Connect with us

Editorials

Release the Craven Cut: A History of Wes Craven’s ‘Cursed’ Werewolf Film

Published

on

Cursed Werewolf

With all the talk of Justice League and the notorious “Snyder Cut” finally being released next year, I decided it was time to really take a deep dive into one of horror’s greatest unseens: the elusive Wes Craven Cut of werewolf movie Cursed. More importantly though, I wanted to dive into the biggest question of all: does it even really exist?

We all know the stories surrounding Wes Craven’s re-teaming with Kevin Williamson for their werewolf picture. Trapped in an incredulous ‘production hell,’ Cursed ended up likening its namesake more than anyone ever would have guessed. Originally written in 2000, execs at Dimension claimed that it was going to reinvent the werewolf genre. It would be half a decade and four reshoots later before Cursed finally made its way to screens in the spring of 2005.

Williamson’s script was bought in 2000, sure, but it would be another two years before Craven was tapped and another half a year before shooting would start. Now, what was written, what was shot, and what we’ve seen are all three very different things. While lots of these elements were thought for a long time to be lost to the sands of time, as we march on, little bits and pieces continue to find the light of day. 

Williamson’s original script, which is vastly different from the final cut, can be found online here, among other places. Even this screenplay may have some discrepancies from the original, noted as the 2nd revision and updated in 2003, but the bulk of this movie shares very few similarities with the Cursed that would hit theaters two years later. I would highly encourage anyone interested to give it a read, as this feels much more like Williamson while also offering a much gorier and less goofy film. Some of the big scenes stay mostly similar; the initial car crash, Ellie and Jimmy realizing that something has changed about themselves, and even some of the climax don’t stray too far. Yet, it’s easy to approximate about eighty percent of the script does not line up. Ellie and Jimmy are not brother and sister in this version and the character of Jake doesn’t even exist, instead replaced by the burnout son of a millionaire, Vince. Many ancillary characters have larger roles, such as Scott Baio and Jenny (our girl from the beginning of the film version), and other characters are introduced that never found an on-screen counterpart, such as the butler Toby, the self titled “star f*cker” Becky and Vince’s deadbeat dad. 

The entire existence of the character Vince leads the movie in a completely different direction than the Cursed we know. It creates a dynamic between our three leads that isn’t seen on screen; Vince and Ellie become an item but he ultimately isn’t our big bad, and it allows Jimmy to have some separation and character growth outside of Ellie that feels right inside of Williamson’s wheelhouse. Now this isn’t the only drastic disparity. Yes, Joanie remains as the alpha werewolf, but now instead of Jake running around as a cub in the pack, Scott Baio is the subordinate wolf. Our entire climax is much more focused and less cluttered, still taking place in a wax museum but instead one that’s open already and merely closed at the time. Again, Williamson keeps a much tighter rein on the ending by reeling things in; less flash, more focus.

And that’s just the script! 

Cursed Jesse Eisenberg

Once actual production started, based on this original treatment from Williamson, Skeet Ulrich was tapped as the Vince character with Christina Ricci and Jesse Eisenberg still slotted as the roles that would come to life. A number of other actors were announced for the project and even filmed scenes but in what capacity and what role, still remains a mystery. While we have seen actual stills of Skeet Ulrich getting bitten by spectacular Rick Baker werewolves (we’ll get there), many of the other actors listed were either cut from the movie by Weinstein or Craven. While it’s easy to go back and see a who’s who of famous actors now, the original line-up is incredibly stacked. On top of Ulrich, we also had Omar Epps, Mandy Moore, Robert Forster, Illeana Douglas, Scott Foley, and horror vets Heather Langenkamp and Corey Feldman. According to an interview with Marc Shapiro in 2005, Craven mentions Freddie Prinze Jr. had been attached too – but that seems to be the only real mention of his involvement.

