After the success of 2020’s The Invisible Man, it makes perfect sense that filmmaker Leigh Whannell would be asked to helm yet another reboot of a Universal Monsters movie. The Invisible Man was one of the last films released in theaters before the COVID-19 lockdown, but was still a box-office hit and garnered critical acclaim. It was a fresh new take on a monster movie, largely due to Whannell’s skillful direction and its themes of domestic violence. When it was announced that he was brought on to helm a reboot of The Wolf Man, I couldn’t help but be interested. I personally liked The Invisible Man a lot, and I was hopeful that I feel a similar way about Wolf Man. Sadly, that is not the case, as the film ends up being a pretty big disappointment. It has a pretty good premise, and it feels like its head is in the right place, but it isn’t able to execute some of its main ideas all that well. It all feels like a major waste of potential, and seriously lacks some bite.Â
Blake Lovell (Christopher Abbott) lives in San Francisco with his wife Charlotte (Julia Garner) and daughter Ginger (Matilda Firth). He has a good life, but occasionally has a hard time controlling his temper. When he gets word that his father has died, Blake and his family travel to his childhood home in the remote mountains of Oregon. On the way there, they are attacked by a mysterious creature who runs them off the road and scratches Blake’s arm. Once they finally arrive at Blake’s father’s house, they barricade themselves in. However, Blake soon begins to act strangely, and undergoes a frightening transformation that could put his wife and daughter in harm’s way.
Leigh Whannell first broke out as a screenwriter, penning scripts for films such as Saw, Dead Silence, and Insidious, all of which were directed by his friend and fellow filmmaker, director James Wan. He has since turned his focus to directing, beginning with 2015’s Insidious: Chapter 3. While that film got mixed reviews, his next two efforts were much more warmly received. 2018’s Upgrade and the aforementioned The Invisible Man saw Whannell coming more into his own, and utilized some inventive filmmaking techniques. One would hope that he would continue this upward trajectory with Wolf Man, but that’s simply not the case. While Whannell directs this film competently, it’s certainly not at the level of his previous films.Â
Much of this is due to the screenplay, which Whannell co-wrote with wife, Corbett Tuck. The film is very upfront with the themes of generational trauma that it seeks to explore, establishing them quickly during the first 10 minutes. This is done somewhat efficiently, sure, but it is also incredibly heavy-handed. It’s not like I was expecting the film to be particularly subtle or nuanced in its observations, but it handles them so clumsily that it took me out of the film. Perhaps I’m just experiencing fatigue from the massive wave of horror films that are ultimately about trauma, but I was left very underwhelmed by what the film ends up being, and found it largely uninteresting. It didn’t help that it is woefully predictable, leading me to feel like I was always one step ahead of it throughout. At no point did I feel suspense or fear while watching the film because I knew exactly where it was going and what was going to happen the whole time.Â
It doesn’t help that the majority of the film takes place in a farmhouse and much of the horror is centered on the transformation of our lead character, Blake. I’m all for a good body horror film, but this film does not fall into that category. There were a couple of moments that are effective in that department, but it falls short for the most part. I couldn’t help but be reminded of David Cronenberg’s The Fly while watching Wolf Man, as both are about men transforming into strange creatures. The Fly is successful both as a body horror film and as a drama due to its stomach churning visuals and the inherent sadness of the main character’s metamorphosis. Wolf Man severely lacks in both of these areas, as the imagery isn’t particularly striking and there’s not enough emotionality in the film as a whole to allow it to have an impact. While it is easy to recognize the themes of generational trauma and the horror of seeing someone you love turning into a monster, they are handled in a rather surface-level manner. Much of this is because we don’t ever connect with any of the characters. They are all thinly written and feel more like bland archetypes than anything else. It makes it really hard to care about what’s going on in the film as a result, and is a huge contributing factor to its dull nature.Â
I was hoping that the performances would redeem the film somewhat, but not even Christopher Abbott and Julia Garner could save this one. Abbott and Garner are both incredibly talented, but this film mostly wastes their capabilities. Abbott definitely has a little more to work with, and the physical elements of his performance are admittedly pretty good. The transformative aspects of the role are handled well on his part, but the first act allows him to show off his great screen presence. He gives easily the best performance of the film, but I certainly wouldn’t say it’s his finest hour. The same could be said for Julia Garner, who is really given nothing to work with. She plays an incredibly thankless role, and we know next to nothing about her character throughout. Garner is a great actor, but she is absolutely squandered in this film. Her performance isn’t necessarily bad, but there’s only so much she can do to make something of the scraps she’s been given. It’s definitely more of a failing of the script than of Garner herself, but it is still rather disappointing nonetheless.Â
The film is hit or miss in the visual department, as the compositions and some of the camerawork are pretty solid, but the creature design and overall color palette is pretty lackluster. The use of muted colors can be effective, and Whannell has proven himself able to work with them rather well in his other films. However, the shadowy aesthetic of the film comes across more boring than anything, and didn’t do much for me. There are a couple of moments where color or light is used interestingly, mainly when we see things from Blake’s point-of-view as he’s transforming, but these moments are very brief. The creature design is also pretty weak, as there isn’t anything inventive or eye-catching about how the wolf-like creatures are depicted. It feels like there was minimal effort put into this aspect of the film, which is not what you want to see in a film that is ostensibly about transforming into a horrifying beast. Some of the camerawork at least gives the film some much-needed dynamism, especially in the scenes that focus on Blake’s transformation, but the rest of the film’s visual style is middling at best.Â
Wolf Man is a colossal disappointment as someone who enjoyed Leigh Whannell’s previous two films, and it is a misfire on many levels. It may have its head in the right place, but it just isn’t able to properly translate its ideas in a way that is particularly meaningful or interesting. It is dull, plodding, and lifeless, with a surface-level script that does the film no favors. I hope that this is merely a stumble in Whannell’s career, as I do consider him a good director overall. However, this film is a major low point in his filmography thus far, and lacks the energy he brought to his other works. This film may not be an out and out disaster, but it is still a huge let-down and is far more boring than a film about a man turning into a werewolf should be.