Latino Lycanthropy


What is it about werewolf movies that sends filmmakers scurrying back to the safety of good old Mother England? What is wrong with the good old U.S.A.?

Granted, Guy Endore managed to successfully get away with setting a werewolf novel (The Werewolf of Paris) in nineteenth-century France and the Hammer film based upon his book took it a step further and set its werewolf story in Spain. Plus more recently John Sayles set a werewolf story (The Howling) here in the States. Then, of course, there was the more recent werewolf movie An American Werewolf in Paris, but the less said about that one, the better. There was also the French movie The Brotherhood of the Wolf but I am not quite sure that it is fair to consider that a werewolf movie though it is considerably better than An American Werewolf in Paris.

Anyway, for the most part, when we Americans usually think of werewolves, we think of England. Thus we get titles like Werewolf of London, She-Wolf of London and An American Werewolf in London. Perhaps because we have gotten used to associating horror stories with the English or perhaps because we prefer the contrast between the traditional British stiff upper lip and a raging beast. Or perhaps we have got so used to having our best horror stories done by the English that we seem to forget that other people can do them too.

Perhaps it is just as well we do not see more attempts to import the werewolf legend into America given the number of people around the world who already like to associate the Yanks with barbarism. And as a Latino, I should find my obsession with werewolves especially ironic because so many of the characteristics associated with werewolves -- hairiness, thick eyebrows, violent tempers and funny hands -- are also associated with Latinos. Coincidence?

Who knows?

In any event, one would think that any werewolf movie that had a Hispanic actor like Benicio del Toro playing the lead character would be right up my alley. And it would be nice to say that 2010’s The Wolfman was the ideal werewolf movie. Indeed, it would be nice to say at the very least that The Wolfman was a memorable movie, but unlike many horror films I’ve seen, I doubt it will be remembered as fondly as the original 1941 Universal movie which bore a similar name. In fact, I suspect the producers will be lucky if the film is remembered at all within a decade or two.

Part of the problem is that this particular werewolf movie has nothing particularly interesting to say. It starts promisingly enough with the death of some poor English guy being stalked by what appears to be the second coming of the Hound of the Baskervilles. Then it is revealed that said victim is the brother of Del Toro’s Lawrence Talbot character. Why he does not look much like Del Toro is never adequately explained. We are shown a portrait of Lawrence’s Latin mother but it is never explained whether or not she was also the mother of Lawrence’s brother or whether they were half-brothers. Was Lawrence’s mother really just the mistress of Lawrence’s father or is there some other explanation? The film never explains and normally it would not matter if the actual story was half as interesting as such questions. But it is not.

The film does have some potentially interesting angles though. For example, Del Toro’s Talbot is a Shakespearean actor with obvious father issues. Since his father is played by a British actor (Anthony Hopkins), it’s tempting to predict more than a few obvious references to Hamlet and Macbeth but fortunately the movie does not go that route. However, the route it does travel is not much of an improvement.

Nor do Talbot’s acting skills play any crucial role in his investigation of his brother’s death. Since the movie is called The Wolfman, it’s not much of a surprise that the mystery culprit behind his brother’s death turns out to be a werewolf. Nor is it shocking that Talbot ends up being bitten by said werewolf.

I was surprised to find out that Emily Blunt played the would-be bride of Talbot’s late brother. Ms. Blunt looks very good in period dress and it would be nice to say that her character played a memorable role in this movie but unfortunately, she is more often an afterthought. The film flirts with the idea of a romance between her and Talbot but it never develops it too fully or convincingly -- which is a shame since such a development would have made the climax of the movie a lot more powerful.

The most memorable part of the movie is the brief view we get of Talbot’s late mother. In many ways, she seems symbolic of the film’s problems since apart from Ms. Blunt, she is very easily the most eye-catching part of the cast -- yet the movie has no idea what to do with her save to kill her off.

For that matter, it has no idea what to do with Del Toro or Hopkins save to use them in combination with elements from far better movies. Perhaps the true problem lies in the fact that such an expensive production with high-profile actors dares not say anything particularly new or original lest it lose its potential audience. And yet by playing it safe, it ensures that any repeat viewings this movie might gain would be few. Very few. So perhaps this production was indeed cursed. But not in a way that can be ended with a silver bullet.