First off, I wondered why Cineworld decided to basically shove this film into a missable time slot and one week run. Yeah, I get it. It was admittably at first glance, a pitifully low budget film like a stage play transferred to the screen but that didn't mean it could have not have worked. The lack of stand-out vfx, the barely workable dialogue and wooden by the numbers delivery by half the cast, the others led to overdramatizing a simple line in order to lend weight to their appearance - led me to feel that the whole production was conducted over an intensely short time limit and consequently was rushed to completion every step along the way. I feel that it's likely the original scope of the movie was bigger, with a consequently bigger budget for everything, especially vfx. In the end, it turned out to be a make do production.
The basic idea of a Romans Vs Werewolves story, from a dark age of Britain, set up in the North far from civilization with only the wild Pict barbarians for any interest in a barren cold unforgiving land - is a good basis for a horror story. Writer & director Stuart Brennan also acted in this film too, and it shows. Like a one-man self-production, if I hadn't been sure he was on screen, I would have thought he was manning the camera as well. Stuart Brennan has made a worthwhile contribution to British film-making out of self-producing, writing, directing and acting at various times in his films across his career in film, and at times has carried it off well. Though, not this time.
In execution, the film comes across like a BFI film school student movie. In which case, as it was shot - yes it would have worked brilliantly as a short of about 25-30 mins. And of course, Brennan should have relaxed the reins and only stuck to the actor and writing duties, there then would have been scope for another director to make more out of the film in the shortened time allowed, tightening up precedings considerably and giving it a short, sharp shock delivery.
Some of the female actors playing warrior women and soldiers at times actually felt natural and of their time period. Though the costumes and dressing of the actors were mostly an afterthought, and this had a profound effect in the way they portrayed their roles as fighters. Also not enough rage was shown by the infected soldiers to project the pain and madness that overcame them, as the infection proceeded to ultimately change them from human to beast. The swordplay could have been more effective. One particular scene could have been made much more dramatic, exciting and effective if the camera shutter ran at double speed for the swordplay scenes in order to crank up the action but slowed down to half-speed when this could have been used to show the disorientation of the agitated scared soldiers - and the infected trying to cope with the increasingly sickening effects of the werewolf bites. These are are staple of movies action sequences and done well is pleasing to the viewer. I think there may have been some camera shutter speed effect during the villager storytelling flashback scenes.
I did enjoy the landscape scenery, so kudos to the location manager, the cinematography was quite good overall and kept me in my seat at the cinema - except for the staging of the night scenes, in the circumstances given the overabundance of lighting which is a definite giveaway to a film's low-budget origin, if not done well. This led to a lessening of any tension that would naturally have been felt by the viewer, as the soldiers huddled together can't see anything beyond a few feet around them, yet the camera seems at least 30-50 feet away in order to get everyone in shot, so too much light in the scene. The only thing I will remember fondly of this film a year from now, is the quick speed flash movements of the werewolves, the camera work and sound in these instances provided genuine apprehension and heightened tension.
I have read the laughably brief 1/10 rated copy and paste parrotted reviews left on and I'm certain most reviewers couldn't be bothered to spend time actually stating what it was they absolutely abhorred about this film, so just copied the previous review. In doing so, other reviewers who may have had some to contribute just decided not to, and let the film stay dead without providing any help by trying to revive the poisoned corpse. I unbelievably still admire this film even if it did leave me totally unmoved.
If this film ever makes it to TV, Horror Channel or Film4, I will watch it again to see if there was anything I missed in the actual storytelling itself. Not the filmed action. If I had watched this on TV, I probably would have changed channels or left the cable box on record to catch up with it later when I was bored. 5/10 rating - worth watching if nothing else is at hand on TV or as a download.
Edit: May 2020. I revised down my rating, but I still believe that this film deserves more than the 1/10 or 2/10 rating that most reviews have given it. I just watched a Mystery Science Theatre 3000 episode "reviewed" watch of Hamlet, the TV version from 1960 starring Maximilian Schell - a great actor normally, but utterly wasted on this production. And seriously, not even the jokey live commentary by the MSTY 3000 spaceship crew, saved this Hamlet. It was s*** and I can't believe this episode ever aired. Now that is a 1/10 review. Not even swearing, gratuitous nsex and violence would have saved this Hamlet. So, in comparison, Wolf (2019) is a masterpiece - 10/10!
3 out of 9 found this helpful.
Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
