Vampires & Zombies are popular, so why not Werewolves?

[Kirkman1987]

Zombies have been done to death (or, perhaps, undeath) and one zombie film is very much like the next one. There is really not enough one can do with them, storywise, to keep people coming back. I place them in the same bracket as most "Horror" slasher flicks: they're not real horror (psychological) and suffer from the old "showing the bear too early" syndrome; there is little tension left to manipulate your audience with.

The only zombie thing that shows any promise is this new "Walking Dead" series - and then only because they focus on the universal story of human survival (and keeping the zombies in the background)...
.

I love zombies but agree with this assessment.

I honestly think the only person to get Zombies right in serious films has been Romero with his first two films (haven't seen walking dead yet). He understood what you say, that the real interest in a zombie film aren't the creatures themselves, but the human survival story and the interest in an apocalypse setting.

When I think of the best scenes in zombie movies, It's not a gory kill, but the atmosphere of a scene like this...

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TTtLEeT_08[/yt]

Going back to werewolves, considering the popularity of emo vampires, I can't believe werewolves haven't come back in force. Lon Chaney spent half of those films seriously depressed or trying to commit suicide.

 

[Holdfast]

I've been wondering about this alot lately given the plethora of shows and movies featuring vampires and zombies.

I can't remember where I read it (I don't think it was on this board), but someone amusingly correlated the popularity of the 3 genres with the general socio-economic backdrop of the era.

They jokingly suggested that:

- vampire films are popular during recessions as the vampire is the emblem of a parasitic aristocracy, feeding off the poor, helpless masses paralysed by their hypnotic effect and ability to disappear into insubstantiality (mist/fog/bat) when faced with danger.
- zombie films are popular in boom times, representing as they do the proletariat rising up and destroying - even feeding upon - intellectual elitism (brains!)
- werewolf films fit neither category so tend to less popular, although being generally middle-class in nature (sedate by day, with a hidden dark side only coming out rarely at night when others cannot see) they tend to be popular when the middle classes have been happy for a while and start to question whether there's something more to life than just a comfortable suburban existence.

Although funny, if you actually look back at the different genres' relatively popularity (and allow a year or two lag time to allow for production times), there is something of a correlation!

 

[Nowhere Man]

I like werewolves a lot more than zombies. I would like to seeker werewolf movies.

 

[Snaploud]

Vampires and zombies are part of a larger fascination with the apocalypse. Werewolves aren't typically associated with the collapse of civilization and therefore don't evoke the same interest level.

 

[toughlittleship]

I found out yesterday there is a new Howling movie coming out, although it doesn't seem to be a serious effort.

 

[Greg Cox]

On the other hand, werewolves pretty much go hand-in-hand with vamps these days. TWILIGHT, UNDERWORLD, TRUE BLOOD, VAMPIRE DIARIES, THE GATES . . . .

You can hardly get one without the other!

 

[Blamo]

To be honest I've had more then enough of Vampires, Zombies and Werewolves. They all seem a bit too "normal" as far as monsters go. Then again, I suppose that's the point, if these modern renditions vampires weren't so human like with a bit of inhuman attributes, they would be nowhere near as powerful oestrogen bait.

 

[Gaith]

To be honest I've had more then enough of Vampires, Zombies and Werewolves. They all seem a bit too "normal" as far as monsters go.

Well, there is that. So long as you give werewolves the ability to change at will, they're really just specific shape-shifters, unlike zombies (totally different creatures from their hosts) and vampires (similar to the originals, but burdened with the whole immortality thing and other restrictions).


And, for the record, the Del Toro Wolfman is awesome monster cheese.

 

[Trek4Ever]

There have been some interesting werewolf projects in recent years: DOG SOLDIERS and GINGER SNAPS, for instance. And WOLF LAKE was an intriguing experiment that didn't quite work.

We also have a new, and reportedly more serious, version of TEEN WOLF in the works . . . .

