appears to be the post woman “Cecily Moore” (Vayntrub). On his first night there all the generators are taken out by what appears to be a powerful animal and one of the residents are killed. This starts a long game of insinuations and conflict between the residents. It becomes apparent one or more of them are actually werewolves and the clock is ticking to find out who.

I Accuse You!

One of the standard types of horror comedies is basically a form of fatal slapstick. That is everyone ends up killing everyone else, often by accident. This is one of those. This obviously fits with the video game. I’ve never played it, but these games always work by eliminating who you think is the werewolf (or Mafia member) and the goal of the actual werewolf is to misdirect the other players to eliminate each other. This is exactly what is happening here. The trouble is, since this is an adaptation of the game, you know this going in. It makes the set up all a bit too obvious. It also means by necessity, you don’t actually see the Werewolf until the final moments of the movie.

The biggest problem the film has though is that it is not especially funny. It’s more “Quirky” than laugh out loud funny. That gives the film some charm, but I need a bit more to my horror comedies. That aside, the movie is perhaps most similar to “The Beast Must Die” (1974). Both movies turn the werewolf story into a bit of a murder mystery, with the colourful cast constantly pointing the finger at each other. The difference is I didn’t predict the werewolf was in the first act of that movie. Ultimately, this is almost a good movie, but just fails to really stand out in any way. It is a very average horror comedy. 5/10

Late Phases/Night of the Wolf (2014)

Mostly this movie is referred to as “Late Phases”, but it is also known as “Night of the Wolf” and that appears to be it’s official release title in the US and UK. No doubt that caused a lot of confusion with the marketing. Late Phases is a better fit for the film’s plot, but it doesn’t really say “Werewolf” loudly enough, so I can see why it was changed. Anyway, this is a movie from Spanish filmmaker Adrian Garcia Bogliano and his first in English. It is written by Eric Stolze, with cinematography from Ernesto Herrera and music from Wojciech Golczewski. The film stars Nick Damici as blind retired Vietnam war veteran “Ambrose McKinley”.

Ambrose has just moved into a quiet retirement community on the edge of a forest. Despite his disability he is fiercely independent and has a shaky relationship with his son. On his first night in his new home he is attacked by some kind of beast and is only saved by his dog (Who is mortally wounded during the attack). Ambrose quickly realizes he has been attacked by a werewolf and that when the next full moon arrives he will likely be killed. He isn’t going to go down easily and spends the time until the next full moon preparing and investigating. This brings him into conflict with the other residents of the village and his own son.

Old Dogs, New Tricks

This is a fairly unique werewolf movie. It plays the mystery angle to some extent, but is more focused on it’s non-wolf protagonist. Nick Damici really does hold this film together as the grumpy vet, determined to go out fighting. The film goes with a the traditional version of the monster with a design straight out of The Howling. In practice they aren’t the best looking versions I’ve seen but I do have to give them points for a very good transformation scene. Don’t expect to see a lot of them though. They appear at the start and end of the film, but the vast majority of it is in that period in between full moons. That’s not a big negative for this film though as it gives the film time to focus on Ambrose and see what makes him tick.

Obviously a werewolf movie already requires some suspension of disbelief. This movie asks us to go a little bit further in believing that this blind veteran can fight back against them. It turns out, it’s not as much of an ask as you would think! The movie does well with it’s budget and it doesn’t mess about with the plot. The bookended werewolf scenes and the direct drive and ticking clock of the rest of the movie means it doesn’t drag. Overall, while it’s not going to break the long standing record of only five great werewolf movies, this is pretty close. A good low budget werewolf movie, just about worthy of a 6.5/10.

Wer (2013)

“Wer” comes to us from writer/director William Brent Bell in his third feature and second horror film. I’m not familiar with his work but the film “Boy” (2016) seems to have been his most successful. Alejandro Martínez provides cinematography and Brett Detar, the music. The film stars A.J. Cook with support from Simon Quarterman, Vik Sahay and Sebastian Roché. All solid TV actors that occasionally pop up in lower budget movies. I have to admit it is hard to take Vik Sahay seriously after watching him in “Chuck”, but he does a good job so that is on me.

After a horrific attack in France on a family of holidaying Americans, the authorities arrest local man Talan Gwynek (Brian Scott O’Connor). There is more than a little controversy here though since all the physical evidence suggested a vicious animal attack far beyond what a human could do. Because of this expatriate lawyer “Katherine Moore” (Cook) volunteers to take the case of his defence. Assisting her are investigator “Eric Sarin” (Sahay) and animal expert “Gavin Flemyng” (Quarterman). Fairly early on she starts to suspect this is a fit up being done by a corrupt police captain “Klaus Pistor” (Roché). However, there is definitely something strange about Gwynek….

