Even such a werewolf as I did not catch this film. (This is hard, believe me.) Almost everything is poor, except a few ideas.
The graphics are terrible - the werewolf moves as if it weighs nothing, and its very appearance is depressing. In the 2004 Van Helsing, werewolves look better.
Characters are ridiculous. There's potential in some, like Adam Crowsdell and Ed Quinn. They look cool and the actors take out, but here are the rest. Dummy. There is nothing more to say about them.
The story is even more ridiculous than the characters. I won’t go into spoilers, but trust me, everything is stitched together with white threads. Motivation is not traceable from the word at all.
The scenery is 'from the word dick' - the film tries to play in the Middle Ages (heroes race carts, torches everywhere, etc.), but the characters wear rifles with a sliding bolt.
Of the positive, I can single out the idea of wools and the basis of "professional werewolf hunters meet an atypical lycanthrope."
I'd like to take that basis. Toss out the unnecessary decorations of the Middle Ages. Play the idea that werewolves are smart creatures and because of this, they are difficult to hunt.
But not this time. . .
The trouble with this film is that it lacks some scope. Remake "Wolf-Man" in 2010 was a box office failure, but he still noted the "Oscar" for a chic makeup. This recognition clearly signaled to Universal that it was possible to restart the dark universe (classic horrors of the 1930s and 1940s like Dracula, Frankenstein, The Mummy and 1941’s Wolf-Man). And for this reason ... over the "Beast among us" decided not to try.
No, it was good. This film is able to scare, besides, there is its charm in the form of the Gothic atmosphere of the XVIII-XIX centuries, but all these advantages are perceived as an accident. Maybe the studio had a few million dollars left to invest in, and it put it in, giving up on the end result. In this film there is intrigue and as many as two characters, with which the plot twists are associated, but all this is mixed into such a pile that the viewer will say "I do not believe" more than once or twice. In how this world functions, the director himself did not really understand. Creatures with different mythological origins are often mixed here, and this despite the fact that back in 1941, the Wolf Man consolidated modern ideas about werewolves. By the way, “The Beast Among Us” openly quotes “Wolf-Man”, that is, despite the small budget, someone seriously assumed that the film would be lucky to become a full-fledged restart of the dark universe.
Fans of hard, unchildish content will be happy that there are many bloody scenes and beautiful views of the full moon. However, at some point, the audience begins to wonder: too often the moon is shown full. In general, this blunder is characteristic of many films: at any convenient opportunity in the night sky, a full moon is necessary.
Unfortunately, the nitpicking is caused by the werewolf himself, who, not in the example of the “Wolf-Man” or, say, “American werewolf in London” is too shabby and unkempt. Perhaps the fact is that our monster lives not in the city, but in the village, but the settlement is generally a strange place, since it is too small for the city, and too clean for the village. There is even a stone pavement and quite a decent brothel. But it is ironic that women of easy behavior are shown to be less attractive than the werewolf hunter (Ana Ularu) and Eva (Rachel Dipillo), who is the girlfriend of the main ... stop, and who is the main character? In "The Beast Among Us," he is not. Charles (Ed Quinn) has his backstory, but gradually he is pushed into the background, and Daniel (Guy Wilson), whose name is sometimes pronounced so indistinctly as if he were Tanniel, comes out on the first. Very charismatic, albeit slightly played by Adam Crowsdell, whose character tries to be intriguing, but the weak script barely withstands this intrigue. Some really interesting characters (for example, Eve’s father) on the contrary, are too poorly disclosed, and for a film with a non-childish rating it would be nice to add candid scenes that would be a very sweet highlight.
By and large, only those who really like werewolves will be satisfied with this film. For everyone else, it will be mediocrity. I give a positive assessment mainly for attractive heroines.
There are films that, despite their cheapness and simplicity of execution, still give some pleasure to the viewer. And it seems, to an expensive spectacular blockbuster, such a film is far away. And the actors are selected unknown (or little known). Again, some other delicacies are lacking. And yet, this is exactly the case when you can (though not necessarily) kill an hour and a half of leisure. I'll go through the picture very briefly.
Starting with the plot, there is not much to say. However, it is typical and "edible" for such a film. If you take into account the budget, then, of course, it becomes clear that this is not Van Helsing. That's it. Not even close. But the level is different. Okay. The development of the story is moderately intensive. But dialogue, oddly enough, does not burden the viewer. It seems that everything said has a direct connection with events. You can see immediately that the director tried to give his work quality. At least as much as the financial resources were. Immediately, the writers interfere with a thrashy horror movie with drama. Is that bad? I wouldn't say. Rather, it's neutral. That is, the drama takes place, but, in view of the lack of certain dynamics, it becomes too drawn. Now, the question is, what am I looking at? Drama packed with horror or vice versa? Probably the first. And certain plot lapels - turns, as if, should press a tear. What else can I say? There are good costumes, there are scanty graphics, there are normal scenery. The action takes place under unforgettable music. Which, actually, is a little weird. On account of the composer, there are good works in the cinema. Oh, come on. A few words about actors. In fact, to single out someone does not make much sense. Everyone worked at level. Specifically, at the level of low-budget horror. Maybe someone better. The character set is highly anticipated. A cool team of hunters for evil spirits, at the head of which stands, ala, a cowboy in a hat and with a revolver, an inquisitive boy, his bum, and a couple - three secondary persons and suspects. That's all.
