User Reviews

It almost kills me to write a bad review for this this film that I so wanted to like. As a huge fan of The Universal Monsters, I can say that that this film tried to capture that old feeling, but ultimately failed. Shot on an extremely low budget, I can give this film a pass in certain areas. The black and white also adds a nice touch and a nod to the classic films. However the ultimate failure of this movie is all due to the terrible acting. And I mean really bad, over the top, Scooby Doo-type reactions. I cannot imagine any non Universal Monster fans sitting through more than 20 minutes of this film.

5 Strangers are invited to a Gothic castle by the host, Bela Reinhardt. As the movie slowly progresses, you find out that each of these 5 individuals has something in common and there is a reason they were chosen to come. The Dr. will choose one of them to be his successor. Who will it be ? The nerd, the jock and his brainy sister, the big game hunter, or the beautiful girl with the attitude? You'll have to watch to find out. See the mystery of the unknown footprints and many other twists and turns. If you can survive the slow pace and bad acting, at least stick around for the main event. The Frankenstein Monster takes on The Wolf Man in a knock down drag out slug fest! I liked the design of both monsters and the fight was a lot of fun. Worth the price of the DVD.

Of course Dracula comes in at the very end to make an appearance that really makes no sense. And I also understand that the actor who played him in this film recently passed on. Like I said previously, the movie had its heart in the right place. It just did not deliver.

I give it 4 of 10 stars and that is only because I loved the monster fight at the end of the movie.

'House of the Wolf Man' is a well imagined but overall disappointing mess. It definitely has a child like love for the classic monster films and it sometimes hurts the film. I just can't help but be disappointed by it. If I had to choose one problem with the film it would be it's script. It reads as if it were written by a ten year old. I didn't really expect the dialogue to be brilliant but overall this thing just seems downright silly at times. It feels as if writer Eben Mcgarr learned his entire vocabulary from the worst of the horror movies. This isn't really all that bad per say but it's noticeable, noticeable to the point of detracting from the film.

The big draw to the picture for me was seeing Ron Chaney play The Wolf Man. His performance was what I expected, merely serviceable. The acting gene skipped Ron. I wasn't expecting him to match his excellent Grandfathers but I don't know. I really find that this is my overall reaction to the film. I want to defend it in someways but I can't find any excuses. Ron Chaney simply isn't an actor, he's a name. To his credit though he looks as if he is having a ball in The Wolf Man make up and that's all I really was hoping for.

The only good performance comes from Cheryl Rodes and good might just be a stretch. She looks like she's having a great time though and she is sexy. I guess that is the way to judge some of these performances. Michael R Thomas is absolutely fantastic in his Lugosi impression but sadly they gave him nothing to do. The hearts in the right place but we don't get good performances.

What works with the film is how much it loves the technical aspects of the classic Universal films. The set and the cinematography look like it is a direct sequel. The film really is a beautiful modernized love letter to the 40's silver age of horror. The score comes really really close to ripping off the classic Wolf Man themes and I love it.

What the film leads up to is a climatic battle between the Frankenstein monster and The Wolf Man. Everything else is filler with poor acting. I really think the movie would work much better as a short. I'm not really interested in this poorly conceived story. I want the monsters and I'm sure everyone paying to see this does too. Why not exploit them for all they are worth? Frankenstein and Dracula come into the exposition with no explanation what so ever. Even The Wolf Man abruptly joins the story. It really seems as if McGarr didn't write the story around these monsters which he should have.

Am I glad I saw this film? Yes, very much so but I probably won't be picking it up again any time soon. You get what you expect but little more.

Let me start with the good stuff. I grew up on Universal monster films and was eager to see this attempt at finishing the "House of..." cycle. It captures the atmosphere of the period quite well, the full-orchestra score is dead on, and the monsters all look terrific. So do the sets and the miniature castle shot at the open is as good as any from the classic movies. This movie was clearly made lovingly by true fans, and that warns my soul. Nods to Universal abound, such as cutaways to the Creature From the Black Lagoon skeleton on a table, alongside the glass dome contain the now dead and decomposed King homunculus from Bride of Frankenstein.

However, the script is laborious, it rough going even at 74 minutes. When I was an hour and five minutes into it and still no monsters had shown, I knew we were in trouble. Up to that point, it plays more like one of those Monogram mystery films more than Universal. Things pick up when the monsters arrive, they look just great. You can see the seams on the Frankenstein make-up, but the design is terrific and the black and white photography obscures some of the flaws. There is no real setup for the monster, he just staggers in for the obligatory (and well staged) fight with the wolfman. Dracula appears, too, right at the end and for apparently no reason.

