AN AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON is arguably the most brilliantly creative vehicle from the 80s, but ideas alone don't make full-length feature films.
The film's script provides its audience with precious little story, and what there is of it is illogical and therefore unconvincing. Instead of story, Landis fills the screen with gimmicky sequences that undermine the impact of the truly substantial ones that work. Provided that the dialogue, which is really quite awful throughout the film, be reworked--the nightmarish home-invasion, the second visitation of the protagonist's savaged friend, the protagonist's transformation, the hilarious balloons-in-the-park and the haunted theater sequences are all keepers. The rest of the script should be scrapped and replaced with a story that makes sense.
Further, the film's lovers, David and Alex, are virtual strangers--not only to the audience, but to one another. The audience needs to know who these people are and understand what motivates their love. Given that Alex invests the most and is willing to put her life at risk, it is especially important that we be given some clue as to why she apparently comes to love David so much. Reducing David's and Alex's relationship to what appears to be a casual affair while depicting acts of great devotion is confounding and seriously undermines the impact of the film's horror. Also, the film's comedic element is introduced too early in Landis' version. This should not occur until after the romantic element is well established.
Landis' film is a B-movie, unconsciously presented as something more, but not in the tradition of the great, classic noirs of the 40s and 50s. This film really is mediocre.
Not withstanding, the film's makeup, for which it deservedly won its only Oscar, and some of its special effects are really quite excellent and continue to hold up against today's standards. And though its effectiveness is somewhat undone by the film's shortcomings, the juxtaposition of real horror and comedy is stunningly imaginative.
I give it a 5 out of 10 for creativeness and effort, and strongly recommend it to film lovers, as this is a potentially great film still waiting to happen and should not be allowed to languish as a cult classic, namely because it isn't, i.e., a classic. I recommend Michael McDowell to write and Tim Burton to direct the remake.
Posted by David
"When you side with a man, you stick with him." --William Holden as Pike in THE WILD BUNCH
|
|
|
This message has been deleted by an administrator
|
|
|
 by -
Moviejock
(Sat Jun 7 2003 14:25:17 )
|
|
 UPDATED Sat Jun 7 2003 14:42:13 |
But, Krist-ine, that's the whole point of getting Tim Burton to lead the project . . . or perhaps Terry Gilliam. These guys know how to cast, avoid the gimmicks and stick to the essentials when dealing with the odd or surealistic. Besides, the whole point of my post is that one couldn't do any worse.
But my madness doesn't stop there. . . .
Cast: Brad Pitt = David
Edward Norton = Jack
Renée Zellweger = Nurse Alex Price
Michael David Rawlings
"When you side with a man, you stick with him." --William Holden as Pike in THE
WILD BUNCH
|
|
|
This message has been deleted by an administrator
|
|
|
NO REMAKES - this is a classic - a defining moment in werewolf movies.
Mike, how do YOU know that, while David is in hospital, he and Alex aren't talking the whole time?? (Remember, he doesn't want to be left by himself - what they gonna do all day, play chess??)
There could have been a whole bunch of scenes that were originally scripted but cut out because the director felt they sucked and would probably downplay the horror aspect - these are doomed lovers, don't forget, so all we need to know is that they get together, and he DIES HORRIBLY at the end.
Why must people bring a whole backstory into it? Keep it simple, stupid. Otherwise, as Randy in Scream says, you lose your target audience. People didn't go to An American Werewolf.. to see a hairier rendition of Casablanca! When you see Werewolf in the title or the poster, you get a HORROR movie, not a goddam chick-flick.
