6. Ginger Snaps (2000)
John Landis's "An American Werewolf in London" (1981) ruined werewolf movies for me years ago. It was the first werewolf movie I ever saw, and it towers so far above other werewolf movies, not to mention most other horror movies, that they almost always leave me disappointed. It would be a bit like seeing Iron Maiden open for King Diamond and Motorhead. Both are excellent bands, but nothing compares to a live Maiden show.
When I watch "The Wolf Man" (1941), which is often cited as a classic of the subgenre, I just want Lon Chaney, Jr. to stop whining and for the movie to end. I like "The Howling" (1981) but for whatever reason, it's just not very memorable, and although the sequels are terrible, "An American Werewolf in Paris" (1997), makes them look good. (Here's a cinema axiom: If Julie Delpy is in it, it sucks, and yes, this applies to the Richard Linklater movies, too. In fact, here's another cinema axiom: If Richard Linklater made it, it sucks.) "Silver Bullet" (1985) is actually very good, and Dog Soldiers" (2002) isn't bad.
However, the only werewolf movie that even approaches the level of "An American Werewolf in London" is "Ginger Snaps." Like Landis before him, director John Fawcett presents the werewolf as a victim of her condition. However, he goes further by using the werewolf myth to explore the horror of puberty. Ginger's period starts the day after she is bitten by a werewolf, and the onset of puberty is linked with lycanthropy.
However, the only werewolf movie that even approaches the level of "An American Werewolf in London" is "Ginger Snaps." Like Landis before him, director John Fawcett presents the werewolf as a victim of her condition. However, he goes further by using the werewolf myth to explore the horror of puberty. Ginger's period starts the day after she is bitten by a werewolf, and the onset of puberty is linked with lycanthropy.
Werewolf movies often unfold as if the highpoint is the transformation scene, and it's almost always disappointing because it's never as good as the one in "An American Werewolf in London." Fawcett avoids this scene altogether, and takes the much more interesting approach of having Ginger transform gradually. This enables him to show her vacillation between resisting and accepting her body's changes.
"Ginger Snaps" is an excellent horror movie. It reminds us that although the werewolf myth offers rich source material, movies based on the myth work well only when they elicit the right amount of sympathy and horror for their werewolf characters.
I never understand why "The Wolf Man" (1941) is always considered the classic Universal werewolf movie, not only because it's not very good, but also because "Werewolf of London" is so much better. "The Wolf Man" fails because its werewolf is neither sympathetic nor horrifying. He's just annoying, and he looks ridiculous. The werewolf in "Werewolf of London" isn't sympathetic or horrifying either, but he at least looks cool. The make up and transformation scenes are very effective.
However, the more important factor in the movie's success is that it's just weird. It throws in a bit of mad science, as the werewolf is also a botanist who is cultivating a flower that blooms only by moonlight. His collection of plants includes one that eats mice, and inside his laboratory is a monitor that shows who's outside. (Remember, this was 1935!) To make things even more interesting, "Werewolf of London" actually features two werewolves, and they fight over a plant that provides a temporary cure for their condition.
This one doesn't explore the full potential of the werewolf myth like "An American Werewolf in London" and "Ginger Snaps," but it takes a unique approach, and no matter how many times I watch it, it remains fascinating.
This is an hour and a half of college students in a video chat. I don't know what we were thinking when we tried watching this piece of shit. It's worse than it sounds, and we only lasted thirty minutes. It did cause me to pause for a few minutes to wonder if college students like it, which of course made me ask, will this end up being one of many experiences to come when I'll hate a movie because I'm too old to get it? Was my response to this movie akin to my grandmother complaining that she's discriminated against because she doesn't have an email address? If so, fuck it. No amount of annoying horror movies for younger people can take my "Texas Chain Saw Massacre" away from me.
"Ginger Snaps" is an excellent horror movie. It reminds us that although the werewolf myth offers rich source material, movies based on the myth work well only when they elicit the right amount of sympathy and horror for their werewolf characters.
7. Werewolf of London (1935)
I never understand why "The Wolf Man" (1941) is always considered the classic Universal werewolf movie, not only because it's not very good, but also because "Werewolf of London" is so much better. "The Wolf Man" fails because its werewolf is neither sympathetic nor horrifying. He's just annoying, and he looks ridiculous. The werewolf in "Werewolf of London" isn't sympathetic or horrifying either, but he at least looks cool. The make up and transformation scenes are very effective.
However, the more important factor in the movie's success is that it's just weird. It throws in a bit of mad science, as the werewolf is also a botanist who is cultivating a flower that blooms only by moonlight. His collection of plants includes one that eats mice, and inside his laboratory is a monitor that shows who's outside. (Remember, this was 1935!) To make things even more interesting, "Werewolf of London" actually features two werewolves, and they fight over a plant that provides a temporary cure for their condition.
This one doesn't explore the full potential of the werewolf myth like "An American Werewolf in London" and "Ginger Snaps," but it takes a unique approach, and no matter how many times I watch it, it remains fascinating.
7.5. Unfriended (2015)
This is an hour and a half of college students in a video chat. I don't know what we were thinking when we tried watching this piece of shit. It's worse than it sounds, and we only lasted thirty minutes. It did cause me to pause for a few minutes to wonder if college students like it, which of course made me ask, will this end up being one of many experiences to come when I'll hate a movie because I'm too old to get it? Was my response to this movie akin to my grandmother complaining that she's discriminated against because she doesn't have an email address? If so, fuck it. No amount of annoying horror movies for younger people can take my "Texas Chain Saw Massacre" away from me.
No comments:
Post a Comment