The story falls apart when the creatures appear, but it's what we are here for, and the preceding hour is completely forgotten at that point. Apparently by the film makers as well.

The acting from everyone is over the top, probably intentionally, but it is taken too far. Watch the old Universal films. The acting styles may be more stagy than we see today, but they are well-played by actors who believed what they were doing and consequently made you believe. These guys are playing a campy style, and it is at odds with my respect for the old films. Ron Chaney, here of course for his name alone, is the worst violator. His annoying monotone gets very old very fast and he is completely incapable of carrying the titular role.

The sole exception the late Michael R. Thomas as Dracula, who seems to be channeling Lugosi. Too bad there isn't more of him.

All that said, if you are a fan of these old movies, and they are your touchstone in life, as they are for me, then you can't afford to miss this uneven film with a big heart squarely in the right place.

Just to give you guys an idea of how long I've been waiting to see this film, I first wrote about it last Halloween while it was still making its rounds at independent screenings and festival circuits. Fast forward to present day and I now hold in my hand the unholy grail of recent horror cinema... or is it?

The plot, like oh so many of those classic fright films, revolves around a slightly mad scientist who has invited a group of young people to his castle by offering them each a chance to inherit his vast estate and resources. Each member arrives single file as Bela Reinhardt (played by a stone-faced Ron Chaney) proceeds to (annoyingly) deliver psychological profiles on each ad nausea. There's some spooky, Scooby-Doo type shenanigans that unfold and then Bela delivers his bombshell... he's actually *GASP* a werewolf! I won't spoil the second half of the "twist," suffice to say by that point the surprise has pretty much been spoiled anyway.

Having not heard much about House of the Wolfman online, I've let most of my excitement rest on the merit of the still photos and trailer that have been floating around the internet for the past year. Watching it I really wanted to experience a film that would transport me back into the birth of Universal Horror (1930s). Instead, the film seems to strike an uneasy balance between being an honest homage and an all-out satire.

It would be unfair to say that the film as a whole is "bad," however I don't share the same mentality regarding the acting which is really what pulls the film down to Ed Wood status. Best described as uninspired, each actor and actress delivers their dialog with such a sense of austere disinterest it's as if they're being held against their will. Lines that should be creepy are instead wooden and awkward while moments of brevity (mostly thanks to Jeremie Loncka's "Sully") seem too forced. Perhaps the most jarring and uncomfortable character was Jim Thalman's character, Archibald Whitlock, whose racist overtones are arguably more terrifying than the monster's themselves.

Actress Cheryl Rodes sizzle up the screen with some vintage eye candy about halfway through, but the real bits of excellence come from the small nuances that the film offer up including a creepy, disfigured grandmother and the special effects for the Wolfman. There's also a nice throwback to Dracula courtesy of the late Michael R. Thomas, but it happens so late in the film and without any real impact to the plot that it loses any of its campy intention.

Having not seen Eben McGarr's (writer, director, producer) previous film, Sick Girl, it's hard to make a comparison but with this being only his sophomore effort I'd have to say that it shows potential. At the very least I would have to say that McGarr should be commended for the scope of his intentions as I'm sure filming a period piece is no easy feat on an independent budget. With a better cast, a little editing and a bigger budget House of the Wolfman could have been everything I had waited for and more.

In the spirit of full disclosure, I was invited for a visit to the set of "House of the Wolf Man." Yet, I did buy my own ticket for the premiere of the movie last night. So take my review for what it is worth.

I absolutely loved Eben McGarr's new film, "House of the Wolf Man." It is a love letter to the classic horror movies of yester year, and pays homage in the way many wish filmmakers would, but seldom do.

The movie is presented in black and white, full frame, and mono. It was shot in the style of the classic monster movies of the 1930's and 1940's; intended to fit in as the "missing" chapter of the "House of" franchise. Universal originally made "House of Frankenstein" (1944) and "House of Dracula" (1945). Reportedly there were plans to complete the trilogy with "House of the Wolf Man," but the studio never got around to making that one. Writer / Director Eben McGarr has created the missing piece to that trilogy. He employed only the lighting, sound, and camera techniques used in those original films. The care he showed truly pays off.

The film opens on a dark and stormy night at the castle of Dr. Bela Reinhardt (Ron Chaney) where five strangers arrive. Those five people include Reed Chapel (Dustin Fitzsimons) and his sister Mary (Sara Raferty), brainy nerd Conrad Sullivan (Jeremie Loncka), the mysterious Elmira Cray (Cheryl Rodes), and renowned hunter Archibald Whitlock (Jim Thalman). They have been summoned by Reinhardt to participate in a game of elimination, in which the last one standing will inherit his estate. Along the way, the five participants come face to face with a creepy servant named Barlow (John McGarr) as well as the triumvirate of monsters - the Wolf Man, Frankenstein's monster, and Count Dracula.

