Alpha or Omega?
DIRECTED BY LEIGH WHANNELL/2025
January is notoriously the “dump month” for films—where studios release projects not expected to perform well. Despite this, I purchased a ticket to Leigh Whannell’s Wolf Man to see for myself.
Let’s not bury the lede: the movie is fine. It’s not a waste of time, but it doesn’t fully qualify as an engaging cinematic experience either. The first 20 minutes are laden with dry, drawn-out exposition that feels unnecessary. This method of foundational storytelling can be effective when it delivers scares, plot-critical revelations, or emotional depth—but Wolf Man struggles to provide any of these early on.
The film opens with Blake’s (Christopher Abbott) childhood, where his father (Sam Jaeger) raises him in a cold, militaristic fashion, preparing him to survive a beast lurking in the woods. While this setup has potential, it lacks emotional resonance or urgency. A scare, a shocking revelation, or a pivotal plot detail could have elevated the scene, but instead, it feels hollow. In my opinion, a flashback or subtle dialogue could have better conveyed Blake’s upbringing without bogging down the pacing.
The narrative then shifts to present-day Blake:
– His estranged father in Oregon is declared legally dead after years of being missing.
– Blake’s wife, Charlotte (Julia Garner), is a workaholic, creating distance in their marriage.
– Blake is a devoted stay-at-home dad to their daughter, Ginger (Matilda Firth).
Blake decides to return to Oregon with his family to clear out his father’s belongings, hoping the trip will rekindle his relationship with Charlotte and help her bond with Ginger.
Once the family crashes their moving van in the woods, the real story begins: Blake is attacked by the wolf man, marking the start of his rapid and harrowing transformation. The remainder of the film explores his descent into beastliness, but it’s padded with filler that fails to fully flesh out the characters or plot. Christopher Abbott’s portrayal of Blake is pitch-perfect, but the weak script and disjointed storyline leave him with little to work with.
The movie’s most interesting moments occur during Blake’s transformation. From his perspective, his vision becomes ultraviolet, voices become incomprehensible, and fear consumes him. To his family, however, he appears wild-eyed and incoherent, believing he’s communicating while speaking gibberish. These moments were captivating and original, something I wish Whannell could have maintained throughout the runtime.
One standout scene involves Blake investigating noises in the house, only to realize he’s hearing the steps of a spider in a closet. Subtle moments like this effectively convey his deteriorating humanity without overreliance on the spectacle of physical transformation. The practical effects and creature design are solid, and the gradual loss of Blake’s humanity is convincingly portrayed.
As for some nitpicky observations I can’t overlook—while much of the dialogue works, there are moments that made me chuckle for the wrong reasons. For instance, the 10-year-old daughter, Ginger, refers to Blake as “dada” in one scene, which felt oddly out of place and raised an eyebrow. Another moment comes when Charlotte tries to ground Blake during his transformation, desperately listing all the things she can’t do without him before delivering the line, “I guess what I’m trying to say is… I love you.” This overly melodramatic, soap-opera-style exchange pulled me out of the story entirely. At times, the heavy-handed dialogue made it difficult to connect with the narrative on an emotional level.
I also have to mention that the acting—Christopher Abbott aside—isn’t particularly strong. Julia Garner’s portrayal of Charlotte feels lackluster, though I’m unsure if that’s due to her performance or the limitations of the material she was given. The daughter’s performance is serviceable for most of the film but falters when the scene demands emotional depth. On the other hand, I found Sam Jaeger’s portrayal of the hardened father convincing. However, after discussing the film with others, it seems not everyone shared that sentiment.
With all of this in mind… let’s get into spoiler territory.
The reveal that the wolf man stalking them is Blake’s father is predictable from the start. The narrative attempts to derive emotional weight from Blake’s fear of becoming like his father—angry, unkind, and distant—but the transparent plot undermines this effort. By the climax, in a final act of humanity, Blake urges Charlotte to shoot him, fully aware of the monster he has become. Unfortunately, the emotional impact of this moment is dulled by the overly foreseeable storyline.
This premise—exploring transformation as a metaphor for something more human—has been handled with far more depth in other films. David Cronenberg’s The Fly (1986) immediately comes to mind. In The Fly, the transformation is a heart-wrenching descent into monstrosity that elicits genuine sympathy. Wolf Man never quite achieves this emotional impact, as it struggles to make its characters feel relatable or its story compelling through the lens of generational trauma and parenthood.
As my friend Paul Hibbard aptly put it, the film feels like “cinematic dead air.”
That said, I remain a Leigh Whannell fan. The Saw franchise is my favorite, The Invisible Man (2020) was a masterful reimagining, and Upgrade (2018) was a fun ride. However, Wolf Man feels like his weakest directorial effort to date. Even Insidious: Chapter 3 delivered memorable scares and maintained engagement throughout.
While Wolf Man fell flat for me, I still appreciate Whannell’s ambition to reimagine horror classics. Here’s hoping his next venture captures the magic he’s more than capable of delivering.