Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Seither The Wolfman Changes


Though both the 1941 version of The Wolfman, directed by George Waggner, and the 2010 version of The Wolfman, directed by Joe Johnston, both carry the same title and have a few similarities in plot, the two films are drastically different in almost every way. Differences in the plot of the two films are probably the most obvious difference to the casual viewer, but it is the difference in cinematographic techniques which stand out to the discerning viewer. In the original version the directors were definitely limited by the technology that was available to them in depicting Larry Talbot's (Lon Chaney Jr.) transformation into the wolfman. First, the transformation starts off as an increase of hair on Larry's legs, and then the director begins to splice in frames which depict increasingly wolf-like legs and feet. For the period during which this movie was filmed, there is no doubt that this was the pinnacle of technology, but by modern standards it is simple and unimpressive. In the 2010 version of the film, the director had much more advanced techniques to make the transformation into the wolfman seem much more horrifying and realistic; however, the CGI (computer generated imagery) used in the modern version does seem fake in its own unique way. Another interesting difference between the two film's representations of the transformation into the wolfman is that the 1941 version's is much less violent than the 2010 version is. In the 1941 film the Talbot simply sits in a chair watching as his legs become hairier and his feet become a wolf's paws. Contrastigly, in Johnston's The Wolfman Talbot writhes and screams as he changes into the wolfman. Because of this difference, the modern The Wolfman seems more a action/horror film than does the more psychologically thrilling 1941 version.





VS.

1 comment:

  1. You need to fix the last You Tube. It is too big for the blog. If you have forgotten how, see Brian; he will help you. Your blog focuses on transformation. It is concise and well written. You point out the two major features of each transformation.

    ReplyDelete