True but they haven't captured the general public's eye like all the apocalyptic zombie and emo vampire stuff. Many posters here are bringing up good points as to why werewolves can't quite catch on, it's probably due to timing and frankly I wonder how much longer the vampire fascination will continue. To me it seems we're oversaturated and the public's attention will shift to something else. Maybe when they can perfect a new way of presenting werewolves like back in the early 80s will they make their comeback so to speak.

 

[23skidoo]

I've been wondering about this alot lately given the plethora of shows and movies featuring vampires and zombies. They're very popular so why isn't there a craving for werewolves.

It's harder to make werewolves sexy.

Vampires, of course, have been considered sexually attractive since the earliest writings about them, and while we might giggle about it today, back in the day Bela Lugosi was something of a sex symbol as Dracula.

Zombies, too, in a rather perverse way, can be seen as sexy - if not the zombies themselves (though I have seen examples of sexy zombies in films like Fido and 13 Ghosts), then often in the people who are called upon to fight the zombies (Milla, anyone?).

Werewolves just don't seem to have the perceived sex appeal, though Being Human certainly is trying its best.

Also, as I think others have noted, in films they just haven't really come up with a werewolf story that people want to see. Unlike vampires (i.e. Twilight) and zombies (Resident Evil, Romero's movies).

Alex

 

[Greg Cox]

Werewolves just don't seem to have the perceived sex appeal,

Alex

Depends on where you're looking. They are tons of werewolf novels over in the Romance section of the bookstore. More so than in the horror section, probably. Look for the books with the full moon on the cover and titles like PASSION FOR THE HUNT or something . . . .

True story: a few years ago, I got a press release from Tor informing me that one of our books had been nominated for "Best Werewolf Romance."

My snarky first response was "There's actually an award for that?" But then I went down to my neighborhood B&N and browsed the romance section. Ohmigod, the joke was on me. There were plenty of potential nominees just in the new releases sections . . . .

For people who like their sex "wild," there definitely seems to be a market.

 

[Gaith]

Werewolves just don't seem to have the perceived sex appeal

Anyone who says that obviously hasn't seen Julie Delpy in An American Werewolf in Paris.

 

[saturn5]

Because it's very difficult making a convincing werewolf on the cheap as Buffy proved, vamps and especially zomibes are much easier

 

[Deckerd]

Vampires, of course, have been considered sexually attractive since the earliest writings about them, and while we might giggle about it today, back in the day Bela Lugosi was something of a sex symbol as Dracula.

Wasn't it Christopher Lee who made the Count smokin'?

 

[Greg Cox]

Vampires, of course, have been considered sexually attractive since the earliest writings about them, and while we might giggle about it today, back in the day Bela Lugosi was something of a sex symbol as Dracula.

Wasn't it Christopher Lee who made the Count smokin'?

Lee was great, but Lugosi was considered a sex symbol in his prime. He got tons of fan mail from adoring female fans and even had a steamy love affair with Clara Bow!

True fact: the original Lugosi DRACULA was actually released on Valentine's Day and billed as "the strangest love story ever sold."

So, yeah, Hollywood was milking the sex appeal angle as early as 1931 . . . .

 

[24thcenstfan]

If Werewolves are not popular after "True Blood" concludes, then something is definitely wrong with this world.

I've always been a fan of werewolves in the Fantasy genre. I think their lack of popularity in comparison to Vampires especially might have a little to do with how romanticized vampires have become. Vampires are often not seen as monsters, but as the gorgeous facade they are cast to be. Wolves are often cast as the out of control animal as a counter.

 

[DevilEyes]

I've been wondering about this alot lately given the plethora of shows and movies featuring vampires and zombies. They're very popular so why isn't there a craving for werewolves.

It's harder to make werewolves sexy.

Vampires, of course, have been considered sexually attractive since the earliest writings about them, and while we might giggle about it today, back in the day Bela Lugosi was something of a sex symbol as Dracula.

