Modern day or not, the ancient Greek gods of Mount Olympus ( now residing on the 600th floor of the Empire State Building ) and the legendary monsters of the classic ages sudeenly are a very real part of high school student Percy Jackson's ( Logan Lerman ) life. There's a disaster -  Zeus' ( Sean Bean ) lightning bolt has been stolen, and dyslexic, ADHD 12 year-old Percy is the prime suspect. But Percy has other more pressing problems..the sudden disappearance of his mother Sally ( Catherine Keener) and the revelation that he is a demi-god, the son of Poseidon ( Kevin McKidd ) the god of the sea and earthquakes!

Okay, I’ll admit it, it was a cheap date for my wife and myself. But, it was also a much better movie. I know this will sound odd to some, but to those who know me, they realize I rather listen to a top notch polka band than a ho-hum garage band even if they are covering all my favorites. Quality will out. Let’s talk about a good film tonight.

As you might expect, some people end up happy, and some don’t. Almost all of the storylines criss-cross multiple times, making the film much more fun as one wonders, who’s going to find love, who isn’t, and with or without whom? Veteran director Garry Marshall ("Pretty Woman," "The Princess Diaries") explained his reason for making the film this way:

"Some people think Valentine’s Day is the best thing and others try and block it out. It means different things to different people. The other holidays are all clearer. Christmas, we decorate a tree, you give me a present, we sing nice songs, go home, go to bed. New Year’s Eve, you drink, you kiss at 12:00, sing Auld Lang Syne and cry, go home, go to bed. That’s simple. Got it. But Valentine’s Day is vague. It’s a hard holiday to define because love is so hard to define and that’s why it makes for a good story. Why not do a romantic comedy about the day we’re all concentrated on romance, and that’s ‘Valentine’s Day.’"

And, in a rather large nutshell, that is what the film is about, an attempt to simply distill what love means in this wacky world of ours. Still, this doesn’t tell you if the picture is any good or not. In my estimation, and that of my cheap date’s, it is. Here’s why.

First off, Marshall has assembled a tremendous cast. No, it’s not every A-lister in Hollywood, but it is a perfect bunch for this type of film. The roster includes: Jessica Alba, Kathy Bates, Jessica Biel, Bradley Cooper, Eric Dane, Patrick Dempsey, Jamie Foxx, Jennifer Garner, Topher Grace, Ashton Kutcher, Queen Latifah, Taylor Lautner, George Lopez, Shirley MacLaine, Emma Roberts, Taylor Swift, Hector Elizondo, Anne Hathaway and Julia Roberts.   Now, obviously no one actor gets a whole lot of screen time, but in a way that’s part of what keeps things interesting. Most will be hoping that Julia Roberts will get more time than she does. Her storyline is by far the most intriguing, and the one that gets the least screen time (which, of course, helps make it so darn intriguing).

There isn’t a whole lot more one can say about a film like this, either, without starting to give things away. The soundtrack is filled with great old songs, all of which are very well placed to enhance, rather than dominate, scenes. The cinematography is clean, the editing practical. The writing is snappy, the dialogue fresh and interesting for the most part.  There is one negative, and that’s the missed opportunity to end the film on a happy note rather than a vulgar one. It’s sad that after doing such a fine job throughout the filmmakers had to take their one single cheap shot at the very end, but that’s what keeps this one from standing a chance at becoming a rival to "Love, Actually" instead of just a copy.

Still, it is a wonderful date movie. It’s funny, it’s touching, it’s sweet. Bad guys get what they deserve, and so do the good ones. It’s worth seeing, and someone was smart enough to take the taste of the ending out of the mouths of the true romantics by padding the end credits with a bunch of funny out-takes. Enjoy, everyone.    Our final word: 4 stars out of 5.

  This new version based on this 1941 endeavor from the same studio deals once more with the theory of lycanthropy and stars Benicio Del Toro in the title role. Appearing with him are Anthony Hopkins, Emily Blunt, and Hugo Weaving. Finished and scheduled for release in November of 2008, this film underwent much editing and reshooting of scenes, delaying release until now. Reports also had it that the studio wouldn’t show any part of the movie nor grant interviews. Indeed, secretive measures if true. Things like this are a tip-off to a bad film, but on the contrary, this one is beautifully accomplished holding interest throughout and moving along at a brisk pace.  The title character, a man transformed into a blood-thirsty werewolf, a hirsute killing machine, did not come out of the gothic fiction of the 19th century, but rather was put together from ages of superstition, myths, and folk tales. We did empathize with poor Larry at the end; it wasn’t his fault as to what was happening to him having had no control over the transformation. But he would arise again in sequel after sequel, even combined with the other created Universal monsters in creature fests we have come to love, until ultimately he like so many other scary creatures came face to face with -- Abbott and Costello.