All of the performances are very good, blending perfect comic timing with the right amount of campiness that was found in those original monster movies. Ron Chaney, grandson of the legendary Lon Chaney, Jr. (the original "Wolf Man") headlines the cast and is dead-on creepy in the role of the mad scientist. Also earning top marks is Cheryl Rodes, whose screen presence is captivating.

The film is a wonderful technical achievement. Cinematographer Royce Allen Dudley does a tremendous job of capturing the ambiance of the story. The images are eerily beautiful and you will be hard pressed to tell the difference between this movie shot in 2009 and the other "House of" movies shot in the 1940's. The movie is edited crisply as it speeds along at just the right pace. The story is well written by McGarr, with the right combination of campiness and chills. The choreography of the fights between the monsters is extremely well done. Overall, Eben McGarr should be praised for delivering a true gem of a movie that any fan of the classic monster movies will love.

If one of the major studios were smart they would pick this up and give it a proper theatrical release. Destined to be a cult classic, I believe it has crossover potential with older fans who love classic films, as well as with young families. Imagine the marketing campaign - "When was the last time you could take your kids to a horror film?" That alone should be worth millions. So here's hoping that "House of the Wolf Man" hits a theater near you soon. You won't be disappointed.

I finally got a chance to see the movie from John that i stored and forgot about. My actual thoughts on the movie are a little below, but first i want to say a few things... I was told at the wrap, my music was not used and John gave me a dvd and cd papers pictures with a lot of things my music score in a brown manilla envelope and in an envelope i did not see when i looked in there few hundred bucks and love letter. A mushy love letter. Lol signed Bullethead, That was in 2009 and I opened it today 2024. The letter made me cry, all of it made me cry, it is all so very personal to me. I am finally feeling better and looked through it all... I worked as a set builder for my friends the McGarr brothers and Beano Agundez an actor in the film. I have been a builder carpenter and now a set builder, and i have to say building sets is just as hard as building a house. Maybe even harder in a lot of ways. I have great respect for set builders who get no credit they are some of the ghosts of hollywood, but without them. What? I was offered to join there union, but i got sick with cancer and have been fighting ever sense just to stay alive.

I also was given an opportunity in helping write music for the movie, building sets 14 to 16 hours a day. Then writing the music samples using fenele 2008 software, which has gotten a lot better sound quality of the instruments. I gave them 16 minutes of samples, thank you for that. My music was not used however, I got a really great and inspired 16 minutes of music. I posted to my youtube and rumble accounts with what pictures and film clips i was given by John before he passed away, well actually he was murdered by a drunk driver.

I enjoyed this movie, i was present at many shots and at 2 locations, in case they needed me, i worked helping the grip. So i guess i have grip experience as well. The film is shot in the original 1930's camera film. Universal paramount Eben is with. A remake of those monsters. And black and white, the fight scene between the monsters is great, some of it is low quality acting but some if it is good solid acting. My friends did an outstanding performance but im prejudice. Lol. All in all its a good movie and entertaining. Eben is a great director and i bet he has come along way. I have not seen him sense 2009. Sorry to say. I got sick and lost contact.

A tribute to my friends. RIP John McGarr and Beano Agundez. I miss you guys more than words can say, I love you. And if anyone knows Eben McGarr please pass on my information. Go check out my music and follow me at rumble pass it on please to my friend Eben. I just opened up these sites, I'm still alive and i decided to post some of my music i have well over 1000 pieces songs etc. 20 - 30 movie scripts music scores to go with them, i would love to give Eben. Thank you very much. My name is Billy Syms I am dowghouse at rumble. And dowghousestudio at youtube. Dowghouse at proton.dot me, my email... If you want to hear my sample of horror music i made for my way pictures boyz. I made a tribute to John and Beano and posted it on these websites. Thank you. Love to you Eben where ever you are.

Setting out to replicate the feel of the old Universal movies is a high bar to set, but House of the Wolf Man hits the marks in a number of places. The look and feel of the movie is fairly accurate, with an addition of some tongue in cheek humor that makes for an entertaining ride. The technical aspects of the movie, the cinematography, makeup, stuntwork, were all astoundingly good. There were so many breathtaking shots that Royce Allen Dudley deserves special mention for his work. I want to see more from this man, he has a real eye for things.

