The Instigator
TheMovieDoctorful
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
Gabe1e
Con (against)
Losing
1 Points

The 2010 Wolfman remake is better than the 1941 original

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
TheMovieDoctorful
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/23/2014 Category: Movies
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 530 times Debate No: 65714
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

TheMovieDoctorful

Pro

Round 1 is acceptance
Rounds 2 & 3 are arguments and rebuttals
Rounds 4 is final rebuttal
Round 5 is conclusion
Gabe1e

Con

Accepted.

I will be arguing that the original Wolfman is better than the remake, using critics ratings, and reviews on the internet.
Debate Round No. 1
TheMovieDoctorful

Pro

TheMovieDoctorful forfeited this round.
Gabe1e

Con

My opponent forfeited, I will give him a chance to argue.
Debate Round No. 2
TheMovieDoctorful

Pro

Alright, I'll start. First of all, we won't be using critical reviews for this argument, as critical opinion may change over time. After all, many cinematic masterpieces like Platoon and Blade Runner received negative reviews upon release. It's just these movies on their own.

Characters:
Both the characters in the original Wolf Man and the remake were extremely deep and likable, but I think the remake definitely has an edge. First off, the remake goes much further into the back-stories of it's characters giving them very solid profiles. Lawrence Talbot is made far more sympathetic given his tragic backstory and childhood; being sent to an asylum as a child by his own father, being the racially discriminated son of a gypsy and watching his mother die. In the original film, Larry Talbot seems WAY too happy, and generally seems like he had a good life before being bitten by The Wolf Man. With Lawrence Talbot of the remake, his life is miserable, depressing and all joy is slipping away. The only reason he has to live is the love of Gwen Conliffe, the only person to show him companionship or even friendship in his darkest times. Speaking of Gwen, she is a FAR better character in the remake than the original. In the original, they really have no reason to fall in love. Gwen is engaged with another man, she cheats on him once with Larry and...Then they pretty much fall in love. In the remake, Lawrence and Gwen's relationship begins rather awkwardly, as Gwen is frustrated that Lawrence originally didn't want to investigate his brother's death, but over the course of the film, Lawrence becomes extremely supportive, understanding and kind to Gwen, and in return, she slowly becomes equally supportive, kind and understanding as well as VERY proactive. This makes Lawrence and Gwen far more sympathetic as the film progresses, and makes their romance far more emotional and touching then what we have in the original (Where Larry discovers Gwen by spying on her through her window...Not kidding)

Villain:
Many have criticized that Sir John Talbot, a supportive and kind father in the original, is a villain in the remake. I disagree entirely. Sir John offers a fantastic dark mirror of Lawrence himself; while Lawrence wishes to contain the beast within, Sir John wishes to let it run free. On top of that, he also shows that it is easier to let our vices and inner beasts control us, as Sir John seems to live a rather decadent life while Lawrence's is a living hell. That being said, he's not a one dimensional bad guy. He is a little sympathetic as we see that he did initially try and contain the beast after the tragic death of his wife. However, after the death of his other son Ben, he went insane, finding nothing to live for except the beast. Thus, Lawrence, the only other surviving member of the Talbot family, must redeem his own sins as well as the sins of his father by destroying him in a rather intense fight scene near the end.

Acting:
The acting is rather impressive in the originals, I will admit. That said, I think the acting in the remake is better. Benicio Del Toro did a phenomenal job capturing the pain and broken mental state that Lawrence had. He has to capture a wide range of emotions; angst, fear, compassion, anger, stubbornness, sincerity and depression. Chaney did a great job as well, but I don't think he captured the range of the character like Del Toro did. Anthony Hopkins is downright terrifying in this movie. He's mysterious, cruel and sophisticated yet fatherly, and played the tragic element of his character extremely well. His Sir John was far more developed and layered than the Sir John of the original, who was likable but rather basic; a friend of Larry's who didn't believe in lycanthropy. Emily Blunt completely blows Evelyn Ankers out of the water, her performance is infinitely better and more interesting. She did a great job being sincere and sweet while still being stubborn, frustrated and sometimes angry. Her arc from bystander to supporter to a proactive force driving the story is FAR superior to what Gwen went through in the original. In fact, come to think of it, Gwen didn't really HAVE an arc in the original. She was basically Larry's on again, off again lover and that was pretty much it.

Overall, yes, The 2010 Wolfman got unfavorable reviews from critics and was not NEARLY as praised as the 1941 version. However, after sitting down and watching it, it really is an underrated masterpiece and actually better than the original. It was certainly the best film of 2010, and one of the best remakes.
Gabe1e

Con

Gabe1e forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
TheMovieDoctorful

Pro

TheMovieDoctorful forfeited this round.
Gabe1e

Con

Eh, this topic was stupid to debate about anyway, I am sorry for my forfeit.
Debate Round No. 4
TheMovieDoctorful

Pro

TheMovieDoctorful forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
TheMovieDoctorfulGabe1eTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had made an argument. Conduct to Con due to the numerous forfeitures by Pro.