 “THE WOLFMAN” 2010 is based on the screenplay of the classic 1941 film. Here again is Lawrence Talbot (Benicio Del Toro), a nobleman in 1891 England returning to his family estate when his brother Ben goes missing. His father Sir John Talbot (Anthony Hopkins) and his brother’s fiancée Gwen Conliffe (Emily Blunt) wait there, and it is Gwen who found Lawrence in London acting on stage with his own theater company and convinced him to help find his brother, her missing love. There appears to be some mysterious beast lurking around the Talbot estate. The creature possesses enormous brute strength, bloodlust and ( like any dedicated monster ) a penchant for killing the villagers. Even the Scotland Yard inspector who worked the Ripper case, Inspector Abberline (Hugo Weaving), is investigating the ghastly situation. In his investigation, Lawrence learns of an ancient curse and sets out to destroy the vicious creature in the Blackmoor's forbidding woods. But you know as well as I do what the result of his quest will be, especially since there appear to be many, many skeletons in the Talbot family closet - some of them with a lot of hair.

Special effects, costumes, makeup, and color add greatly to this current retelling of the tale. Well done are the acrobatics on rooftops in London as the creature moves at great speed. There are some differences and liberties taken from the 1941 version, but this one is a motion picture that stands on its own merits. A remarkable remake of the older version that will thrill modern audiences with what it has to offer. Be aware that there are some gory 
scenes including heads lopped off bodies and entrails aplenty, but that’s how it is with the horror genre audience today: graphic and gory.

TRIVIA: 
1. What a cast that 1941 classic version of “THE WOLF MAN” had! In addition to Lon Chaney, Jr. in a star-making performance, the role he would play five more times, the others in the cast were Evelyn Ankers, Claude Rains, Patric Knowles, Ralph Bellamy, Bela Lugosi, Maria Ouspenskaya, and Warren William ( who went on to be the first Perry Mason ).

2. The 1941 film separated in the title the creature’s name: “THE WOLF MAN.” This new version makes it one word: “THE WOLFMAN.”

3. Fox Film made a silent "Wolf Man"werewolf movie in 1924 with John Gilbert and Norma Shearer, but no symopsis is available.

The Story: It’s the 1890s in England, and there’s a werewolf terrorizing the countryside. With three people murdered, the entire village has its theories. Many of these center around the camp of gypsies which showed up just before the killings began. Some say it’s magic, others blame the dancing bear.   One of the victims is Ben the brother of our hero Lawrence Talbot (Benicio del Toro). Ben's grief-stricken fiancée Gwen (Emily Blunt) writes to 
Lawrence who just happens to be in the country for a spell withhis theater company to let him know of his brother’s murder. Lawrence, who hasn’t been home in ages due to dark troubles between himself and his eccentric father Sir John (Anthony Hopkins), comes back immediately, determined to discover the truth and fearing the worst.

Dad seems happy enough to see sonny boy show up and their meeting is polite enough, but before long it’s time to get back to the business of crafting a horror movie. And, with "The Wolfman," that means having the creature show up and bite Lawrence so he can be as cursed as the beast. This happens and, outside of the arrival of a big city London's Inspector Abberline (Hugo Weaving) who’s been sent to investigate, things begin to go downhill.   To clarify "downhill," let me first say that in many superficial ways this one has a lot going for it. The special effects are, as you most likely suspect from the previews, are absolutely stunning--and not just the transformation sequences. The action of the running werewolves, the choreography of the various fights and scenes of slaughter, et cetera, are well handled, ingeniously laid out to the point where one can not take their eyes from the screen.

The homages to the original film, especially in the way the new werewolves ( a combo of Rick Baker's talent and CGI ) reflect the original make-up, are carefully constructed and appreciated by we older viewers. Costuming, sets and locations, props--everything of this nature clearly illustrates the advantages of the typical expertise of a big budget studio production. There are also many wonderfully interesting touches in the manner in which much of the movie is filmed. Dream sequences and memories are handled in highly original manners. The creature attacks are accomplished at an incredibly high speed. Impossible to follow, they are paid off in a rain of scattered intestines and organs which come across as realistic and necessary proof that something happened, not the usual tossing of meat and blood against a wall simply to hear it stick.

The actors all do a fine job as well. It’s a top notch cast doing their usual excellent work and, Del Toro is to be complimented for putting on just enough extra weight so as to reflect the general appearance of Lon Chaney, Jr. in the classic film. Even Danny Elfman’s soundtrack is a step above some of the work he seems to have phoned in over the past decade.   The problem with this one is simply sloppy story-telling. The family dog, for instance, seems to like people who are werewolves, and not like those who aren’t, except that sometimes it seems to have the opposite taste, to the point where the dog just seems stupid. Another oddity is the fact that it comes out early in the film that Lawrence was put into an asylum after he found his dead mother in his father’s arms. Later in the film, it slips out that young Lawrence had denounced his father as a werewolf while in the asylum.

If this is the case, then why come home pretending to be looking for his Ben’s killer when he knows who it is? Why also pretend to be happy to see his father. And, more importantly, why if so many villagers are willing to believe their troubles are being created by supernatural forces, do none of them remember young Lawrence calling his dad a werewolf the last time people were being slaughtered? Even worse, why do they assume Lawrence is the werewolf when he was with them getting chewed upon by a werewolf?   Like I said, sloppy, sloppy. 

It’s a real shame, for this is one of those movies like 1950's "The Fly" that was just screaming out for a remake. It was a solid story with no budget to make a good movie. Well, Jeff Goldblum’s performance will long outshine that of Al ( david ) Hedison, but Lon Chaney, Jr. will never be forgotten as The Wolf Man in five films and an episode of TV's Route 66.

Our final word: 3 stars out of 5.