Jeanskynebu
the audience applauded
GamerTab
That was an excellent one.
Smartorhypo
Highly Overrated But Still Good
Pacionsbo
Absolutely Fantastic
Rainey Dawn
The two "werewolves or wolves" are a metaphor for the coming of age and male homosexuality. The idea behind the film is "Basically we are no different than the rest of you." The strange part is, they didn't have to add the wolf part into the film - they could have left it as simply young gay love and it would have be basically the same movie.There are parts of this film that could have been "spiced up" a bit because those scenes are rather boring really. A little bit of humor but quite a bit of drama. Overall a worthwhile film for young gay men.I have to say the two "wolves" are very nice looking - Lee Williams played Seth and could easily play Dorian Gray - that is who I see when I look at him.To be honest: I had to fast forward through some of the film because I found it boring - the middle lagged to much for me.5/10
jm10701
There are three really wonderful things about this movie: James Layton, Lee Williams, and the very, VERY last scene. Most of the movie is irritating and very stupid; the story and all of the dialog are dumb; and all the other characters (especially the two old women) are nearly unbearable; but those two boys (oh my!) are so beautiful, and the very last scene is so... I don't want to spoil it, but I will just say it is very much worth holding on for; and it makes me like a silly old song for the first time in the 43 years since I first heard it.That scene and those two beautiful boys raise a one-star movie to at least nine and almost to ten stars. The fact that the movie as a whole is so AWFUL actually makes those three lovely assets shine even brighter. I'm going to buy a copy of this movie, which I do not often do.
tristeza-2
WOLVES OF KROMER is a low budget movie and you can see that all the time you watch it. Some may find the look of the wolves amusing (the furry tail sticking out of their pants in particular), but I think that's not the point. The director paid more attention to the case of two elderly ladies who kill another one -and this issue takes more time than the wolves actually. Another weakness of WOLVES is the lack of any deeper psychological attempt to explain why do characters act the way they do. But do we get that kind of stuff in fairy tales? No. Fairy tales are supposed to be enjoyable. And so are THE WOLVES OF KROMER. The movie is cute, charming at times, the music and photography are beautiful (and you'll love the landscapes). This is not a masterpiece, but just a nice and sweet fable. Don't expect to witness a great movie or you'll get disappointed. Expect to see simplicity, sweetness and beauty. And you'll have fun.
buchtelitemason
This movie promised to be a modern fairytale with a strong pro-gay message. A story of ostracized wolves in love and wanting acceptance from society. It ended up being a film full of missed opportunities. The acting was fair to middling for most of the cast and the two leads(Seth and Gabriel) were definitely pretty, but the director missed the point. The metaphor of wolves as gay men was far too obvious. There was no subtlety in this film and while it seemed that the cast had a good time making the movie, it ended up barely watchable. The wolf motif was creative, but the fluffy tails were a bit much, as were the full length fur coats. The film seemed to be trying far too hard to have a moral and forgot to entertain the audience. So, the moral of this review is, skip the Wolves of Kromer and, if you want a modern fairy tale done right, try Beautiful Thing instead.