So... NO REMAKES. Remakes do not make the world a better place!
|
|
|
| by -
dev_sean
(Sat Nov 1 2003 06:30:44 )
|
|
Classic should be referred to good films, not average and over-rated ones. This is over rated cinema at its best (or maybe worst?). One transformation into a werewolf and its on Channel 4s top 100 scary moments. A remake would benefit many, if it is done right, look at Oceans 11. Far better than Sinatra. So if Tim Burton did do it, it could be excellent. I would have a different actor than Pitt though, he is an excellent actor, but not for this role. Norton? He has been crap in his last two films. (Maybe The Italien Job remake would put you off remakes, though)
|
|
|
| by -
ms38514
(Thu Dec 4 2003 02:29:09 )
|
|
In my opinion you don’t know how to cast and it isn’t just my opinion it is any sane or competent persons opinion Brad Pitt Edward Norton !?!?!?!?!
|
|
|
The film would be a failure with Burton or Gilliam leading it- both good directors, especially Gilliam, but the glory of this film is in its mixture of realism with fantasticism, something neither of them could pull off properly, both being primarily concerned with non-realism. The only change the movie really warrants is to hack that awful romantic subplot out.
|
|
|
As the film stands, I'd agree with you: cut it out! However, I think the film is better with it, just not Landis' version of it.
I think Burton could do it with a McDowell screenplay. He is a disciplined director when he needs to be, take Ed Wood for example. Yes, I think he can do it.
Michael
"Whackos everywhere, plague of madness . . ." --Brad Pitt as Jeffrey Goines in 12 Monkeys
|
|
|
| UPDATED Wed Jun 25 2003 09:55:07 |
This message has been deleted by an administrator
|
|
|
More drivel from pseudo-sophisticates. Landis' version sucks! It's a B movie, fondly remember by teens.
Pitt is a fine actor with a mediocre filmography. Nonetheless, he shines in 12 Monkeys and Se7en. He does not suck, and he would be perfect for the part in a remake of Werewolf.
Get over yourself.
Michael
"Whackos everywhere, plague of madness . . ." --Brad Pitt as Jeffrey Goines in 12 Monkeys
|
|
|
I have to say that I agree with an earlier poster about Norton and Pitt being terrible in the parts as written by Landis. Not to state the obvious, but both actors are too old for the parts; the main characters are supposed to be college age... Pitt is 40 and even Norton is well into his thirties.
Thre only way it would work is if Pitt and Norton were gay lovers back-packing across Europe after taking vows of lifetime commitment. A new angle perhaps, but I doubt it would ever make it past the page. Everyone and their grandma wants to see Pitt and Norton re-unite after Fight Club; but a remake of An American Werewolf in London is an idiotic idea( unless you're just trying to make money ).
I assume that Moviejock means that the film is fondly remembered by people that were teenagers when the film was released. That may be true, but I saw the flick just a few years ago and enjoy it without nostalgia goggles. No one would ever argue that this is an art house film, but it certainly takes risks and has balls that a majority of horror movies lack.
|
|
|
| by -
ms38514
(Fri Dec 5 2003 03:52:37 )
|
|
| UPDATED Fri Dec 5 2003 04:03:30 |
dear god would you quit dishing out this horse Sh!t AWIL is not a B movie dumb a$$ and you saying it is certanly doesnt change a f#!^ing thing
"Why would I want to go to hell? Just so I could piss on Satan.
|
|
|
| by -
jonnerr
(Fri Jul 4 2003 18:01:23 )
|
|
Wow, that's quite a troll. Are you suggesting that all blood in movies should consist of plasma, white cells, and red cells? I guess if you'd make a movie, you'd make sure all people who died stayed that way.
There are good special effects and bad effects. There are CGI effects and latex ones. To say that all good ones are latex and all bad ones are CGI is just silly.
|
|
|
This message has been deleted by the poster
|
|
|
| by -
jonnerr
(Fri Jul 18 2003 21:52:13 )
|
|
I can only assume that you didn't intend to reply to my post.
|
|
|
This message has been deleted by the poster
|
|
|
This message has been deleted by an administrator
|
|
|
I'm all the way with Krist-ine.
|
|
|
Anybody makes a remake of this film and I'll probably kill myself.
can't people be satisfied with the good old films instead of doing trashy crappy remakes?
there is nothing that can be improved in this film by remaking it.
