Knoepfler, Wolfmen

I didn't get to watch the entirety of the original Wolfman due to streaming difficulties, but I'd like to talk about the differences between the special effects of the two movies and the impact they had on audiences at the time.

In the original from 1941, special effects were very limited. The transformation scene only shows the legs, which would be a huge shock to audiences at the time. Modern audiences look back on this and laugh due to the advances in special effects technology. The 1941 audience, however, were amazed and horrified by the transformation. In a sense, I think the older version is better. By not showing the whole body transformation and focusing only on the legs, George Waggner lets the audiences' minds imagine what is happening. Also, there are no direct scenes of violence. It's always hidden or implied. I think this could produce a far more horrifying effect than showing the transformation itself. It creates more suspense and terror of the unknown.

Fast forward to 2010: In this version of the film, the audience is exposed to every aspect of the Wolfman, including the transformation and the bloody encounters with the townsfolk. If the 1941 audience were to see this version, they would be disgusted, horrified, and might die of a heart attack in the theatre. They just weren't used to being exposed to this sort of violence and reality. That's the problem I have with films these days. Audiences are too numb to real suspense and horror. Unless excessive blood and explosions are shown, audiences lose interest. I wouldn't say that the 2010 film would be better if it stuck to the roots of not directly showing violence, but it would show a different kind of horror.

In conclusion, 2010 Wolfman: shock horror. 1941 Wolf Man: suspense horror. Two completely different ways of telling the same story. Both: awesome. I'll howl to that.