Reviews

I saw this film for the first time on TCM and I have to tell you, no movie has hooked me in like this for the longest time! I furthered my appreciation for Lon Chaney, the first TRUE film actor their was in my opinion. This was the first film made by MGM and it was the best choice they could have made.

The film concerns a scientist/inventor played by Chaney whose discoveries are claimed by someone else, a baron. He is publicly humiliated but sees an oppurtunity and becomes a circus clown as a result of it. He falls in love with one of the bareback riders at the circus but, as is common with a lot of his films, the girl loves someone else. One night, the baron who ruined his life comes to the circus and he see's his opportunity for revenge. The overall theme and/or message of this movie is "he who gets the last laugh, laughs last!"

The film is marveously done from begining to end. Chaney is brilliant as always but his performance is subtle at saddening and vicious at times, you actually root for him!

Bravo!

Brotherhood of the Wolf is an incredibly well done film that doesn't ever take itself seriously. From the martial arts to the weaponry in some cases, it takes risks and liberties that all work extremely well together. This film takes what you love about action, period, and martial arts films and puts them in a blender creating a look and a story that's both identifiable and unique.

Although it is somewhat fictional and it does take creative licenses, the history is for the most part real. In the late 1700's an unidentified creature was stalking and killing people in the south-west of France. The king did send people to investigate but the creature was never found. In the case of this film, the two men who the king sent were Fronsac, a scientist and naturist, and his Indian companion Mani. Fronsac met Mani in America, or probably Canada. They became blood brothers and their relationship in the film is one of respect and friendship. They both trust each other implicitly. The other characters they meet are somewhat stereotypical of the narrow-mindedness you come to expect in a film like this, however, they are a perfect cast that gave wonderful performances.

The heroes, Fronsac and Mani, are played by Samuel Le Bihan and Mark Dacascos respectively. They both give performances that are subtle and well delivered. Samuel has to play the part of the only thinking white man in the whole film it seems. While everyone else seems to have their prejudices and superstitions, Fronsac thinks about what he sees and analyzes incidents and corpses to find out what the thing is and why it's doing what it's doing. Mark, playing Mani, has his own problems, the main being the racism of the other people. He's asked at one point if he can produce children with white women, to which he responds, `All women look the same in the dark." He always seems to know what to say and what to do, which is something Fronsac responds too.

The other characters in the film also do a spectacular job, especially the women. Émilie Dequenne playing the beautiful and intelligent Marianne de Morangias has radiance but she's also tough. She's one of two women in the film that Fronsac has gotten emotionally involved. The other is the mysterious, alluring, and incredibly sexy Monica Belucci. She has power, and I do mean POWER on the screen. In every scene she's in, the film seems to slow down and brighten, just so it can focus in on her. She presents an element of mystery, because you think that you know all about her, yet there's something else lurking. Vincent Cassel playing the deliciously diabolical Jean-François de Morangias brings an element of menace every time he appears on the screen. His head only needs the red horns, and look would be complete. The only other character that you can seem to sympathize with is Thomas d'Apcher although he is called "Marquis" through most of the film, played by Jérémie Rénier. He, in some ways, represents the audience so Fronsac can use exposition to explain his theories and he becomes one of the few friends that Fronsac and Mani have.

Now getting back to the story and the film making. There is only one part of the film that I can not watch. Early in the film, the people seem to think that the creature is a wolf or pack of them. So a large hunting party is gathered and they go out and slaughter twenty to thirty wolves on camera. Know I will say it's well done, but that's precisely why it's so horrible to watch. But I also think that's also a reflection of how I feel about our treatment of wolves in the first place. The scene is supposed to show, if you needed any more proof, of how this society gave in too much to its superstitions and the religious control. The other scenes with the wolves make up for this, as well as the fact that Mani and Fronsac are not involved in this and that it disgusts them both.

The other aspects of this film are just as incredible. From the fight chorography by Phillip Kwok, who worked with John Woo on Hard Boiled, which is one the best I've seen. The cinematography is crisp and over the top. You feel the rain and snow, and you feel the punches and kicks. The editing was top notch.

Excellent performances and work all around make this an incredible ride of a film.

I commented on "U.C.: UnderCover" by saying that one of their limits was working within a commercial network and that limited what they could show. This show is the prime example of what can be done within those limits. It has the car chases, the gun play, the scantly dressed women, everything but the "colorful" language.

Wonderful performances from a varied cast with seemingly subdued performances. Neal McDonough was a standout playing a politician with a personal connection to the crime. At first he comes off as a hardass with his only concern being for his own office and reputation but at the end he shows he does care, even if only for a moment. Donnie Wahlberg was a big surprise. I haven't seen him in a lot of things but his character was complex guy that he somehow got across with a few facial expressions and a few lines.

The only problem I can forsee is that they might get into a little stagnation having every episode follow the same format, but that's it. It's essentiaely every detective show you've seen, the difference is the way the story is told, and it's told exceptionaly well!

This show was incredibly well done! Excellent casting resulted in characters who were believable as well as people that I was actually rooting for. The stories were engrossing and well written. It wasn't the case of the pilot suffering and the subsequent episodes being better. Every show was excellent from the writing, the cinematography, the acting, and the editing.

The one tragic flaw was not the shows, it was the restraints of shooting within a network, specifically on a network such as NBC. This show almost begged to use more, shall we say, colorful language only for the purpose of giving more emphasis. The violence was cut to the point that when someone was shot there was nothing. The persons clothes didn't explode, there was never any blood either before or after, etc. The constraints brought about by the censorship cut down the realism that the show offered! The other constraint was working on commercial television. In reality only about fourtie-two minutes of a supposed one-hour program ever makes it on the air. What they were able to do within this time was impressive but it did cut down on what they could have done!

Brilliant show, excellent concept, well done, just to many constraints on the creativity!