Dimension was notorious for jumping into filming before scripts were done, something that Craven and Williamson had experience with as they had done the same turnaround with Scream 2, and again this became a problem with Cursed. Execs decided the third act was too weak and asked Williamson to rewrite it, which is ironic because it’s one of the only portions from the original script that at least has the same general framework; this put the production into a four week halt. Dimension started interjecting and it led to Williamson essentially rewriting the entire script but again, this resulted in more delays as he was also finishing up the series finale of “Dawson’s Creek.” Four weeks turned into three months. 

To add more headaches to the mix, Rick Baker was let go (although some reports say he walked away from the project) and KNB was brought on to now replace all the practical werewolf effects with CG. It’s another unfortunate side effect of the production hell, as the CG werewolves were expensive and it cut much of their on-screen time down; and what remains didn’t exactly age well. By the end of the film, so many cuts and edits were made that it was trimmed down from a gory R to a more accessible PG-13.

Rick Baker’s design for the Judy Greer Werewolf

The constant stops and starts of the filming process had an exhaustive toll on Craven as well, who had already started the process in a bit of a funk. He was due to remake Kiyoshi Kurosawa’s Pulse but that had been pulled from him as well, eventually getting a writer credit on the film when it came out from director Jim Sonzero in 2006. In an interview with Eisenberg from Bloody Disgusting’s own Trace Thurman, it’s noted that they had four different reshoots, even making shirts for the fourth return that said “Cursed 4: Back For More.” The entire read is fascinating, and you can find it here. Eisenberg confirms what Craven had stated as well, that about ninety percent of what was filmed was canned before reshoots that lasted the length of most independent movies. The movie is still listed at $38 million for a budget but many suspect the number ballooned up much higher due to the continued reshoots.

Now we’re in the present. Cursed came out to mediocre fare, although this critic stands by his unabashed love for the finished project; but that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t absolutely love to see the mythic “Craven Cut.” Does anything like it actually exist? We know the footage is still out there. It’s been confirmed by numerous sources, mostly editor Patrick Lussier, who is now a big time horror director in his own right. After the horrendous acts of its owner, The Weinstein Company was forced to sell off its properties and Lantern Entertainment ended up with a large chunk of them, a reported 200+ films, so it stands to reason that Cursed is most likely somewhere with Lantern. When Meagan Navarro wrote her piece about director’s cuts that we deserve, it led to a number of us Craven fans once again touting the infamous cut of the film. Friend of mine Joshua Tonks posted a mock-up graphic for the film and Patrick Lussier popped in to let us know that “Sadly, this doesn’t exist the way you’d like it to.” Interpret that as you will. To me, it seems the footage may still technically exist but not in the complete vision that Craven would have wanted. 

Maybe we’ll never know. The further we get away from Cursed, the more we find out that certain things will be lost to the annals of time, especially with the tragic loss of Wes Craven in 2015. But I still remain optimistic that we’ll find a cure for this particular curse.

If it exists, it’s time to #ReleasetheCravenCut.

Editorials

Finding Faith and Violence in ‘The Book of Eli’ 14 Years Later

Published

on

Having grown up in a religious family, Christian movie night was something that happened a lot more often than I care to admit. However, back when I was a teenager, my parents showed up one night with an unusually cool-looking DVD of a movie that had been recommended to them by a church leader. Curious to see what new kind of evangelical propaganda my parents had rented this time, I proceeded to watch the film with them expecting a heavy-handed snoozefest.

To my surprise, I was a few minutes in when Denzel Washington proceeded to dismember a band of cannibal raiders when I realized that this was in fact a real movie. My mom was horrified by the flick’s extreme violence and dark subject matter, but I instantly became a fan of the Hughes Brothers’ faith-based 2010 thriller, The Book of Eli. And with the film’s atomic apocalypse having apparently taken place in 2024, I think this is the perfect time to dive into why this grim parable might also be entertaining for horror fans.

Originally penned by gaming journalist and The Walking Dead: The Game co-writer Gary Whitta, the spec script for The Book of Eli was already making waves back in 2007 when it appeared on the coveted Blacklist. It wasn’t long before Columbia and Warner Bros. snatched up the rights to the project, hiring From Hell directors Albert and Allen Hughes while also garnering attention from industry heavyweights like Denzel Washington and Gary Oldman.

