Azreen I., Wolfman

There are striking differences in the transformation from man to wolf in the 1949 Wolf Man and the 2010 Wolf Man. Obviously, the 1949 Wolf Man would be expected to have less of special effects considering the time it was made. In the 1949 version, the transformation of man to wolf was not that visually active. For majority of the transformation, they only showed the hair on his feet get longer. It was not actually shown how the transformation took place. It was kept to a very minimal. Thus, leaving the audience to imagine how Lon Chaney Jr. fully transformed from a man to a wolf man. Also, the picture quality and the fact that it was black and white does not make it visually attractive to the eyes. Also, one can tell that Jon Chaney Jr.'s wolf man seemed very fake like. Obviously, if we were to think of it from the point of view of someone watching it when it was released in 1949, it would be a great feat. Around those years, there was no movie like Wolf Man. But nowadays, visual effects/special effects play an important role in practically every movie. In the 2010 version of Wolf Man, the special effects of the transformation were pretty vivid. They show how Benecio Del Toro's body changes. From the hands getting distorted, from blood coming out of the nails as they grow longer, from the bones in his face shifting to even how the teeth change. The most visual transformation scene is when Benecio Del Toro was in the hospital room with all the doctors there to observe him. The transformation scene in the 2010 version is obviously more visually pleasing. One can actually see his transformation. Also, the minute details such as blood coming out of his mouth while his fangs replace his teeth make it more realistic as well. In all, the 2010 version of The Wolf Man showed a well thought out transformation from man to wolf and allows the audience to see the transformation. Whereas the 1949 version, leaves it up to the audience's imagination on the transformation.

The hospital scene:

Slan-Wolfman Transformation

The 1941 Wolfman and the 2010 Wolfman weren't the best films I've seen but they weren't the worst.

The '41 version was very simple but it was interesting to watch. It was interesting because of the plot and the transformation of the Wolfman. The transformation in the '41 version was more mysterious and less gruesome. The transformation was more of fangs, more hair, and a larger forehead. The slow transformation techniques build up suspense and fear. Larry goes from feeling hair growth on his arms, to taking off his socks, and next thing you know a full blown werewolf. They made this werewolf more of a man beast by making him walk upright in the '41 version.





The '10 version does more of a gruesome transformation. The computer generated transformation is interesting to look at but hard to take in. Lawrence's transformation appears to be more painful. Bones are breaking and changing. His teeth are getting sharper and his muscles are growing. The '10 werewolf looks like a body builder who got a hold of some bad steroids. This werewolf has more beastly characteristics. It runs on all fours and possesses amazing strength. The computer generated werewolf is hands down a better looking werewolf.

The techniques used in both films were great. They made both look realistic. You could tell that both were not in homemade Halloween costumes. The technology in 2010 was not available in '41 but the werewolf was believable. The '41 version gave filmmakers a foundation and it has evolved ever since then. If you see the werewolves in "Underworld" or "American Werewolf" films you'll notice that they are each have their distinctive characteristics. No two werewolves are the same.

Michael Arruebarrena: The Transformation of the Wolf man

The fact that Lon Chaney, Jr., the actor who plays the Wolf man in the 1941 version, puts on the wolf man makeup and outfit even 30 years after the movie was made brings light onto how revolutionary this movie was. The Wolf man (1941) was the second time a werewolf was put onto the big screen, and, though the effects seem cheap and unrealistic, they were spectacular for the time.

The transformation in the classic film was much more strategic. The frame focuses on Chaney’s feet as he grows hair then walks away. This method was a money and time saving technique. Yet, the transformation was affective and makes the viewer see the wolf man as more human. Also, the story line is held stronger. So the approach is to show the audience that he is changing, then show him completely changed, sort of a way to shock the audience. All of this transformation happening with a film orchestra playing a thrilling score.

When Benicio transforms, his bones realign. His feet bulge out, and he grows sharp fang teeth. Most importantly, the audience sees all of the changes. The effective result is the transformation feels realistic. What the film looses is the stylistic method in capturing a believable transformation without ever really showing any truly realistic effects.

Whether the older or the newer Wolf man is better becomes irrelevant. The times were completely different. The newest version lost its style in the transformation, while the older one was obviously not real. While the newer one gets multiple shots at different angles, the older one tries to keep one continuous show of his transformation illustrating the patience of the time. As the CGI improves, the more our spectators expect real looking, fast-paced special effects.

Villavicencio- Wolf Man vs. Wolfman

Written by Curt Siodmak and directed by George Waggner, the 1941 film “The Wolf Man” tells the story of a cursed man who regrettably transforms into a murderous werewolf at the arrival of a full moon.

Unlike many classic remakes, Director Joe Johnston’s 2010 version, “The Wolfman,” manages to preserve the original film’s plot rather accurately. Despite obvious differences such as character details and running time, “The Wolfman” remains relatively true to the initial story.