Of Wolf And Man

This is a very rare breed of werewolf movie in that it tries to take a realistic approach to the curse. As a result the make up style is a lot closer to the original Wolf Man than the more modern “Howling” style monster or werewolves that actually turn into wolves. Here the werewolf is a human suffering a rare disease that can be both inherited and passed on through infected blood. Those infected become notably hairier on a permanent basis, but most of the time are harmless. That changes on the full moon where they gain superhuman strength and become violently feral. This movie achieves everything “Wolf Man” (2025) set out to do in re-imagining the classic version of the monster. That it achieved it twelve years prior, just goes to show how little Leigh Whannell actually brought to the table.

The plot around the beast is a bit more of a mixed bag. The individual parts all work well enough, but the film shifts gears dramatically for the final act. Once the secret is out, the rest of those plot elements don’t seem especially important. This works fine first time through, but I can’t help but feel the early acts will lead to the film dragging somewhat in repeat viewing. I also have to say, I’m not a big fan of werewolves that don’t resemble wolves in any way. While this may be the best version of that I have come across, it’s not what I am after. I guess you could call it a “Lycanthropy” movie instead of a “Werewolf” movie. Anyway, that gripe aside, the movie is pretty good and worth a strong 6/10.

Final Howl

Werewolf movies are difficult to pull off and few have ever really found the formula. So when I am able to score one of these films at a six or higher out of ten I call that a win. Indeed if I do put together my top ten, “Wer” and “Late Phases” may well make my list. I want to note too that the gap between those movies was narrow. They are both worth checking out, if you are a fan of the sub-genre. Late Phases edged ahead because it felt 100% like a werewolf movie and still managed to find something new to say. As for Werewolves Within, it’s not really much of a werewolf movie. It is though reasonably fun and certainly better than “Cry Wolf” was. All three are better than “The Beast Within” (2024) and way better than “Wolf Man” (2025). Anyway, stay tuned as I may have more werewolves for you soon.

Head to Head: Wolf Man (2025) & The Beast Within (2024)

Posted on January 23, 2025January 23, 2025 by fenrisfil

Today I have a Werewolf double bill for you, checking out the just released “Wolf Man” from Universal/Blumhouse and “The Beast Within”, an independent release, directed by Alexander J. Farrell, from last year. I’m going to put these two wolves head to head. These movies are pretty similar so it makes sense to make a comparison. Wolf Man though has the backing of two of the biggest players in the horror field in Universal and Blumhouse and is of course part of Universals ambition to make use of the classic Universal Monsters they are associated with. A while back they wanted to establish a shared universe for these characters, but a real clanger of a “Mummy” movie cause a rapid re-think. That rethink has seen director Leigh Wahnell tackle “The Invisible Man” and now “Wolf Man”.

Really, the whole Universal Monsters thing is a fools errand for the studio. Almost none of those monsters are IP’s owned by Universal and are almost all public domain, or generic enough (I.E. Werewolves & Mummy’s), that anyone could make a movie. This is a similar situation to a lot of Disney’s classic line up. What the studios actually own is their own take on the products, some of which will be under copyright but all thick with trademarks. But if that is the case, what is the benefit of doing entirely new and modern takes on these products? Perhaps an attempt to try and claim the public perception of ownership? Certainly the shared universe plan made some sense (Especially given the Universal Monsters were the first shared universe). Anyway, let’s dig in.

Two Wolves Inside You

The plot for both movies is similar. Both feature a small family of husband and wife and one daughter. In both it is the families’ patriarch that is the wolf of the story. There are a few key differences though. In Wolf Man, the male lead “Blake” (Christopher Abbott) doesn’t start off as a “Wolf Face” and instead is infected. Meanwhile in The Beast Within, “Noah” (Kit Harington) is implied to always have been the monster. Both films end up with the wife and daughter desperately battling for survival against their father/husband at a remote location. The Beast Within tells the entire story from the point of view of the daughter “Willow” (Caoilinn Springall). In Wolf Man, the daughter “Ginger” (Matilda Firth) is the focus but the film is from a more neutral perspective. The name of course is a reference to “Ginger Snaps” (2000), a much better movie.

