'The Wolfman' Gets R-Rating!
12.09.09 By: Alison Nastasi
Universal announced that their remake of the 1941 classic, The Wolfman, will have an R-rating from the Motion Picture Association of America when released February 10, 2010. Even though the studio has struggled with reshoots, delays and changes--fans can get excited about this movie again knowing that they haven't neutered old Wolfie with a PG-13 rating. The trailers for Wolfman have promised R-rated worthy 'bloody horror, violence and gore' in telling the story of Lawrence Talbot (Benicio Del Toro) who reunites with his estranged family after his brother vanishes. He discovers that a bloodthirsty beast has been terrorizing the town and while he and his father (Anthony Hopkins) try to hunt it down, Talbot discovers a horrifying destiny for himself. The film also stars Emily Blunt, Hugo Weaving and Art Malik. Rick Baker (An American Werewolf in London) will be handling the gory special effects, so you know it will be good.
A PG-13 rating opens the film up to a broader audience and sometimes proves successful. Take Sam Raimi's Drag Me to Hell; the film was highly entertaining, had plenty of gross-out and delivered far more than some R-Rated films even. Still, the debate continues as to whether PG-13 movies have a place in the horror genre, considering they often get their rating to ensure maximum profit for the studio. Or do we blame the filmmakers? Have too many people sold their soul to the uber profitable scary movie/hot teen drama combination?
Filed under: News/Reactions
Reader Comments (1 of 2)
kissyoubaby30at 12-10-2009
Sadly, My boyfriend and me broke up a month ago. yeah.. i'm young ,beautiful,lonely and still hurting.i may be in need of someone to love..still..
My friends told me about AgeLessMingle.Com and i got curious about it.. they met their boyfriends
there.,It's the best place to meet a older boyfriend or a younger girlfriend. i cant risk myself..So i got a usename(Anny888) there in order to find a new boyfriend.is it wrong?
xxxxxxxxx
John Grayat 12-10-2009
You can't "redo" a Classic...Willy Wonka number one was great. The remake was creepy. I had the feeling I was watching a Master Pedophile at work. What will they redo next??? Jimmy Steward's Its A Wonderful Life, or maybe Judy Garland's The Wizard Of Oz.
Dannyat 12-10-2009
For cryin' out loud, why do they remake classic movies? "The Wolfman" with Lon Chaney Jr is a classic and was very well done. Unless film makers can put their own spin on it (like the remakes of "Ocean's 11" & "The Italian Job"), DON'T BOTHER REMAKING CLASSICS. Christ, I hope nobody remakes "It's A Wonderful Life," "The Wizard Of Oz" or any other classic movie. They'll just f--- it up.
Johnat 12-10-2009
Yes, some remakes are bad, but they did not remake willie wonka. Tim Burton did his take on the book, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Much closer to the book than the other movie with Gene Wilder. And I think he should do a version of the Wizard of Oz. True to the book without all the annoying songs.
Tenaat 12-10-2009
It's not the Wolfman if it doesn't have Lon Chaney Jr. I HATE REMAKES. You just cannot remake a classic horror film. Look at House on Haunted Hill, 13 Ghosts and House of Wax. Not one of those movies had the original plot, and they sucked...bit time!
Steven Mark Pillingat 12-18-2009
Isn't this just cute? Hollywood's talent resource has dried up so completely that they're continuing right along with their cheap gimmicks to attract a clueless audience. Given that abscence of creativity, they regularly resort to movies that feature old TV series, comic book characters, brainless teen novel adaptations and remakes of far superior films from the days when filmmaking WAS an art form. And- again given their present lack of talent- they "improve" on these films with graphic gore and pornification. But then again, what else does Hollywood have to offer anymore? Taking a new story and making a classic from it with superior writing, directing, acting and camerawork is a concept all but lost. Hollywood is not only depraved and insane, but rudderless as well. My apologies to the spirits of Lon Chaney, Jr. and Evelyn Keyes for this travestic "rework" of the film that they had made into an American classic.
