Why Werewolves Will NOT Be The Next Big Thing.
By Scott Hillman
I however don't think so.
Every couple of years new trends tend to appear in horror movies- Monster movies, ghost stories, slasher pics. I don't think werewolves are suddenly going to join these. They can make interesting stories, but I think several factors-money popularity hold them back from reaching mainstream success and if nothing else the (semi ironic) dual nature of there existence.
There’s a cliché in vampire movies that there is always a scene where the rules of what vampires are is spelled out in great detail. Though we may think all vampires are same, they are in fact wildly different-some can be affected by crucifixes, some die in sunlight. Werewolf movies have similar problems. We may have an idea of what werewolves are but werewolves have dramatic differences.
These two movies demonstrate the basic dichotomy of werewolves-there fundamentally two different creatures. One is the werewolf who in the classic Lon Chaney mode is cursed to change and has no control over it(the Wolfman, but also Cursed). The other is the man who wants to change, has control over it and usually can control it at will(New Moon, but also Wolven, The Pack).
The first type of werewolf is the most common in movies, and is a classic in horror. there's a primalness to the fear-a metaphor for the monster inside, that we can't get out. Its a powerful story that Bollywood and interesting directors want to explore.
The problem with the wolf man stories is that it is well....kind of the same. At its core its also a somewhat depressing story- Man fights monster inside kills people- usually at least one person he loves. He then dies at the end. People have made variations to make it less depressing by adding elements of comedy or action, or ways around the unhappy ending. However there is the general air that they are just that-variations. Though people complain that all Hollywood does is remake old movies, you can only remake a movie so often. Especially non feel good, cerebral stories.
The second type of werewolf is one less common in movies, though historically its much older This werewolf who can change at will, can become a monster at will. Historically and in movies such as Dog Solders you see these kind of creatures as villains. Yet we also see this character as a hero.
This isn't a new idea. While Teen Wolf is the only movie jumps to immediate mind as an example of a heroic werwolf movie, There have been tones of interesting werewolf fiction over the years that follows this path. However from my experiences with it, this tends to play as straight fantasy, not horror. The Werewolf as a hero battling monsters with little or no consequences other then fear of defeat. The fact that the basic story isn't all that different then superman is worth noting, though the fact that it isn't quite a superhero story can be interesting. However most of them, are never that traditionally scary.
This is of particular note in relationship to Twilight, which success is arguably due to the fact that there never that traditionally scary. Could they make that movie and replace a vampire with a werewolf? It's possible. It has already probably been done in book form. Going to any young adult book store, will find dozens of books about variations of Harry Potter and Twilight, of super-hero academies, and young love between ghosts. I am a particular fan of the vampire magical academy sub genre. its easy to copy a successful book idea, to modest but respectable profit.
Its a cliche that Hollywood recycles and copies of what successful. Yet despite the fact that some of the most successful movies of all time are big budget teen centric romances (Titanic, Ghost) historically is not a genre that gets copied a lot. The reasons for this, are hard to fathom. Despite the fact that it is the most popular movie EVER, I can't think of a single movie that's a direct copy of Titanic.
There are some possible reasons-the genre is all about massively building up a New Star. Hollywood Press have become reluctant to do over the last couple of decades- making Robert Pattison the new Leonadro Di-Caprio. Since the studio system broke down in the late 50's doesn't happen all that often-why build up a star that'll just go someplace else?
There is also the kind of general belief that this is the one expression of the idea, lightning in a bottle. And of course there also a kind of general belief that big budgets are best spent on movies which explode.
And to make the werewolf Twilight would cost. Studio caliber Werwolf effects are still expensive, and CGI can still be a hit and miss prospect. Even nearly 15 years after Jurassic Park, you still see duds. Good werewolf costuming and makeup are much harder to do then for vampires. The most expensive vampire effect is much much cheaper to put on screen then a good werewolf. There's locations sets, and lots of publicity money. Twilight cost 43 million dollars to make, and though it has a deceptive indie style (which is my favorite things about it) you can see it on the screen. This potential werewolf movie would cost as much as that if not more.
And really pure copies, tend not to be as successful as the original. Teen romance is a genre that is all about massive buildup. If it doesn't pick up you have got an expensive bomb. It seems a counter intuitive gamble.
This kind of logic also applies to any werewolf horror movie. Though the vampire film festival was established to help with non slasher horror genre, that's a dependable genre that relatively cheap to produce. The relative cheapness to produce is the key to horror these days- horror has the highest dollar spent to money received ratio of any genre, but spending to much on it does not increase returns. Paranormal Activity is a movie recently that cost $13,000.00 to produce and made close to $100 million in the box office (before DVD where the REAL money is) I don't think if they have spent $26,000 it would have done twice as much. .
This is not to say there is no variety in horror these days. Though the J horror trends seems to be dying down, you can do a lot of original stuff with ghosts, for not that much. Vampires movies can take advantage of the fact that Eastern Europe is breaking down to get excellent sets ( I.E once treasured palaces of empires) for cheap. To go to werewolves which are expensive, and has been hit or miss(2005 "Cursed" is not getting a sequel) is a risky proposition at best.
And. If it fails....well, i think we have the status quo.
I guess the big takeaway from this is, not that people are going to stop making werewolf movies. However I think its going to be what currently is happening. Every 5 years a studio makes a werewolf movie. Every now and then someone does a monster mash movie (ala Underworld or Van Hesling). Every year or two we see a semi independent werewolf movie. This is more or less the status quo.
I would like to state i have nothing against werewolf movies. I think well done movies like Ginger Snaps, or Werewolves of Wall Street are ways of making thoughtful interesting horror. I think the image of giant werewolves standing quietly in the shadow in the movie Dog Solders is one of the most evocative and creepy in recent horror.-its the space that there in is the key. It maybe the indie and semi indie space (which i haven't really talked about) is a good place to explore this kind of work
These are in short the kind of movies I hope to see at the Vampire Film Festival. If the big burst about werewolf movies is that we get 5 or 10 good indie werewolf movies next year, i would be tickled pink by that. However i think predicting a major werewolf boom is unlikely.
(Note: I am not including the Incredible Hulk movies on this list, though its been argued that he is archetypically awesome. There NEEDS to be a giant trend for incredible hulk movies.)