Finally, “Werewolf: The Beast Among Us is a movie, not so disgusting and wretched. I've seen it worse. But, admittedly, not necessarily. My viewing case, I would describe it this way. It was tonight, there was nothing to do. Therefore, if you have nothing to watch, or bored with boredom, you can watch this movie. He gave me some pleasant impressions. Agree, such attempts are quite a lot. And this, I want to say, is not the worst of them. Which means there is a place to be. Thank you very much. Let the review be green. No pity. The score is probably brazenly overstated by a couple of points. Again, within the existing category B.
The big problem with this movie is that it all looks so bad. One gets the impression that Universal had extra money, well, they decided to remove such a miracle, and the money was not so much, but quite enough to get another passerby. Maybe not the worst movie about werewolves, but in my opinion, this picture is very close to this, and in fact, it is nothing more than a failure.
Plus, in the plot there is a bunch of different nonsense and on the popular films about werewolves “The Beast Among Us” well, it does not look like at all. They made here "smart" monsters, a gang of "van helsings" hunting them, woven some ghouls here and even quite a real vampire lit up. But the craziest thing, it's probably a horse with wheels from a carriage, for the place of the back legs, so to speak. God, who invented this? It looks like another Uwe Ball movie. If it was called In the Name of the King 3, I wouldn’t be surprised.
In general, it is not clear for whom and why this was filmed. I will not say of course that everything is so bad, with the atmosphere by the way got right to the point, but if someone misses this “masterpiece” past his eyes and ears, clearly not much will be lost. More 4 out of 10 I just can not put such a film. Absolutely meaningless and merciless to the viewer nonsense, which should be sorry for the time spent.
The first thing to say about this film is that it can hardly be considered a horror or thriller in the direct understanding of these genres. That is, there is a lot of blood and meat mush here, of course, and quite realistically made (or, at least, for a person unfamiliar with real corpses, it seems realistic), although absolutely stupid bloody scenes here are also enough - in general, the film is not for the faint of heart. But this is more of a mystical horror fantasy with elements of “black” comedy.
Who does not agree with the latter, remember at least how in the last battle a werewolf falls on the top of a pole or how a man at a doctor’s appointment asks: “Do I look like a werewolf?” – a typical outwardly werewolf according to medieval ideas, I must say.
In an interview with one of the actors – Adam Crowsdell – posted on Vkontakte, he says that on the set there was a sense of presence in graphic rum. It was on the graphic novel that the film turned out to be similar (at least to the Japanese manga) - and the characters, and the interweaving of genres, and the atmosphere. And, since graphic novels are not liked by everyone, not everyone will like this film.
In some ways, “Werewolf: The Beast Among Us” is similar to “Vampire Hunter D”, especially the full-length “Bloodlust” – you can find parallels even among hunters, but with a great stretch.
By the way, in the same interview, it is said that the shooting of “Werewolf...” took place in Transylvania – of course, the plot of the film has nothing to do with its most famous inhabitant, but you can admire the views.
The gloomy, tense atmosphere, an excellent soundtrack that creates a mood, the inability to tell for a long time exactly who the werewolf is, a good performance of the actors and an unexpected end - all this leaves a pretty pleasant impression after watching.
There are also poorly sewn-up moments in the film: editing, dialogue, etc. But that doesn't spoil the big picture. And most of them are not even noticeable from the first view.
In general, the film gives the impression of a certain “combing”. As if, compared to literary works, they were written, but the last time they were not read before publication. Although, when it comes to movies, it’s not easy to “read” the last time before publication, especially on a small budget. For example, it still seems to me that there was not one werewolf, but two, just no one knew about it: In many comments, on this and other sites, as the main absurdities are called: an ancient flamethrower, a cure for the full moon and the fact that the villagers for some reason did not kill a werewolf suspended from a tree, although they recently shot several of their own, locked in a cell, thinking that one of them was a werewolf. Well, in the latter case, everything, in my opinion, is quite logical: people were frightened, easily shot a few helpless people, but seeing the transformation of a real werewolf, they were not just afraid – the fear paralyzed them, and they “forgotten” which side of the gunshot the trigger, and then, having come to their senses, they tried to kill him.
