<object width="360" height="230"><param name="movie" value="http://www.traileraddict.com/emd/30628"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.traileraddict.com/emd/30628" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" width="360" height="230"></embed></object>

Did a search, and didn't find anything about this movie. If nothing else, Seyfried really looks the part, and the music is cool. Why am I not surprised that they are publicizing the whole "from the director of Twilight" aspect?

Full trailer is out:



Not really sure what to make of this, except it seems to be aimed at the Twilight crowd.

Saw both trailers. Looks terrible.

doesn't look that great but i'll see it (rental) just for seyfried

holding out hope for the unrated version

It was okay, set in some time without guns, but with medieval type of weapons, and provincial outlook. The film was not all that exciting, even during direct confrontations with the big bad wolf (because the wolf is so ridiculously fast and strong), who had been satiated for years with livestock sacrifice under a blood red moon in order to not kill the people in a village, but then something happens, a human is killed by the wolf, and the villagers become truly fearful of their lives and are on high alert. Valerie (Amanda Seyfried) is one of the villagers who is initially impacted by the human killing. The villagers call for the priest-like entity (played by Gary Oldman in an uninspired role) to help defend themselves from the wolf. After setting up some of the rules of the wolf (there are places that the wolf can't go), it ends up being a who-is-it supernatural mystery.

There is something in how Catherine Hardwicke (the director) frames her shots that is irritating to watch, she picks odd angles, and overall, those choices aren't as effective to mine the horror from the wolf's rampage (perhaps she's under the PG-13 shooting guidelines, nevertheless, better directors could think of better ways to shoot scenes than what she's demonstrated so far).

This film is aimed at young girls, and it might be a decent matinee viewing as well.

I give it 2 stars or a grade of C.

11% on RT with more than 100 reviews in.

After reading the plot summary out of morbid curiosity, I'm not surprised it's rated so low.

Yeah, it really is that bad. I was constantly taken out of the movie because it was so jarringly obvious that everything was shot on a soundstage and not outdoors. I kept looking past the edge of the scenery to see if I could catch a glimpse of the building they were shooting in. There were times that the streets were supposed to be snow covered but it was clearly white sand instead. Unintentionally funny dialogue kept the audience I was with laughing at what should have been serious or tense moments.

While I am happy to see this movie getting its just deserves for the Twilight knock-off it clearly proves, I really hope it doesn't hurt Amanda Seyfried's career too bad. I think she is a strikingly beautiful and talented actress and would hate to see her career derailed by the crappy movies she (or more likely her agent) has chosen.

She has nice tits and good acting skills. Hopefully this doesn't damage either.

Anyone want to spill the twist ending.?

The big bad wolf is really Adrien Brody?

I'm assuming at least Gary Oldman is doing a good job in this flick?

He tries, but the material is beneath him.

I still need to see Tip Toes...just for Gary Oldman's "amazing" performance...

Isn't he essentially an over-glorified cameo?

What about Michael Hogan? I was shocked to see him cast in a feature film.

Saw this today and basically agree with the negative reviews. Oldman does the standard, vaguely Eastern European, Dracula without the hairbuns, self-righteous villain thing that he always does when he's just showing up for a paycheck. Someone needs to make a period horror movie with Oldman and Anthony Hopkins to see who wins the scenery-chewing contest (these are both actors I love, by the way, when they're actually trying).

My first comment less than 5 minutes into the movie: "I didn't know they had pretty-boy hairstyling gel in tiny medieval villages."

EDIT: I just realized that someone DID make a period horror movie with Oldman and Hopkins, and it was called Bram Stoker's Dracula. But that's a good movie, so it doesn't count.

I seen this and the best thing I can say about it is that the 1hr40mins went alot faster than I thought they would. It was a "fast paced kinda non-stop action" flick and my wife loved it