ARRGGH!
|
|
|
Yeah...remakes RULE!
GREAT idea!
|
|
|
Oh, come on. Brad Pitt and Ed Norton as gay lovers back packing across Europe. That's gold! Who wouldn't pay to see that? Some one get Joel Silver on the phone.
|
|
|
| by -
shawnkjr
(Sat Jul 26 2003 15:11:16 )
|
|
Wasnt american werewolf in paris a remake
|
|
|
Yes, we could do an even better job nowadays than 1981, however due to computer images and special effects they look crap on screen and false, ok I know the make up is false in AWIL but at least it is realistic, computer animation sucks!
You could never surpass AWIL
http://kickme.to/americanwerewolf
|
|
|
I absolutely love the fact that there are no 'stars' in this movie, beyond Rick Baker's werewolf FX (an audaciously memorable sequence, in my opinion). And how can the Nazi werewolves dream sequence be in any way laughable or inept? I think it's still something of a shocker even to this day. As to the film's casting I feel Naughton and Dunne are both understated, believable and, more to the point, likeable in their roles, and Agutter and Woodvine (why hasn't he been in more films?) lend solid support. I think that the character development, for what it is, is sufficient enough to give this film pathos. And I think it most definitely does have pathos, whatever argument you might put to the contrary. This is very much a movie that fits into its time and place, mainly the early '80s when one could still aspire to make a monster movie which respected the notion that those who love monster movies are not necessarily mental or emotional midgets. Now I am an admirer of Tim Burton's work but I wouldn't want to see him, or anybody else for that matter, within fifty miles of a remake of this film. Landis's movie sucks? ****ing bull****!!
|
|
|
Um, if this movie was remade with only 2-3 of the original scenes from the first, then it's not really a remake anymore, is it? It's a whole other crappy movie with Brad Pitt and computer graphics...
Frankly, the I think the novelty of this film is in the fact that it's the type of horror story that teenagers went to see during the 80's. If we're going to remake this, why not remake Ferris Buellers' Day Off or The Breakfast Club? ...I better not give you any ideas.
|
|
|
| by -
aka-tus
(Tue Oct 21 2003 14:49:29 )
|
|
haven't read all of the posts, but i just have to say that there is no need to remake this film at all. maybe i'm biased because it's one of my all-time faves, but this film was exceptionally well made for its time, or any other time, for that matter. it has a simple, cohesive story that works, and CGI would do nothing to improve upon the special effects (as evidenced by "an american werewolf in paris").
and imho, tim burton would ruin it. visually, he's one of the best directors out there, but he consistently sacrifices story for those impressive visuals. he would end up putting in a visually stunning scene that makes no sense plotwise, and would therefore tarnish it. (i'd love to see him as the cinematographer on a film with a director that knows a thing or 2 about continuity, story, and plot.)
this film is one of those rare classics that doesn't need to be touched. it's perfect the way it is.
|
|
|
its brilliant, how can a remake better it?
just look at the sequel to see what todays standards can do! :D
|
|
|
| by -
thejoge
(Sun Oct 26 2003 10:29:57 )
|
|
What is it with everyones obsession with remakes? The Italian Job and Time Machine, absolute classics whose remakes don't even deserve to share the same title. American werewolf in London is not only funny, scary with a good story, it is one of the few films where the lead character actually dies. Just because it looks a little dated now, doesn't mean it needs a remake.
|
|
|
Why ruin a good thing. I saw this for the first time last night (i wasnt born when it was originally released) and thought it was a laugh and nothing would be achieved by a remake.
The only winner in the War of 1812 was Tchaikovsky
|
|
|
If anyone remakes this I will personally hunt everyone involved in the project down and beat them all to death with a spoon.
