Obviously, the 2010 version of The Wolfman has more advanced computer animation capabilities and is able to provide a more visually convincing transformation of the movie's main character into a wolf creature. While neither looks incredibly realistic (ignoring, of course, the nonexistence of werewolves), the 2010 version depicts a more believable process of transformation, rather than the 1941 method, which was simply a fade from human to creature.If we look at these two transformation scenes in the context of available technology at the time of the films' releases, however, the 1941 version is far more impressive. The 2010 version's computer animation resembles a cartoon rather than a live-action sequence. Of course, the transformation sequence essentially is a cartoon, but other studios in these times produce far more convincing digitally animated sequences. Wolfman 2010 did not show any mastery of modern CGI technology, while Wolfman 1941 shows a mastery of the available special effects technology of its time.
You have not titled your blog correctly. It should be Armato Wolfman, Technique and Technology. Next time I will deduct points. I like your critique of the 2010 for being to cartoonish. I, too, like the 1941 version for its low lighting, soft focus, and imaginative responses allowed the audience.
ReplyDelete