After a series of revisions by Anthony Peckham meant to make the story more consumer-friendly, the picture was finally released in January of 2010, with the finished film following Denzel as a mysterious wanderer making his way across a post-apocalyptic America while protecting a sacred book. Along the way, he encounters a run-down settlement controlled by Bill Carnegie (Gary Oldman), a man desperate to get his hands on Eli’s book so he can motivate his underlings to expand his empire. Unwilling to let this power fall into the wrong hands, Eli embarks on a dangerous journey that will test the limits of his faith.


SO WHY IS IT WORTH WATCHING?

Judging by the film’s box-office success, mainstream audiences appear to have enjoyed the Hughes’ bleak vision of a future where everything went wrong, but critics were left divided by the flick’s trope-heavy narrative and unapologetic religious elements. And while I’ll be the first to admit that The Book of Eli isn’t particularly subtle or original, I appreciate the film’s earnest execution of familiar ideas.

For starters, I’d like to address the religious elephant in the room, as I understand the hesitation that some folks (myself included) might have about watching something that sounds like Christian propaganda. Faith does indeed play a huge part in the narrative here, but I’d argue that the film is more about the power of stories than a specific religion. The entire point of Oldman’s character is that he needs a unifying narrative that he can take advantage of in order to manipulate others, while Eli ultimately chooses to deliver his gift to a community of scholars. In fact, the movie even makes a point of placing the Bible in between equally culturally important books like the Torah and Quran, which I think is pretty poignant for a flick inspired by exploitation cinema.

Sure, the film has its fair share of logical inconsistencies (ranging from the extent of Eli’s Daredevil superpowers to his impossibly small Braille Bible), but I think the film more than makes up for these nitpicks with a genuine passion for classic post-apocalyptic cinema. Several critics accused the film of being a knockoff of superior productions, but I’d argue that both Whitta and the Hughes knowingly crafted a loving pastiche of genre influences like Mad Max and A Boy and His Dog.

Lastly, it’s no surprise that the cast here absolutely kicks ass. Denzel plays the title role of a stoic badass perfectly (going so far as to train with Bruce Lee’s protégée in order to perform his own stunts) while Oldman effortlessly assumes a surprisingly subdued yet incredibly intimidating persona. Even Mila Kunis is remarkably charming here, though I wish the script had taken the time to develop these secondary characters a little further. And hey, did I mention that Tom Waits is in this?


AND WHAT MAKES IT HORROR ADJACENT?

Denzel’s very first interaction with another human being in this movie results in a gory fight scene culminating in a face-off against a masked brute wielding a chainsaw (which he presumably uses to butcher travelers before eating them), so I think it’s safe to say that this dog-eat-dog vision of America will likely appeal to horror fans.

From diseased cannibals to hyper-violent motorcycle gangs roaming the wasteland, there’s plenty of disturbing R-rated material here – which is even more impressive when you remember that this story revolves around the bible. And while there are a few too many references to sexual assault for my taste, even if it does make sense in-universe, the flick does a great job of immersing you in this post-nuclear nightmare.

The excessively depressing color palette and obvious green screen effects may take some viewers out of the experience, but the beat-up and lived-in sets and costume design do their best to bring this dead world to life – which might just be the scariest part of the experience.

Ultimately, I believe your enjoyment of The Book of Eli will largely depend on how willing you are to overlook some ham-fisted biblical references in order to enjoy some brutal post-apocalyptic shenanigans. And while I can’t really blame folks who’d rather not deal with that, I think it would be a shame to miss out on a genuinely engaging thrill-ride because of one minor detail.

With that in mind, I’m incredibly curious to see what Whitta and the Hughes Brothers have planned for the upcoming prequel series starring John Boyega


There’s no understating the importance of a balanced media diet, and since bloody and disgusting entertainment isn’t exclusive to the horror genre, we’ve come up with Horror Adjacent – a recurring column where we recommend non-horror movies that horror fans might enjoy.

Continue Reading