Thought you might try escaping...so I just took the liberty of removing your horse's brain
|
|
|
There is absolutely NO REASON to remake it!!!!!!!!!!! Just because it looks a little eigthy-ish now, but it isn't what it looks like, it's the story, plot meaning, all which are fine in American Werewolf.
You don't see people wanting to remake Casablanca because it looks to fourty-ish!!!!!!!!!!!!
I personally saw American Werewolf about a week and was amazing by everything in it. Escpeially thought the ffects were great! If it's remade then it'll become an "effects movie", in which they only focus on effects, and forget evrything else!!!!!!
I totally agree with wierzbowskiandfacehugger2000, he'll come after them with a spoon, I'll come after them with a rabid dog!
|
|
|
| by -
J-dgr
(Fri Oct 31 2003 19:03:08 )
|
|
go the original-one of the best horrow/humourous movies ever.
|
|
|
This message has been deleted by the poster
|
|
|
John Landis made a great classic with this movie, it is practically perfect. It doesn't need a facelift or a remake. Alongside Landis' The Blues Brothers the previous year, no sequels were needed - but were made :( and failed.
Peter
|
|
|
| by -
ms38514
(Wed Dec 3 2003 22:32:46 )
|
|
You sound as if you think your opinion is the only one that matters and that what you say is the truth but in fact what you say is nothing but your own opinion
P.S
this movie is a classic and just because you say it isnt does not change a thing.
|
|
|
no ofense but you must be american...no more bad remakes of good movies please americans(specially if they are non american movies!!!)...
|
|
|
This film was written and directed by an American and stars two Americans.
"Do these come in funny shapes?"
"No. ...Unless round is funny."
|
|
|
so its an american movie altough everything arround its english?...cool...and that gives ya da right 2 trash da film by doing a remake?
|
|
|
I never suggested a remake but I don't agree that remaking a film neccessarily means you are trashing it. Some have said imitation is the sincerest flattery.
"Do these come in funny shapes?"
"No. ...Unless round is funny."
|
|
|
| by -
Darth_pachysaur
(Fri Apr 9 2004 11:34:01 )
|
|
| UPDATED Fri Apr 9 2004 11:35:13 |
A remake would suck! It's great the way it is. A classic.
Sigourney Weaver rules all!
|
|
|
I don't think a remake is needed.
However, I do wish there was a way they could re-do the dialogue, to punch it up a bit.
As well, I wish they could extend the film a little. It seemed to end so abruptly. I wish they could have shown some background to how the first werewolf came to BE in East Proctor, and how the locals knew so much about it.
Had there always been werewolves in the area? Did the locals at the Slaughtered Lamb know who it was during the daylight hours? It was clear that everybody in the area knew what was happening -all the people in the village pub...the local police who covered up the report...the doctor who gave David first-aid when it happened...etc.
I'd love to see something done on the backstory of East Proctor.
(As well, I'd like to know why they did allow David to be sent to the hospital in London. They knew what was going to happen to him on the next full moon).
|
|
|
I'm one of those viewers who wouldn't change a thing about this movie, but at times I do wish for a backstory. In that respect I agree totally with TorontoJediMaster.
I too wonder about the shady history of East Proctor. I also wonder about the immediate futures of the main characters. How many years of therapy did Alex need after seeing her boyfriend die violently, and turn from beast to man before her very eyes? What did the newspapers say the next morning concerning the events? Did the autopsy report show anything strange about the Kessler boy's state? (probably not, because the curse had been lifted). These are questions that don't need to be answered, but are indicative of one viewer's deep level of involvement with the movie and the rich and believable atmosphere that it creates.
