User Reviews

(spoilers)

This film had some interesting ideas such as the protective family dog and the brother's search for recovery through his family.

The dog was cool and that scene where Thor gets taken away to the pound was *really* sad... then later the film gets cutesy and the dog wasn't put down afterall, the boy rescues it and the dog rescues the family.

I liked how the sister wasn't a standard horror film female: she was neither screamer or tank-top heroine. She was intelligent and everyday.

I felt really let down near the end by the characterisation of the brother. I felt like there was a huge and sudden transition from the anguished cure-searching self-restraining man to the guy who calls his sister a "b**ch" and doesn't take the effort to cuff himself anymore. In the end, he's not a nice guy anymore - that justifies how it's okay for him to die - that justifies how there can be a big fight scene. I would have thought it would be better drama if he asked him sister to put him down.

Other areas where it was terrible was the special effects. When you have special effects that mediocre, the director will usually take the effort to use more shadows and the "more is less" technique.

In some ways, this film reminded me of "Alien" (eg where there's drooling before the victim gets killed and the sensitive animal).

I saw this for the first time recently n i agree that it was an ok werewolf film for the late 90s but the movie cant hold up due to the bad effects n lousy ending.

I even showed the werewolf to my seven year old nephew n he dismissed it as a soft toy.

Michael Pare was in good shape, the family house is picturesque but the tension n suspense is totally lacking.

How Ted was able to get the same shoes after his shoes gets torned everytime he transforms is beyond me and it is an expensive affair man.

Also Ted handcuffing himself so close to his sister's house is plain stupid.

Another ridiculous stuff they added is that Ted transforms into a werewolf every single nite thereby removing the concept of full moon.

Even the nudity n sex scene is lousy cos the makers were confused whether to make it a mild movie involving a family n their dog or go full out.

My wife and I watched this on Shudder as a late night movie to just have on in the background. Like many have said, it's nothing new. However, if you're a gore/horror hound there's quite a bit to enjoy here. We were both surprised. There's 2 scenes of God awful 90s CGI but the rest is good old fashioned practical effects. By far the greatest part of the movie is that the family dog not only lives but is the hero of the movie! Loved that!

Whenever "Bad Moon" comes to mind, I always surprised to read it was made in 1996. The early nineties, maybe, the late eighties, more likely, I think. Yet, there is it. Release date: 1996. The film feels much older then that, a deliberate throwback to early eighties creature features, when Rick Baker, Rob Bottin, and Stan Winston redefined monster effects. The film was ignored upon release and remains somewhat obscure to this day. Open-minded horror fans who take a chance on it might find a likable, eccentric werewolf thriller.

Based on the novel "Thor" by Wayne Smith, "Bad Moon" is a story about a boy and his dog… And a werewolf. Attorney Janet lives with preteen son Brett in a big house on the edge of the Pacific Northwest forest. Seems the only company the family of two has is Thor, their loyal German Shepherd. That is until Janet's brother Ted comes to stay. Unbeknownst to the family, Ted was bitten by a werewolf while in Nepal. Changing every night, he struggles with his animal tendencies, handcuffing himself to a tree when he transforms. Neither Janet nor Brett connect Ted's reappearance to the vicious mauling deaths in the area. Thor, on the other hand, senses something off about the uncle. The dog keeps a close eye on the man and his nightly rituals. It's not much longer until Ted realizes that Thor is on to his secret.

Perhaps the reason the film has never been well-received, besides it generic title, is that "Bad Moon" seems to be a movie with two minds. The films open with a steamy sex scene that ends with a werewolf tearing a woman apart and then having its head blown off. The film then transitions to a little boy playing catch with his dog. The whole film slingshots between those two tones. The gore is fairly explicit, the werewolf crushing a construction worker's head in its jaws, strewing his body parts through a tree. Later, the wolf tears a con man apart with his claws, the blood spraying through the air. When the movie isn't focused on graphic werewolf violence, it's a film about family, including the beloved pet Thor. This schizophrenic tone is most obvious in the final act. While Ted confronts Janet about his lycanthropy, chasing her through the house, Brett sneaks off on his bike, rescuing Thor from the local pound. The hard horror content doesn't always co-exist easily with the Spielbergian family drama.

Yet it almost doesn't matter because veteran genre screenwriter turned genre director Eric Red nails the heart of the story. The soul of the film rests behind Thor's vivid eyes and the love his family has for him. If they gave out Oscars to dogs, Primo, the shepherd who plays the part, would have won. I'm only being partially facetious when I say he's the best actor in the film. Any animal lover is bound to have their heart-strings tugged by the scene where Thor is separated from his boy. The last act, where Thor and the werewolf fight, would have been ridiculous if the audience didn't care about Thor as much as the characters do. The movie successfully endears the dog to the viewer, investing "Bad Moon" with far more emotion then it otherwise would have had.

The human cast is a bit more mixed. Mariel Hemingway does very well as the single mom, never reduced to a screaming female. She's strong in the face of a petty con men and remains strong when being chased by a werewolf. Mason Gamble as the young boy is less impressive. It's a good thing that the kid is pushed towards the sideline for most of the film because he's not quite convincing. Michael Pare's performance is a bit harder to read. He conveys a threatening attitude subtly, especially when only a blink frightens Thor into attacking. However, moments of bigger emotions seem unconvincing coming out of Pare's mouth. A brief voice-over narration especially doesn't work, Pare given melodramatic dialogue about "the restorative power of love," for goodness' sake.

The center piece of any werewolf movie is its werewolf. "Bad Moon" doesn't feature the most original design, your standard up-right dire wolf. However, the effects are convincing. Some might consider them cheesy but I like the close-ups of the drooling, snarling face. The film's relatively small cast keeps the body count low but gore hounds might still find effects of note here. The dismembered body mentioned earlier is especially gruesome. The only effect in the movie that doesn't work is a nightmare sequence featuring a were-dog. It's a silly moment and luckily one the film doesn't focus on. "Werewolf of London" is briefly seen and the film outright pays homage too, with its werewolf vulnerable to regular bullets and Nepal-set opening.

Red's direction is handsome and makes good use of its lush shooting location. The score balances frights and lovely orchestral nicely. I'm not surprised that "Bad Moon" bombed in theaters as a post-"Scream" audience probably didn't have much interest in an eighties-style creature feature. The movie's unlikely to blow anyone's socks off but it's a solid werewolf flick nevertheless.