Rating: 
Summary: OH, PLEASE GNAW ON ME MR. WOLF!!
Review: .
Not a drama, not a thriller, definitly not a horror film, well, what then? You got it, a comedy in way too many acts. Our big bad wolves run around the forrest with their tails sewn to their ratty, not-so-fur-like-mid-moth-eaten -coats and yap like foxes instead of wolves calls.I admit I was the one doing the howling. The only acting I was able to pick up on was the two elderly ladies and they snarled and howled more than the wolves. Actually they were waiting at GMAWS house to eat the wolves... I say, if you ever have a little...get-together for a film fest, this would get everyone off-(no not that off), on a light note. You could spend hour's picking it to pieces....and howling!!
I gave it a (one)* And a 'shame-on-you', kick- in- the- cinematic- reels for wasting so much celluloid.
This has set the 'gay motion picture' back to the dark ages. There were three rich guys plus Boy George who got together ,
this was their first movie and hopefully their last...
ciao yaaah 69
Rating: 
Summary: A Howling Success
Review: A beautifully written and filmed feature that intelligently explores homophobia and hypocrisy through an allegory that reworks Little Red Riding Hood amongst the Shropshire Hills. The Wolves of Kromwer focuses on the relationship between Seth and Gabriel, two gay wolves, their supposed murder of the local lady of the manor and the resulting wolf hunt. Imaginative script with surreal comic touches. Well acted and good characterisation. Involving and thought provoking. Premiered at Sundance Film Festival. Charles Lambert (writer and producer) is a man I am expecting great things of in the future.
Rating: 
Summary: A great movie - beautiful, funny, odd
Review: I first saw this film at a film festival a few years ago, and have looked forward to getting it on DVD since. It's a beautiful movie - the settings and scenes are lush and rich, and the characters are all wonderful - from sexy young men to ridiculous old ladies. It's a fairy-tale-esque story with wolves as an allegory to gay men, with a nicely intertwined story of some elderly ladies plotting to kill their mistress. It's not just worth watching, it's worth watching more than once!
Rating: 
Summary: Significant Disappointment
Review: I saw this film before its release, at the New York Lesbian and Gay Film Festival. It sticks in my mind still because of its trite, fully derivative, predictable, and tedious plot. I cannot recommend the film...
Rating:
Summary: A Werewolf Movie with No Bite
Review: I'm going to keep this review short as the movie doesn't deserve more than that. I didn't care for it. I've watched it 2 2/3 times. The first time, I was underwhelmed. I then watched it with the director/writer commentary. Their insights, such as they were, did not improve my initial assessment. After many months, I took one more look (this sometimes helps me reassess previous feelings about movies. ....P>As an allegory for the gay experience, it's unexceptional at best. As a retelling of fairy tales, it's weak. Some of the direction is appealing, but the design and the script are unexceptional. My advice: move on. There are much better movies about werewolves. There are much better movies about being gay. (C)2002 Joe Edkin
Rating:
Summary: A Werewolf Movie with No Bite
Review: I'm going to keep this review short as the movie doesn't deserve more than that. I didn't care for it. I've watched it 2 2/3 times. The first time, I was underwhelmed. I then watched it with the director/writer commentary. Their insights, such as they were, did not improve my initial assessment. After many months, I took one more look (this sometimes helps me reassess previous feelings about movies. ....P>As an allegory for the gay experience, it's unexceptional at best. As a retelling of fairy tales, it's weak. Some of the direction is appealing, but the design and the script are unexceptional. My advice: move on. There are much better movies about werewolves. There are much better movies about being gay. (C)2002 Joe Edkin
Rating:
Summary: Crying Wolf: disappointing and over rated
Review: If you are looking for Queer as Folk with fangs and claws, this is not it. I bought the movie The Wolves of Kroven thinking it was promising story of love and persecution with a somewhat happy ending. It's also sold in a visually attractive package with an eye catching picture of the stars on the cover and let's not mention the five reviews. It's nothing like it. The movie that is neither comedy, parody or horror. The plot has so many gaps is ridiculous, the relationship between the two main characters is superficial. This is sold like a gay film but the subject of gay love is passed on until the very end, correction, the very disappointing and somewhat ridiculous end. If you want to see a something with a script that best describes the deepest emotions in a relationship of two men, just watch South Park or Queer as Folk (USA). The writers of those two programs can express the deepest feelings of gay love in a few minutes more than this mediocre movie attempted in it's 100 minutes. And by the way, don't expect any good making out scenes.