In terms of a sequal, a true sequal was planned with Landis as director, but Polygram thought it was too wierd. Polygram then stole Landis' idea and sold it to a German producer resulting in the bastardized trash that is "An American Werewolf in Paris". This info was taken from an interview with John Landis in the British magazine called Hotdog, issue # 22. I read once or heard in an interview that Landis also might be interested in creating a movie based on David Kessler's family back home in the states. Basing a movie on characters that he made up would provide him a jumping off point to make different kinds of movies, perhaps a serious drama about Jewish life in NYC. I don't know, but it seems that Landis has always been interested in trying his hand at different kinds of presentations. Some of them good and some.....
Here's a few question's i'd like to ask John Landis:
Did David Kessler have the dream with the "Muppet Show" in it because he heard the voice of Frank Oz (who provides the voice of Mrs.Piggy). Surely this was not a product of coincidence. Landis is too specific for that.
Is Winston, the dog, a reference to special effects artist Stan Winston or Winston Churchill?
Kessler ate a lot of flesh during his carnivorous lunar activities. Did he go potty before becoming a man again?
|
|
|
| by -
mt1-1
(Tue Jun 15 2004 08:09:40 )
|
|
What is wrong with you, you crazy fool. Sit in a cold bath and think about your life carefully
|
|
|
| by -
DarkPaw_
(Mon Jul 12 2004 13:46:30 )
|
|
This movie does NOT need to be remade; it is fine and is indeed a classic. It is perhaps the ONLY decent werewolf movie I have even seen, and I have seen a lot of them.
The problem with any werewolf movie is a plot; a bad plot will make a bad movie no matter HOW good the effects are. The overall presentation of the 'werewolf' concept also needs to be looked at carefully, and different techniques also need to be used other then the popular CGI.
I personally would prefer the cast to be people hardly anyone has heard of, not some big star that has been in tons of movies with a few highly successful blockbuster films.
Lastly it would be really awesome if a director were to show the structure of a pack, how they work amongst each other and not just some unintelligible dribble that is just thrown in there to touch upon it lightly. Sadly I doubt there will be any such movie for a long time, or maybe ever.
|
|
|
| by -
vintage2004now
(Wed Jul 21 2004 21:32:57 )
|
|
| UPDATED Wed Jul 21 2004 21:41:38 |
Vintage2004
American Werewolf in London is a classic. Maybe someone could make a brand new werewolf movie with a new concept, with Rick Baker doing make-up with a CGI Fx team. Sure it may just become forum for Fx, but as long as it didn't pretend to be 'Werewolf in London', it might be OK.
|
|
|
This message has been deleted by an administrator
|
|
|
Vintage2004
"They already remade it ... the remake was called An American Werewolf in Paris."
And it was a terrible waste of time, film & money. I was thinking in terms of someone like Rick Baker &/or Rob Bottin mixing the make-up & cgi, you know, Some People With Talent.
|
|
|
It's a Dark Comedy not Shakespeare... This film is a classic that films today can't even touch. Those were the worst ideas I ever heard...Brad Pitt!!! People like you are the reason Psycho was remade. If it ain't broke don't fix it.
"We Make Everything You Need and You Need Everything We Make"
|
|
|
This movie was already remade. American werewolf in Paris.
|
|
|
Yeah, and look at what a Fiasco that turned out to be! Just goes to show that although special effects may have evolved since the 80's, they're not neccesarily better. I'll take Rick Baker's Mangy Hellhound over those cartoon werefoxes anyday! Also shows how important The Director,Actors, and script are.
"We Make Everything You Need and You Need Everything We Make"
|
|
|
| by -
wet_dog
(Fri Sep 10 2004 11:04:48 )
|
|
Criticisng the films narrative and then recommending Tim Burton for the remake is quite ironic.
|
|
|
just shows that they must be running ideas to remake this. I love this movie, why not make another werewolf movie it cant be hard? leave this movie alone or so help me i'll bite your ass off!
I heard there was gonna be a remake of the fly('86 version) by fox - a remake of a remake? holy *beep*! That will suck as much as a 2 bit hooker.
|
| |
| | |
company.
Advertise on IMDb.
License our content.