The other main difference is in the look of the character. Both productions opted for a 100% practical effects, which I definitely approve of. The Beast Within went with a traditional Werewolf design, but Wolf Man went in a very different direction. The idea seems to be to modernize the look of the “The Wolf Man” (1941), but in practice there is little resemblance. Really the beast looks more like some kind of sasquatch. The transformation is also very slow, so you don’t see much of the full transformed monster. The Beast within saves the Werewolf’s appearance until near the conclusion too and both films work a very, very slow build up.

Werewolves For Modern Audiences

Perhaps disappointingly, the themes for both movies are exactly what you’d expect in the current year. That is, both basically tackle “Toxic Masculinity”. The difference though is that Beast Within is far more clear cut. That is really about how families stay with an abusive man and make excuses for them. That is a genuine problem, so while it is obvious, I can’t complain about it. Also portraying that from the young girls perspective opens up a lot of creative avenues. Ones we’ve seen a few times before, in better films. It’s not a bad take though, and I appreciate the attempt, even if it is at times clumsily implemented.

Wolf Man however tackles a far more debatable version of “Toxic Masculinity”, suggesting that masculinity in general is a problem and that one may inherit this toxic behaviour from your father. I don’t want to use the “W” word here, but lets just say it reminded me a bit of a certain Gillette advert. The thing is the behaviour the movie paints as negative is entirely protective in nature. The leading man’s father shouts at his son for wandering off alone in a forest full of bears and that he knows has at least one Werewolf in. This is portrayed as an abuse of some kind. Later Blake shouts at his daughter for tight rope walking on a concrete barrier by a main road. The movie suggests he learned this bad behaviour from his father and similarly…. well, there’s an obvious plot twist down the road.

Style And Atmosphere

As far as atmosphere goes, I find myself favouring Beast Within. It’s notably cheaper, but it is creatively put together and provides a constant atmosphere of tension. Wolf Man relies on the a lot of jump scares, but does have some moments of good cinematography. The music wasn’t especially notable in either case. All the actors are reasonable in both movies, perhaps a little stronger in Wolf Man. However, the dialogue is better in Beast Within. Honestly a lot of the dialogue in Leigh Wahnell’s movie felt clunky and forced.

Special effects is a trickier one to rate in a head to head. The design for Wolf Man is not very good, but it is well executed. The slow transformation provides a lot of interesting moments, making this movie a bit of a body horror. While Beast Within punches above it’s budget, the final act provides a good few shorts of the monster that don’t look particularly realistic. The design though is solid. You don’t see the werewolf until very late in the movie, but there are a few good dream sequences featuring transformation effects. I’m favouring the underdog (Pun intended) again here.

Werewolf Vs Wolf Man

So in conclusion… Well, I don’t recommend either of these movies really. But let’s tackle them one at a time. If you like slow burn horror with an unreliable narrator then you may enjoy The Beast Within. But it’s not something worth going out of your way for but personally I enjoyed elements of it and didn’t feel like I wasted my time watching it. It is however not really what most people want from a werewolf movie. That it the metaphor is so obvious doesn’t help it either. It’s not particularly clever, even with the use of the child’s perspective and there is no fun here at all. It is passably average so I give The Beast Within – 5/10.

I have to be honest here and tell you that Wolf Man was a very disappointing movie for me. Leigh Wahnell made a very good low budget movie with “Upgrade” (2018) and provided a solid if somewhat obvious take on “The Invisible Man” in 2020. Here however, he’s made an absolute clanger. Clunk dialogue, bad creature design, slow to the point of boring and a frankly cringe subtext. Indeed given that Invisible Man was also basically about toxic masculinity, I’m starting to wonder if Wahnell actually has more than one idea in his head. That also means currently the entire new body of Universal classic monster movies is about modern identity politics. Lame and disappointing. I give Wolf Man – 3.5/10.

Nosferatu (2024)

Posted on January 6, 2025July 20, 2025 by fenrisfil

Since Robert Eggers latest movie “Nosferatu” was released in the UK January 1st 2025, for me it is the first movie of this year. To many of my readers though it will have been the last movie of 2024 since it arrived Christmas day for the US and a few other territories. Sadly that means my review is behind everyone else. It also means it missed out on my “Best of 2024” list. But in my view it’s viable for 2025 with that release date. We’ll see where I place it next December. Anyway, this is written and directed by Robert Eggers. Jarin Blaschke provides cinematography and Robin Carolan the music. This is of course a remake of the 1922 silent movie, which was effectively an unofficial adaptation of Bram Stokers Dracula.

