The Antipodean

Hmm, I saw the directors cut of it on DVD tonite and -- well, it wasn't terrible, I rather liked bits of it and it was definitely better than I'd expected based on the word of mouth. No classic but no abortion either. Final act was a bit silly (the Hopkins character I figured out in scene 1) but I'm curious what the theatrical cut must've been like minus the 17 minutes, I'd imagine that would make a far lesser movie.

OldBoy

my thoughts as well. better than expected.

Dr. DVD

After watching the unrated cut(got it for $11 at Best Buy on Blu-Ray this week), I think this is a solid horror movie. Interesting that the theatrical cut pretty much cut out the entire first act, and left a lot of stuff unexplained. The movie is by no means great, but more like a three star effort as opposed to a two star one.

Solid Snake

So...thanks to the BF at Amazon...I've finally owned this. And I like it a lot. Johnston is a production design guy for sure. I wasn't bored at all by it. Really really like the time change to the Victorian Era. I'd probably give a B or B+.

islandclaws

Agreed. Aside from some CG moments that I could've done without (and watching it with the awareness that much of Baker's awesome work was discarded), I think Johnston made a competent modern gothic horror film steeped in atmosphere. It's a fun watch, even if Del Toro and Hopkins aren't at the top of their game.

Solid Snake

I'd argue that both did pretty good. Hopkins is chewing up the scenery though...

islandclaws

My problem with Del Toro is that he seems like he's just sleepwalking through the role, going through the motions. Hopkins is obviously having fun hamming it up, but Del Toro just seems bored and some of his line delivery is atrocious (i.e. "I will kill ALL of you!").

The Antipodean

Just watched the Lon Chaney version again recently and while I moderately enjoyed the new one, Chaney beats Del Toro to hell and back -- I love the jovial, light hearted tone Chaney has before the attack and how much he changes afterwards. Del Toro was depressed even BEFORE he was a werewolf!

Dr. DVD

I agree with both KC and Solid Snake. However, only if they are talking about the DC. I still think the theatrical version sucked. It was like they felt audiences didn't have the patience to sit through character development before getting wolfman action.

Hopkins was okay, but I feel he is about to become a Bela Lugosi/Vincent Price type actor. Basically, he becomes the go to person if they need someone to play a creepy guy in a genre flick.

Solid Snake

Alright. Got the UK BD release of the Universal Monsters set. Been going through them somewhat slowly.

Thought I'd some thoughts both films and whatnot. As a side note...I haven't seen these films in over 10 years. So it's pretty cool to fall into that world again.

Now...Chaney's version is solid and pretty damn good...for known reasons. I can't argue that. Nor can I properly find any true criticisms for it.

Out of my personal taste though...I actually prefer the 2010 remake a lot more, the DC...not the TC. It just settles w/ me more. I like Blunt's character here more than in the original. Talbot in the original is too happy or relaxed for me. While Del Toro's is too damn depressed and riddled w/ issues. THOUGH I do find his reasons for not being home for so long a lot better than Chaney's Talbot. Following that though the father is too much of an extreme in the remake. They needed to reel that character in a bit more.

It just feels more real to me, the whole world of it. That's not a criticism in quality to the original but just using the times as a context.

The setting is gorgeous and very well done in the remake. This too just attracts me more.

The original is fucking great in all forms for the time and the impact it had on cinema. Though out of personal taste my preferences lean toward the remake, flaws and all.