Rating: 
Summary: Beasts Fight for Love.
Review: In a small village there were once a couple of young beasts that fell in love with one another. However, as in all macabre love stories there is a mob that has been blinded by the emotional and moral confusion that has been created by an evil force. The question is whether the beasts will be able to live their life and love each other, or if they will be murdered in the end.
Rating:
Summary: Inaccurate Euphemisms of Negative Stereotypes & Homophobia
Review: The 1998 independent film "The Wolves of Kromer", directed by Will Gould and written by Charles Lambert and Matthew Read, is neither a horror film nor a film about werewolves in general. Instead, the "wolves" in the film are nothing more than a euphemism for the gay community at large. The two main wolf characters, Gabriel (James Layton in his only film) and Seth (Lee Williams in his film career debut), meet each other in the woods outside of the fictional town of Kromer, which is where many other wolves also live. (By the way, all of the wolves are gay males.) They spend their time wandering woods and resorting to petty theft (for the most part) to obtain money, clothing and food. Do they ever transform into wolves as in a typical werewolf film? No, instead they spend their time talking and walking around barefooted and always wearing cheap, second-hand faux fur coats with attached tails and beat-up shorts. Of Kromer's "human" residents (who, by the way are all straight or deeply closeted), the film focuses upon a sick bedridden woman named Mrs Drax (Rosemarie Dunham), her housekeeper that is trying to kill her named Fanny (Rita Davies), Fanny's dimwitted diabetic friend Doreen (Margaret Towner) and Kromer's Christian priest (Kevin Moore). As the film's story unfolds, Fanny intends to blame the impending murder of Mrs. Drax upon the wolves; and since the townsfolk regard the wolves as being inhuman, they can be hunted and killed.
Though some viewers have described this film as being a modern-day romantic fairy tale, in actuality, the film (which was poorly acted, written and directed), is nothing more than an exploitation of long-standing negative stereotypes of the gay and straight communities. Why? First, the "wolves" are viewed by everyone else as being inhuman animals. Second, the "wolves" are portrayed as being nothing more than criminals with no ethical center of any kind. Third, the "wolves" are preoccupied with immediate gratification and promiscuous partying. Fourth, the "wolves" are unworthy of being treated the same as everyone else. Fifth, if the "wolves" are subhuman, then there are no penalties for killing them. On the contrary, the Kromer townsfolk encourage such behavior. Sixth, the ridiculous costumes that all of the "wolves" always wear are akin to some people's stereotype of all gay men being drag queens. Consequently, this film is nothing more than an insult and disservice to both the gay and straight communities at large because only a very small minority of real gay men actually fit into this film's very negative stereotypes and only a minority of the actual straight community at large is as homophobic and hypocritical as this film depicts. Therefore, I can only rate this film with 1 out of 5 stars for being grossly inaccurate, poorly acted and completely unsympathetic. Not surprisingly, neither Will Gould nor James Layton have had any other involvement in any other film since "The Wolves of Kromer". If you watch the film, look for the obvious blooper of when James Layton is wearing tennis shoes (instead of being barefoot) while driving a stolen motorcycle. (He's barefoot when he & Lee Williams get onto it, but wearing shoes while driving it moments later.) My advice: save your money and time for something better.
Rating:
Summary: Wolves of Kromer
Review: The acting was alright, the premise--werewolves as a metaphor for homosexuality--was brilliant, but the plot had a painful amount of holes and unexplained, underdevoloped ideas and events. Basically, I loved the characters but the script needs to be edited a lot.
| 