Bill Skarsgård stars as “Count Orlok”, the titular Nosferatu. This monster has established a psychic bond with Lily-Rose Depp’s “Ellen Hutter” and concocted a scheme to bring his reign of terror to Germany so that he can “Be one” with her. This also involves getting rid of her new husband “Thomas Hutter” (Nicholas Hoult). Fortunately for him Hutter is a solicitor and estate agent and so he can kill two birds with one stone by inviting Hutter to his castle to sign the deed to his new estate in Germany. Anna meanwhile continues to be haunted by dreams of this dark figure she likens to death itself. As the menace draws near her doctor seeks the assistance of Professor Albin Ebernhart Von Franz (Willem DaFoe) a controversial expert in the occult.

Gothic Horror is Back

This is a visually and sonically stunning movie. Not a huge surprise from Eggers, but he really has outdone himself with this one. Almost every scene has beautiful cinematography. Eggers makes great use of framing in his shots that really gives everything the look of a painting. He’s also clearly spent a lot of time watching old universal horror films and of course the original Nosferatu. The technique of using what you don’t see to build terror is at near perfection here. But as great as the visuals are, the movie is perhaps more impressive sonically. The use of the intense soundtrack, the frightening way Count Orlok speaks and strategic silence really helps to build the ominous tension and really make you feel in the presence of absolute evil.

It’s not all positive though. Eggers skills possibly don’t stretch to getting child actors to not really feel like children trying to act. The two children in this story were distractingly bad. Fortunately their roles were minor and effectively limited to two scenes (Well two where they had dialogue anyway). The second, larger problem is the plot. It’s not that it is a bad story, far from it. Since it is effectively Dracula it is arguably the most successful horror story ever written. But that is the problem right there. If you haven’t lived under rock your entire life you’ve definitely seen this story (Or something similar) before. Horror fan and/or a movie buffs have probably seen it at least ten times, maybe as many as fifty times. That is a problem.

Dreams And Nightmares

Despite the fact I’ve seen this story many times, the way Eggers approaches it is still unique. The heavy focus on dreams and the way they mesh with reality has always been one of his trademarks. Here he uses it in perhaps his best way yet. Having an evil that can be more of a presence through dreams without having to run around everywhere fits Gothic Horror perfectly. The genre has always been more about implying evil than showing it plainly. The idea is to give the viewer a sense of dread and Nosferatu has that in spades.

Where I wonder if Eggers does perhaps have a weakness, is in directing actors. This is a hard one to judge. The child actors were grating, but a few of the others felt a bit dodgy too. Notably, Aaron Taylor-Johnson felt a bit… off. Lily-Rose Depp though by contrast, was particularly good. Unsurprisingly Willem DaFoe, Nicholas Hoult, Bill Skarsgård and Emma Corrin all did great. But actors of that caliber don’t need that much guidance from a director. It’s when you look outside those names that I start to wonder. That’s not to say anyone was outright terrible though. Even the children, they were just notable by contrast. Put a pin in this one for now.

Remakes Worth Remaking

While I’m not normally a big remake fan, this is one that was definitely needed. After all, I think 100 years is more than enough time to warrant a second go. But since the soundtrack was so important to this film, it is very much justified as an improvement over it’s silent predecessor. It also goes some way to make amends for the shoddy way the original was treated. That is would be a whole separate can of worms, so suffice to say the Bram Stoker estate wasn’t best pleased with the unofficial take on Dracula. Yet it wasn’t until Christopher Lee took on the role that anyone played a more menacing vampire than Max Shreck. This film returns Orlock to the head of the table as scariest vampire.

But speaking of remakes, I can’t help but wonder what “A Nightmare on Elm Street” would be like if made by Francis Eggers. I mean sur,e he’d probably set it in Victorian England or something, but I don’t know anyone that has made so much of an art out of dreams, hallucination and madness. If ever there was a director outside of Wes Craven that could actually do a good Nightmare on Elm Street movie, I think Eggers is the man for the job. He would need the right cast though. I’m not sure the director is as good with the actors as he is with everything else. But, he has always been lucky in finding the best talent to work with.

Conclusion

When it comes to horror it is often down to personal taste. This however, is a film every horror fan can appreciate at least on the audio/visual level. Where opinions may vary is on the story. Gothic romantic horror isn’t a wide field as far as story tropes go and when you are remaking a 102 year old movie based (unofficially) on a 107 year old novel no take will ever feel totally original. However, we all knew what this was going in. Also, you don’t really watch Eggers for the story. That’s not a criticism, it’s just he creates atmosphere like no other director. That is why we watch his movies. That and his incredible attention to accuracy and detail. This is his best so far and it’s worth noting, every movie he releases is his best so far. I can’t wait for his next. This one is in the clouds at 8/10.