chuckieat 12-10-2009
You said it, friend. People these days couldn't follow an intelligent, well-written plot for two hours even if these Hollywood types could actually write one. It's all about special effects, sex and gore. It even creeps into our living rooms every night with the crap that they put on TV. Next thing you know, we'll have "reality" movies.
alschrodat 12-10-2009
Tena and S.M.P. both have it right! I saw this film in 1952 when I was 14, and (Other-than being terrified)-remember thinking how perfect the cast was. Especially Chaney; A big, handsome man reduced to pathetic hopelessness by his curse, and that haunting gypsy woman he went to see. Perhaps some gore could add to the realism, but some films must simply be consigned to history as is, even if not up to modern "sensitivity" standards. For early horrer you cannot duplicate Karloff's Frankenstien or Lugosi's over-the-top Dracula; they BECAME the creature, much as Charles Laughton's astounding "hunchback" portrayal--all dated films that could be "improved" for a modernist, but to what end?
atp2007at 12-10-2009
An R rating for Wolfman, does that mean he has a large SwanStucker like Mel Brooke's Frankenstein?
joeat 12-10-2009
evelyn ankers not evelyn keyes
Steven Mark Pillingat 12-10-2009
You're right, Joe. Evelyn Ankers it was. She was one lovely lady, too. Class and beauty is another lost art in Hollywood.
johnat 12-10-2009
completely agree with steven and tena. the whole movie 'game' perplexes me...they certainly cannot remake a univeral pictures classic - the fact that they only retained the main character's names but changed everything else is a slap on original writer curt siodmak's face. add some gore to get the masses in? wow...sad.
David S.at 12-10-2009
Remakes are a tricky business, especially horror films. Horror film fans are especially protective of their heroes like Lon Chaney and Bela Lugosi, and righfully so. "King Kong" has never worked being remade, despite impressive special effects, Peter Jackson! And that nutjob Gus Van Sant remade "Psycho" frame by frame and it sucked! Some light comedies can work -- the remake of "Father of the Bride" with Steve Martin was worthwhile. But those are basically throwaway films -- completely different. Leave horror films alone!!
outlawsgunat 12-10-2009
THE UNIVERSAL MONSTERS HAVE A SPECIAL PLACE IN MY DARK LITTLE HEART. I'M GLAD IT GOT A R RATING. THE ORIGINAL SCARED THE CRAP OUT OF PEOPLE BACK IN THE, WHAT, LATE 30'S OR 40'S. TO DO THAT NOW AND STAY TRUE TO THE ORIGINAL IT WOULD NEED A R RATING. ALL I GOT TO SAY IS, IT BETTER BE BETTER THAN THAT CRAP DRACULA MOVIE AND THE FRANKENSTEIN MOVIE FROM THE 90'S. THOSE WERE HUGE LET DOWNS.
Kenat 12-10-2009
It was 1944. My grandfather was an extra in the movie, which, I guess, makes it more of a favorite of mine. My grandfather lived in Los Angeles and worked for Universal Studios. He had a part as an extra in many classics.
Alisonat 12-10-2009
i love you guys. you're getting me all worked up about this issue again--in a good way.
Heidiat 12-10-2009
HOT BEAUTIFUL LOOKING ASIAN GIRL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2EHkkJucEM
uncapieat 12-10-2009
"WOLFMAN'S GOT NARDS!"
Rayat 12-10-2009
They added gore!!! What the heck does gore have to do with this story???
Great directors could add fright and emotion without gore.Of course the lame brained not too bright film makers of today couldn't do anything intelligent if their lives depended on it.They are just not intelligent enough nor are they mature enough.They don't know their trade well enough and we are expected to reward them for their lack of brain power.
Gregory Schwartzat 12-10-2009
Too many people confuse scary with gory. Blood and Guts is not scary...it's a gross-out that I find offensive. To successfully scare you, an element of suspense, danger, timing and dread are all needed. Timing is crucial because a well-placed or unexpected scare can be a real thrill with the element of surprise thrown in. A bloody murder scene is scary in the fact that you wouldn't want that to happen to you, but it's a cheap scare compared to real, classic scares that too many movie directors are completely missing the mark! Take That! Gregg in Sarasota, FL