Certainly, the script has problems. There are far too many "surprise" moments that have no real foreshadowing and there are a number of things that the characters seem to take for granted that make little sense without them being explained in exposition, but the overall story is certainly as solid as House of Frankenstein (which I watched directly afterwards for a solid comparison).

In a movie like this, it is the cast that makes or breaks things and here there is a mixed bag. Ron Chaney (grandson of Lon Chaney jr) turned in a performance so horrible that it is obvious he is in this film soley to lend his name. His performance wasn't just bad, it was embarrassingly bad. It should serve as a reminder that having a famed movie star in one's family tree is no guarantee of acting ability. His performance is flat, disjointed, and uses an affectation that makes him sound even more...awful. When he is trying to be menacing, he is bland. When he should be sinister, he is bland. There are no redeeming qualities about his performance. FULL STOP. Thankfully, EVERYONE in the cast (even those with less than stellar performances themselves) are better than he. There are a few notable standouts though...

* Jeremie Loncka puts in a sometimes side-splitting appearance as Conrad Sullivan, a character who stands in for the audience - asking all of the questions that sprang to my mind, and delivering some well timed comedic moments. Of the gathered guests, he rapidly became my favorite.

* Saba Moor-Doucette, as Vadoma, puts in the single *best* performance in the entire movie. Full stop. Not only could the character have stepped from a universal movie (thanks to the makeup efforts of Michelle Chung and the rest of the makeup team), but her performance was gripping, believable, and genuinely creepy. If a movie needs to resort to flat out exposition to fill the holes int he script, this is the person you want doing the explaining. I could watch a dozen more movies with Saba Moor-Doucette in this role.

* The dialog delivery of Rodes Phire, in the femme fatal role of Elmira Cray, was a bit weak. She made up for her dialog shortcomings by, not only vamping her way through every scene, but with her every expression and movement. While she wasn't very convincing when she spoke, she was VERY convincing with every sneer, smirk, and horrified gasp. Her ability to emote, her expressiveness, sold things when her line delivery certainly didn't. While not a top-notch performance, I've seen far worse from people who get paid a LOT more.

* Finally, there was Dustin Fitzsimons in the role of Reed Chapel. The character was written as something more akin to a 50s horror protagonist than one of the 40s but Dustin really sells the role. His eventually demise is terribly written and both the actor and the character deserved far better.

Then, of course, there is the monsters themselves. As mentioned above, the crone Vadoma is jaw-droppingly crafted. The makeup is not only believable, but walks the fine line between horror and revulsion that so many creature makeups fail at. With this to set the tone for the big reveals, things only get better from there. When we finally see the titular wolf man along with Frankenstein's monster? They look to have stepped straight out of the old Aurora monster kits. They look AMAZING! Sadly, much like House of Frankenstein, we get far too little of these creatures as the entire movie is a buildup to this confrontation. Most of the film's characters are immediately thrown away, killed off with very little fanfare, to clear the way to focus on the monster battle. While this is disappointing, the wolf man's actions, bounding across entire rooms, are electrifying.

Like the movies it emulates, House of the Wolf Man is not a perfect movie. It does, however, accomplish what it sets out to do and fans of the classic Universal monsters should be pleasantly surprised by this unofficial entry into the series. Just, seriously, ignore the "acting" of Ron Chaney

So.. to start with the positive side it's really cool to see Ron Chaney filling his ancestors boots even if his performance wasn't good, the acting in this movie was definitely below average but the actors meant well, the acting kinda feels like a home video some teenagers would make, which is kind of quaint but not really enjoyable. And the monster makeup wasn't half bad, I particularly like how the Frankenstein monster kept the Karloff look but changed a few things to upgrade the makeup. The references in this movie don't drag it down like in a lot of movies about legacy IP's and they seem to respect the other movies continuity. The Butler was a really good character and the castle was a nice set, almost everything looked authentic and I don't think they used s greenscreen once.

Now, the negatives, the writing was pretty hard to stomach and the acting couldn't really reinforce it, save for a few good deliveries by the cast. The monsters have no visible bearing on the story until more than halfway through and even then it's minimal which makes it feel more like a Nancy Drew story than universal monster movie and when the monsters show up it barely makes any sense, what exactly Bella thought would happen is confusing and not really understandable, and Dracula just shows up at the end to have his wives give the audience a cheap scare with hoaky masks and then talk about stuff that isn't relevant and doesn't make sense. Yes it would be nice to see the big three on screen again but it comes out of the blue and doesn't feel earned.

This movie was pretty bad save for a few things and what makes it worse is that even with the low budget they had they definitely could have made a fun classic style campy monster movie with it if they just made a better story.