Posted: Sat Jun 18, 2005 10:24 am
OK, I did change my answer. I ultimately voted for American Werewolf in Paris. Doubly painful since it's the sequel to one of the most influential werewolf movies ever.
As bad as the werewolf in Harry Potter looked, I'd now have to rank it only #3. I've been fortunate enough not to have seen DarkWolf, but after seeing that screenshot and some others, it looks pretty bad.
Pure CGI is approaching a point at which it could in theory make some pretty cool werewolves, but only if you get someone like ILM and a $100,000,000 budget to pull it off. (Granted, I was astonished with what Tim Albee did accomplish with just six months and two computers up in Alaska all by himself with Kaze, but it's a CG animation movie, not trying for photo-realism. Still, I'm happy to see his name on the list for Freeborn.)
I feel that a mix of CGI and live animation is really the way to go, and if I were handed the pipe dream of making my own werewolf movie, that would be what I'm doing. The fact that Freeborn is doing just that really makes me happy.
I do realize that that's what they did with Underworld. But I should also note that for all Underworld's flaws, visual imagery was not one of them. It looked fantastic--just painfully implausible, and the werewolves themselves didn't look like werewolves. I again go back to my previous statement about needing to send the effects team to Goldenwolf Boot Camp.
Teen Wolf was actually the movie that started my fascination with lycanthropy, so there's a place for it in my heart. Yes, the "wolf" form looks cheezy and in no way lupine, but it worked for what the movie was--an '80s teen comedy. I'm not sure it would have had the same effect if he'd been a great-looking Howling style anthropomorph or an actual wolf; it needed to be kind of cheezy for the effect.
As bad as the werewolf in Harry Potter looked, I'd now have to rank it only #3. I've been fortunate enough not to have seen DarkWolf, but after seeing that screenshot and some others, it looks pretty bad.
Pure CGI is approaching a point at which it could in theory make some pretty cool werewolves, but only if you get someone like ILM and a $100,000,000 budget to pull it off. (Granted, I was astonished with what Tim Albee did accomplish with just six months and two computers up in Alaska all by himself with Kaze, but it's a CG animation movie, not trying for photo-realism. Still, I'm happy to see his name on the list for Freeborn.)
I feel that a mix of CGI and live animation is really the way to go, and if I were handed the pipe dream of making my own werewolf movie, that would be what I'm doing. The fact that Freeborn is doing just that really makes me happy.
I do realize that that's what they did with Underworld. But I should also note that for all Underworld's flaws, visual imagery was not one of them. It looked fantastic--just painfully implausible, and the werewolves themselves didn't look like werewolves. I again go back to my previous statement about needing to send the effects team to Goldenwolf Boot Camp.
Teen Wolf was actually the movie that started my fascination with lycanthropy, so there's a place for it in my heart. Yes, the "wolf" form looks cheezy and in no way lupine, but it worked for what the movie was--an '80s teen comedy. I'm not sure it would have had the same effect if he'd been a great-looking Howling style anthropomorph or an actual wolf; it needed to be kind of cheezy for the effect.