The Wolf Man – The Legacy Collection
Description
For the first time ever, the original The Wolf Man film comes to DVD in this extraordinary Legacy Collection. Included in the collection is the original classic, starring the renowned Lon Chaney Jr., and three timeless sequels, featuring legendary actor Bela Lugosi and others. These are the landmark films that inspired an entire genre of movies and continue to be major influences on motion pictures to this day…. More >>
The Wolf Man – The Legacy Collection
February 28th, 2010 at 4:31 pm
The Wolf Man, in my own personal opinion, is not as good as many of the other classic Universal horror films. It’s not for lack of trying. The cast is exemplary, including horror greats Lon Chaney Jr., Bela Lugosi and Claude Rains. The story, music, ambiance and mood are all excellent. The problems lie in a few inconsistencies as well as the Wolf Man himself. First, yes, Jack Pierce’s makeup is good for 1941, but the design of the Wolf Man is not. Lon Chaney, changed, looks more like a “werepoodle” than a werewolf. Or, if you rather, the werewolf looks much more like the “bear man” from Island of Dr. Moreau than anything even remotely resembling a wolf. Other problems with the film include the oddity that the police captain, looking at a footprint more than twice the size of a full-grown man’s, concludes that it’s a wolf print. A wolf that leaves a print that big would be the size of a horse, though no one notices anything odd about it. Another inconsistency lies in the fact that when the Gypsy, played by Lugosi, changes into the werewolf, he actually becomes a wolf and not an extra-furry man; however when Chaney changes into the werewolf he does not become a wolf but the aforementioned bear-werepoodle-man thing. Why didn’t he just turn into a wolf too? The movie would have been much more effective (and creepier) had this been the case. Yet another (and this is the only other one I’ll mention–I promise) was the horrendous decision to have Claude Rains play Lon Chaney’s father! Rains looks YOUNGER than Chaney!! The flow of the film is also impeded by a far too abrupt conclusion. Also problematic is that the main character, played by Chaney, is pretty hard to sympathize with. He’s portrayed as a smarmy twerp who immediately upon entering the castle he’ll inherit sets his sights on breaking up a couple to be married!
Rating: 2 / 5
February 28th, 2010 at 6:35 pm
I never found the movie to be that good, the sequal, Frankenstein meets the Wolfman is a kind of fun picture to watch and is really the only Universal team-up monster fight films that was at least interesting to watch(if however not all that spectacular.)
Rating: 2 / 5
February 28th, 2010 at 8:05 pm
O.k., I’m not a big fan of old monster movies, but 30 bucks for four, oh yeah. The extras are definately good too, giving a good deal of information on the Wolfman, and monsters in general. Here are my thoughts on the movies individually:
The Wolfman: Reasonably good, although like all these movies it’s very short and the guy doesn’t even become a werewolf until it’s half over. It becomes incredible with the commentary on to explain about the making, and tell alot of information about the various versions of the movie’s script (there were three; one in 1932 that wasn’t made because it would have offended Catholics, one that was the script until weeks before shooting and would have left the question of whether or not Larry (Gill not Talbot in this version) was turning into a wolf open (you only saw the wolf as a reflection through Larry’s eyes), and the one that was made. He also points out the plotholes (probably left-overs from script changes). There are a good number of holes to laugh at, but I don’t blame them since this was probably done on the budget of two or three “Twilight Zone” episodes.
Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man: This is actually better in some ways than the original. While the idea sounds rediculous, and the excuse for the final battle seems silly, the opening is actually spookier (I won’t say “scarier” because nothing in any of these movies are truly scary in our world) than the original.
She-Wolf of London: This is not a Werewolf movie. It’s a murder-mystery in which the murderor is trying to convince a girl she’s turning into a Werewolf because the girl believes her family is cursed. While I suppose the various instances in which it was implied she was a werewolf could be explained as part of an elaborate scheme, I can’t help but think this was suppose to be more along the lines of the second aforementioned “Wolfman” script until the end when you saw the She-Wolf (or maybe even only saw it as a reflection), but the studio got cheap and wouldn’t buy the make-up. I can’t prove that, but I suspect it. I did not like this movie, but I don’t blame them for having a filler(the only movies with the actual Wolfman are either in this set, in another Monster Legacy set, or “Abbot and Castello mee Frankenstein” which both doesn’t have the Wolfman name in the title and was a comedy; the only real other black-and-white Werewolf movie I guess they had was “Werewolf of London”).
Werewolf of London: Not much to say about this, it was OK, but I never really got into it.
Rating: 4 / 5
February 28th, 2010 at 10:28 pm
just rcve this disc last week along with Frankenstein- legacy collection. Both came thru loose in box and are scratched and freeze up, very dissapointing waste of money.
Rating: 1 / 5
March 1st, 2010 at 12:02 am
With each sequel, the plot becomes weaker, the acting terrible, and production values drop.
Buy it used (not over $5) and you shouldn’t be too disappointed on a rainy Saturday afternoon.
(A few Irish coffees really help.)
Rating: 3 / 5