Tells a fascinating and unsettling true story, and does so well, without pretending to have all the answers.

This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

If you like to be scared, if you like to laugh, and if you like to learn a thing or two at the movies, this absolutely cannot be missed.

It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film

What a bizarre film.Fashioned in vein of Tales of The Brothers Grimm, this early Neil Jordan (The Crying Game; Interview With A Vampire) fantasy horror weaves a vampire-like seduction into the traditional red riding hood tale.It's heavy on the fantasy, as opposed to the horror. But when it does kick into horror-mode it gets pretty badass. The transformations are among the best I've seen...second only, maybe, to the one in American Werewolf In London.Essentially, we have a young lady who has fallen asleep while reading werewolf tales; and begins to dream she is playing a leading role in a story in which she finds herself being seduced by a charming werewolf-man....after wandering off the the path in the woods. Insert psychoanalysis here.The young lass is being groomed by her Grandmother to be a proper young lady. She warns her of the dangers that lurk off the path in the woods- granted she ever dare wander. She even made her a red shawl to wear.A boy from town is constantly trying to woo the young lady, but to no avail. No one manages to catch her eye until she meets a charming gentleman in the woods- who intercepts her on her way to her Grandmother's house...and he just so happens to be a werewolf.The back-story is introduced through flashbacks and recounts told by the old Grandmother; and young girl (in real time) to her mother (after she wakes up). This covers stuff like the death of her sister; why she began to wander off the path; and various excerpts from local legends- detailing the historic accounts of werewolf encounters.Lot's of weird stuff happens in this film: from girls running among giant mushrooms away from wolves that seem like hellhounds; and toy babies hatching from eggs...to mention only a couple. But considering it is all occurring in a dreamstate (up until maybe the end, but probably even then), this surely opens the door to symbolic readings and interpretations. There very well may be some esoteric message tied in there somewhere...but if there was, it wasn't overtly evident to me. So it probably leaves room for a broad spectrum of interpretation.That being said...the scenery and costumes are pretty cool. And, as was previously mentioned, the transformations are f*cking sweet. Especially the one where dude rips his face off until he's just muscles...although, the one where the wolf bursts through the guy's mouth is pretty rad too. Not to mention that tongue gimmick...I suppose this qualifies as a psychological werewolf horror, due to it's non-linear structure, and the fact that it's grounded in a dream world. I didn't take the time to read too much into the symbolism in this one (when I usually do haha), but it does seem to be chock full of it. And there is just enough crazy special effects (no cgi-bs) and gore to keep you horror fans interested too. Recommended. 7 out of 10.

A teenage girl (Sarah Patterson) in a country manor falls asleep while reading a magazine and she has a disturbing dream involving wolves which appears to take place in the woods visible from her bedroom window.How is it that after so many years as a horror fan, this title has escaped me? I may have vaguely heard of it, but certainly never saw it or had any reason to seek it out. Gee, I wish I had known about this much sooner.While the narrative is not very straightforward, and at times a bit confusing with its story-within-a-story structure, it is such a great blend of horror and fantasy. Horror fans get the werewolf, the gore effects, and some really cool transformation scenes. Fantasy folks get vibrant colors (especially red), and very dreamlike atmosphere.David Warner and Terence Stamp both have smaller roles, but add a bit to the picture that only they can. Angela Lansbury has a bit bigger role, though it is not one of her more flattering.As far as the so-called "wolf cycle" of the early 1980s goes, this has to be among the top three released at the time, perhaps second only to "An American Werewolf in London". Truly art in motion.

I remember when I first saw this film (many years ago); I found it quite slow and plodding. This time I appreciated much more the measured approach taken by the director. It gives the audience time to take in the story and become familiar with the strange world he has created. Yes, there are a few clichés in there, the medieval village with a 17th century manor house and the fact the snakes (big ones) live in an English forest did seem kind of wrong to me. Also in the 'dislike' column came the musical score; sorry but synth's just don't cut it any more. May have sounded cool at the time but now it's just too damn cheesy. Okay, so what's to like; well, first there's the performance of Sarah Patterson, who I though did a truly excellent job given the talent she was working with. I also liked the special effects; all mechanical with not a hint of CGI (after all, it didn't really exist back then). I really liked the way the story was structured but it could have done without the 'modern day' bits tagged on to either end. Over all I found it an entertaining watch and something every horror fan should have seen at least once.SteelMonster's verdict: RECOMMENDEDMy score: 7.3/10.You can find an expanded version of this review on my blog: Thoughts of a SteelMonster.

I'm the only person I know who's actually seen this film, let alone loved it, so it's nice to be able to share my enthusiasm for this rich little gem.Why do I love this film? Well, let's start at the very beginning. I adore it when a movie's title is open to interpretation and could be taken in any number of differing ways. Is this about wolves in various guises as companions, whether literal or metaphorical, or are they merely playing a role in some elaborate scenario in our personal fabrication of reality? As it turns out, both. This flick is BIG on the symbolism and the worst wolves are, to quote, "hairy on the inside."Secondly, and let's not beat about the bush ( pun entirely intentional ) the movie is positively dripping dark Gothic sexuality. Not that is has any sex scenes per se ( though there is the least erotic lovemaking scene between the heroine, Rosaleen's, parents at one point ), but it's a Freudian orgy. Sensuality swamps practically every scene, and though it has been known for me to over-analyse a tad ;) it's hard to resist the urge to intermittently shout out "ooh, lipstick as a labia metaphor!" or "That tree has a phallus!" ( which is why I stopped watching films with my parents decades ago... I think I was embarrassing them.)"Oh come ON Mum !!!! The tree quite obviously has a penis!!" "I think I'll go make a pot of tea now..."Like the much later "Ginger Snaps" lycanthropy is pretty much a metaphor for sexual awakening, however, here the nature of the beast is firmly rooted in seduction. Even the walks in the mist-shrouded forests bring a quickening of the pulse that can't always be attributed to unease.Possibly my fascination for this collection of stories within a story comes from seeing it for the first time when sexuality was foremost in my own mind. That said, it is classified as a horror movie and has a couple of impressive wolf transformations that haven't aged too badly, though they distracted me from my preferred focus of the Gothic ambiance. In my world Beauty and the Beast wouldn't have been totally ruined by the Beast becoming yet another bland Prince, and the happy couple would have embraced their attraction and maybe popped out a few puppies or something. But then I would have preferred Beauty to have not been put off by her beau having a bit of extra fur on him. Likewise, when the wronged 'witch' in one of the tales exposes the vile aristocracy for the savage beasts they truly are, and thereby commanding the respect she deserved, then I, for one, cheered her on.If I were to have one criticism it would be this : the movie is often interpreted as having a feminist bias, with the men all being portrayed as beasts in disguise, cruel brutes, or seducers. Whilst I can see why a confused and blossoming pubescent girl may see things this way it's only balanced by a quote from Rosaleen's mother that goes, "It there's a beast in men it meets it's match in women too."Things this film has taught me? 1) If his eyebrows meet in the middle and he speaks with an accent then he wants in her pants. And 2) "My, what big teeth......." leads exactly where you'd expect it to.Some fabulous little performances all round, but you don't really watch it for the Oscar winning acting. Give it a go, you might actually like it if you have a taste for the quirky with a slight under-taste of perverse.