A cure for a full moon sounds silly from the point of view of every werewolf lover, but no one, for some reason, suggested that it could be a “horse” dose of sleeping pills: Then it would be possible: the transformation, of course, it will not stop, but the werewolf can not hurt anyone. Although the film does not reveal the essence of this medicine. As for the ancient flamethrower - to whom it seems absurd, read about the "Greek fire", it is, of course, not the same, but what seemed at first careless stupidity of the authors, you begin to look differently.
In addition to “blunders”, in the film there are generally a lot of moments (subtleties) that you will not notice at the first viewing.
In fact, the Werewolf: The Beast Among Us feels very much pre-prepared: a thorough study of mythology, at least about vampires (I know less about werewolves, so I can’t judge). Folklore, not modern tradition. And the steel false teeth of one of the hunters seem to be from there. In Slavic folklore there is a mention that vampires have "steel fangs". Unless this is a surprising coincidence, the filmmakers could not adapt them to their vampire, but could not abandon them. So came up with such a strangeness, which, by the way, in a fight with a werewolf was more effective than most other weapons of hunters.
In general, from a technical point of view - the film is average, or "solid" average - who likes it more. It makes itself felt on a small budget. But the creators tried. Fans of the classics of the horror genre about werewolves should not watch it - the werewolf is not the main thing here at all, it, in my opinion, without losing the essence of the plot can be easily replaced by any other character who is concerned with the problem of duality of essence. “The Werewolf: The Beast Among Us” is such a terrible tale. And there is something about it that makes me at least watch it 4 times (which is very strange for me).
My opinion is that if a bigger budget = more polished + more spectacular action scenes, which the modern audience loves so much, it could be a masterpiece.
8 out of 10
I know he’s a long way from 10, but it’s a great movie.
We are all monsters, that is, people and animals at the same time.
Despite the fact that lycanthropy is a very real disease associated with the fact that a person considers himself an animal, we still perceive it not as a disease, but as a three-meter and upright dog that devours people and can only stop it with a silver bullet. Thanks to the films and related literature. In today’s review we will talk about a man who every full moon turns into a terrible beast. “The Werewolf: The Beast Among Us.”
The local district is terrorized by a terrible beast. People desperately ask for help from werewolves hunters, and they bargained a little, agree. Despite the fact that the weapons of hunters are ahead of their time, they are still not ready for what they will face.
And the battle for the audience sympathy brave hunters on werewolves immediately lose. Despite the fact that each of these guys looks stylish, and quite defiant, the brave hunters for profit completely lack both character and acting skills. The exception is only Ed Quinn, who is trying to do something, but in such a poor scenario, his attempts are in vain.
So what's wrong with the script? All! Not only have the creators stuck in more than two dozen characters who were supposed to play a more or less important role, in fact they are just extras who are just in this film and the viewer has to put up with this fact somehow, so the plot is pure nonsense. In principle, I can understand what thoughts swarmed in the writer’s head. They tried to show the viewer a man who is not guilty of being a killing machine, and he suffers from this very much. It hurts a lot of movies on this topic have come out lately, so sick. Oh, come on. So they tried to show it, but it turned out to be bad for the creators. See for yourself: a bunch of superstitious peasants kill their countrymen at the mere thought that they may be werewolves, but when they encounter a real werewolf, they hesitate. "He's one of us! Countryman! You can't do that! What's wrong with you people? That thing just recently killed your friends and family, and then you hesitate? Somebody give me the gun! I have not yet spoken of a hereditary werewolf that can turn into a wolf whenever it pleases, not just a full moon. And the cure for the full moon. And about the flamethrower, which well could not appear in the era of the Middle Ages. And about a lot of plot holes and logical inconsistencies. But I guess the above is more than enough.
So what do we have on the way out? Another stupid movie with a disgusting script, terribly staged dialogue, boring action scenes and no acting. Take your time and don’t waste it on this masterpiece, thank you.
2 out of 10
No matter how afraid you are of a werewolf, remember that he is also a human being.
There is nothing new about this tape. Being a video not for wide distribution, the film adopted all the significant stamps of many of its kind, was shot in principle well, but in the scenario plan did not exceed the usual norm.
A typical plot in which everything happens in a small village, necessarily with a brothel, necessarily with a people of chatty peasants-drunkards and waitresses in corsets, where a cool and modest hunter sits quietly in a secluded corner, and the son of a local beauty wants to help him catch a werewolf who goes hunting at night. For the first half an hour, there is nothing to look at: the seed for the main story (hello, Bladraine, almost all copied), the scenery of the village (hello to everything else, because I have already seen these walls and carts in at least five films, as if there is nowhere else to shoot), a love line, a couple of murders, a couple of scenes with “ponts” in the bar. And here's the scenario jumping from one extreme to the other, gaining momentum, but we've seen it a hundred times already. The plot fits into one word: who? While the small-minded peasants, led by a brave but unremarkable cowboy, stumble upon their own traps, we are given an answer somewhere in the middle of the film who is a werewolf. After that, you expect another unexpected turn: “should there be another werewolf” or “should there be several of them”, but it turned out that after the disclosure of the secret, it was already possible to put an end, rather than stretch the obvious for greater importance.