Zombies, too, in a rather perverse way, can be seen as sexy - if not the zombies themselves (though I have seen examples of sexy zombies in films like Fido and 13 Ghosts), then often in the people who are called upon to fight the zombies (Milla, anyone?).

Werewolves just don't seem to have the perceived sex appeal, though Being Human certainly is trying its best.

Also, as I think others have noted, in films they just haven't really come up with a werewolf story that people want to see. Unlike vampires (i.e. Twilight) and zombies (Resident Evil, Romero's movies).

Alex

I don't think its difficult. Or at least it shouldn't be. The apparently normal, nice sweet person with the beast inside! That's tailor-made for psycho-sexual interpretations.

Mike Nichols' "The Wolf" had this combined about the social aspect/commentary on the contemporary male.

Neil Jordan's 1984 film "In the Company of Wolves", written by Angela Carter and based on her stories (her erotic feminist reinterpretations of classic fairytales, the framing story is a reinterpretation of the Little Red Riding Hood - and of course we know that the Big Bad Wolf was always a metaphor for dangerous sexually predatory man...) focused on the erotic side of the werewolf myth.

Then there was also "10th Kingdom" with Wolf, not exactly a werewolf but a half-wolf, half-human, a comic/romantic/charming modern version of the Big Bad Wolf, played by Scott Cohen, who was the sex symbol and romantic lead of the story (the Prince wasn't even the love interest of the heroine).

Plus, you know, werewolves are usually into rough sex when they go into the wolf mode - that's the case on Buffy (but then, on Buffy, who isn't?) and on Being Human.

Vampires, of course, have been considered sexually attractive since the earliest writings about them, and while we might giggle about it today, back in the day Bela Lugosi was something of a sex symbol as Dracula.

Wasn't it Christopher Lee who made the Count smokin'?

Lee was great, but Lugosi was considered a sex symbol in his prime. He got tons of fan mail from adoring female fans and even had a steamy love affair with Clara Bow!

True fact: the original Lugosi DRACULA was actually released on Valentine's Day and billed as "the strangest love story ever sold."

So, yeah, Hollywood was milking the sex appeal angle as early as 1931 . . . .

Well, he brought the whole heavy-accented, deep-voiced, suave charismatic Eastern European aristocrat persona to Dracula. So no, I don't find it surprising or funny. Though I find Frank Langella the sexiest Dracula.

And I'm going to use this opportunity to plug my new Rankopedia rankings: Sexiest male screen vampire and Sexiest female screen vampire. There is no such ranking about werewolves yet, which I guess proves that they haven't been eroticized nearly as much, at least not on film and TV (it would be hard to come up with enough candidates...).

 

[Trent Roman]

One does wonder why necrophilia seems to go over better than bestiality. Perhaps because vampires are so well-preserved, whereas it's harder to miss a werewolf's shagginess (barring a really full Brazilian).

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

 

[Greg Cox]

Well, he brought the whole heavy-accented, deep-voiced, suave charismatic Eastern European aristocrat persona to Dracula. So no, I don't find it surprising or funny. Though I find Frank Langella the sexiest Dracula.
.

Oh yeah, pretty much every female fan of my generation swooned over Langella as the Count.

Just as earlier generations saw Lugosi as a kind Transylvanian version of Valentino . . . .

 

[DevilEyes]

One does wonder why necrophilia seems to go over better than bestiality. Perhaps because vampires are so well-preserved, whereas it's harder to miss a werewolf's shagginess (barring a really full Brazilian).

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

It's hard to see see vampire appeal as a real expression of necrophilia, because it's just so hard to take the idea of them being "dead" seriously, when they're shown doing almost everything that living people do, walking, talking, thinking, feeling, dancing, in some cases fucking, or smoking or drinking something other than blood - or even breeding... anything but sunbathing. They function more as metaphors for the dangerous, predatory and forbidden.

Werewolf love, however, can be seen as bestiality up to a point, insofar as they are actually shown turning into an animal for a period.