One of the most notable, and obvious differences, however, could be the transformation from human to monster. Although both films provide decent depictions (given the technology available at the time), I believe the original version to be more innovative as a whole.

To begin with, “The Wolf Man” stalls transformation until about 40 minutes into the film. This approach allows not only for a better understanding of character relationships, but also for the building of suspense. When Lon Chaney finally transforms into the wolf man, one can only see the changes in small portions, such as the shot featuring solely the man’s feet as they grow long, thick strands of hair. (Curious as to how this was accomplished, I found that a slow process of photograph overlapping featuring different stages of makeup was used to illustrate a smooth change.)

In the 2010 film, CGI effects allowed for an excessively gruesome transformation, as the characters fingers and toes vividly break and mutate into animal limbs, cheekbones protrude violently from each side of the face, and carnivorous pointy teeth grow into place. The changes of each body part are significantly more details compared to the older film; yet, I believe the technique falls comparatively short to other films of this time.

Overall, the way in which the 1940 film managed to create a slow, mysterious change from man to monster is more impressive given the great time, effort, and manual work required for its success.

Wolfman 2010 Trailer

Bienvenu, Wolfman Comparison

In the years following the original film in 1941, many advancements in film technology were used in to expand the abilities of film makers. Make up and basic video effects were used to convey specific images fairly well, however with the advances in film such as CGI and better film editing it allowed film makers to express themselves further. In Wolfman 1941 the transformation sequences are far less "scary" than the transformations in the 2010 version. However, the Wolfman's overall apperance is fairly similar. In the original film, the portrayal of the transformation is simple compared to today's graphic standards. The effects were limited to still scenes where the legs and feet slowly transformed by becoming hairier in a stop-motion-like effect. The Wolfman takes off his clothes in a state of confusion as he "magically" had more hair on his arms and pretended to have more hair on his face. Graphically these scenes portray a mildly scary emotion in our modern state of ever increasing need for realism. The 2010 film uses the advances of technology to enhance the emotions expected for the viewers. In comparison to the still scenes of the old one, the 2010 Wolfman shows the transformation sequence in a life like experience. No still scenes of the legs growing hair slowly, the 2010 film shows the feet exploding through his shoes and the heels actually transforming into the toe walking demon in a highly realistic manner. The 2010 Wolfman bursts through his clothes with intense emotion whereas the 1941 Wolfman simply undresses himself. The 2010 film also portrays the facial transformation with great virility as the wolf pushes his face through and brings itself forth. The 1941 film merely shows this facial transformation only once as a form of closure and silence to the fear that the Wolfman is intended to portray. Overall the use of greater technology in the 2010 film expresses the transformation sequences as intense and frightening for our visually desensitized minds and is fair complement for our modern time.

Becnel Wolfman

While the 2010 remake of the 1941 Hollywood- Horror classic The Wolfman is loosely based on the original and is very different in terms of most of the story line and characters' roles, the transformations that Larry Talbot underwent to become the wolf man were particulary similar in look, but different in application.

Lon Chaney, Jr.'s (Wolfman 1941) transformation involved adding "materials like yak hair, collodion, spirit gum, and cotton" (Jones) to make the make-up more realistic. The make-up artist responsible for Lon Chaney, Jr.'s transformation was Jack Pierce, "the man behind the monsters". Even though some critics have said "that Lon Chaney, Jr. looks more like a wild boar than a wolf" (Jones), Jack Pierce's work is still impressive for his time. In 1941, they did not have the luxury of computer generation or animatronics to apply to the transformation scenes. Also, the original Wolfman had to deal with censorship from the MPAA. The MPAA would "not allow direct man-to-wolf transformations", or "Lon Chaney, Jr. to "look too bestial" (Jones). When Lon Chaney, Jr. became the wolf man, he looked exactly like it sounds: a man with wolf like features, but still discernibly a man. He did not transform into an unrecognizable creature of full wolf.

Benicio del Toro's (Wolfman 2010) transformation involved " pieces of latex prosthetic make-up and loose hair, which were applied" by make-up artist Rick Baker "to del Toro's face each day" and "several dentures and wigs" (Wikipedia). The transformation was computer genrated, which did not sit well with Rick Baker, because he felt that "it would look unrealistic" and the animators did not have his creative "knowledge of design" (Wikipedia). He is a fan of Pierce and wanted to stick to the feel of the original. When Benicio del Toro transformed, he, like Chaney, Jr., looked like a man with wolf- like features. He still had discernable human features, but looked more supernatural. His hands, feet, and body morphed, instead of just growing hair all over his body and his nose changing (like Chaney, Jr.'s transforamtion). You were able to experience the full transformation, instead of experiencing only parts of it, like in the original. In my opinion, del Toro's transformation is more of what I think of as a transformation into a supernatural being than Chaney, Jr.'s.