In general, “The Beast Among Us” is better to watch for those who have not seen films about werewolves or ghouls with the unchanged situation of peasant possessions and good computer graphics. The rest are unlikely to enjoy even the acting game: except for Guy Wilson, who, as it turns out, is the main character, no one did everything, and the “efforts” of beautiful actresses are generally empty.
The average rating for this tape is fully justified, no more.
5 out of 10
Director Louis Morneau (Louis Morneau) is not new to the “scary” genre, however, above the category of b-movie, he did not step, at the same time, creating a quite good fantastic thriller “Time Failure” (Retroactive). Such a beginning was led to the fact that this film, although it will pass the cinemas for the benefit of budget restraint, has some interest in itself. It's worth looking into.
The story takes place in a gloomy small town surrounded by a forest, where residents are in constant fear and suspicion of their neighbors. The fault of all to attack the infection of werewolves, secretly hiding under the guise of someone local, why dead torn bodies are delivered to the morgue whole mountains, and the wounded with scratches and bites must be shot straight in the hospital room. Called a group of hunters for the beast takes up the case, but it turns out that the werewolf here is raging unprecedented before, who is not just much smarter and stronger, so still able to turn when he wants, without waiting for the full moon! . .
The entourage of the picture plunges the viewer into a well-recreated atmosphere of antiquity, stylized for Eastern Europe by the interiors of low wood houses, dilapidated abandoned stone fortifications, dense forest, sullen burdened faces of passers-by, and the eternally muffled tones of the frame contribute to an ominous plume, as can not be by the way. The budget for the production is very small, so the demonstration of the werewolf is minimal, sometimes resorting to flashing in the pitch darkness of the standing night, where only the silhouette is visible. But the operator does a good job, and visualization of the monster with the help of computer special effects is not the most flawed. So it turns out that the viewer should assume restrained means, knowing that there is no generous canvas with a hunt for a furry creature.
Talking about the technical component of the picture, you should talk about its ideological content. First of all, the movie creates the illusion of an action movie, and with a shade of some fantastic action and logical liberties. A group of monster hunters is spelled out, we can say, fabulous: the main turned out to be a kind of silent cowboy with revolvers, a fighting girl has a crossbow with bursting tips and antediluvian flamethrower (!), the other is a skillful acrobat and exclusively throws knives, the next wears a fang prosthesis in his mouth (!?) and in a fight with a werewolf under three meters, rushes ... bite him! And a hunter who rides a two-legged horse with wheels attached instead of hind limbs severed is out of the question. In general, the imagination of the filmmakers gave rise to both equally bright characters, and as if from some video game, but not the real world of the last century. They will be helped by a local boy - a doctor's apprentice, in love with a girl whose father is against their union, thereby, the love line is also present. The truth is, somewhat naive and teenage.
Having such colorful characters, it would be possible to give a not serious, but powerful drive with a lot of exciting shots of shootouts and fights of “cool” hunters for a terrible creature at a full moon. You could... It is possible, but we need funds that, as we remember, the director did not have, so most of the time the spectacle fades into the background, and the first hosts conversations full of clichés and semantic secondaryity for the subjects of people obsessed with the beast. And about script blunders do not forget: the peasants of all suspicious neighbors lock up behind bars to wait for the appearance of the circle of the moon and find out who the werewolf is, and when one wriggles from a fit, then let’s shoot everyone indiscriminately! By the way, when the obvious beast is captive and in chains, they stand for ten minutes, staring at point-blank range, waiting for no one knows what, before he breaks free! Illogic enough others, unfortunately.
As for the “interesting” turns of the story, in principle, dragged along and across the topic of lycanthropy, we can recall the completely unexpected introduction of the vampire (!) in the course of affairs, apparently to provide decent resistance to the beast, and a special key to the narrative that the werewolf can be trained, like a dog for the benefit of selfish purposes of use.
Only in the end, no matter how hard you try, the film and some curious backlogs go down due to the predictability of the presence of clichés, absurdities, and lack of funds. The cast does not play so badly, especially in the episodic role of the only known to the public Stephen Rea, but the story is the most unpretentious, why this case will not save. Recommend to viewing avid long-time viewers of horror, I would refrain, because this tape is secondary, not suggesting even comparison with the masterpieces of the genre of the narrow direction of the beast in man and man in the beast, but for those who are just beginning to get acquainted with the “scary” cinema - can be useful for entertainment, because the more baggage of the material examined, the more stringent the requirements for the works.
4 out of 10