This whole film is barely watchable. It stinks of feminist propaganda, and takes every opportunity to make men in general look bad. It lacks the mystery, imagination and tension that you'd expect from a horror film. Instead, it has more of the feel of a drama film. It looks quite cartoonish, and only kids would probably enjoy this, simply because they wont see all the pc and all the propaganda. Any adult with enough selfrespect not to want a ton of feminist propaganda shoved down their throat will find this unwatchable.The werewolf is highly unrealistic and looks more like a character from a computer game, down to the way it attacks, with fists like some kind of martial arts fighter. I would recommend the howling series of films rather than this work of vomit-inducing political correctness and feel-good cute-dog-is-the-hero garbage.

One man's struggle to contain the curse he hides within... and his last-ditch attempt to free himself with the love of family. But when it looks as if he is losing his battle, and endangering all he holds most dear, the family dog is the last hope for his family's survival... and the end to his Werewolf curse.The movie made many significant changes from the novel, particularly in the make-up of the family, which in the novel consisted of two parents and three children, as well as the dog, who sees the family as his pack, which must be defended at all costs. The dog's perceptions of events are treated in great detail, as is the relationship between him and his human family, and his confusion as to whether the werewolf is a threat to his family that must be eliminated, or a pack member who must be respected. These subtleties mainly did not make it into the film.This film got bad reviews and bombed at the box office. I won't say it's the greatest werewolf film, but it is far from the worst. The opening scene should have garnered it some fans... that's a rather intense gore scene. Now, allegedly a few seconds were cut out. If that's true, I can only imagine how intense that would be. (Director's cut, perhaps?) Worth checking out. If nothing else, it is better than some better-known 1990s werewolf films, like "American Werewolf in Paris".

There aren't a lot of horror movies, if any, with this children's premise of having an animal be the strong, sympathetic, main lead character. No joke too, the storyline was based around the pooch, the dog having the most screen time, a defiant personality and interaction with all the characters in the movie. Although the movie feels like a kid's movie at points, it's definitely not, having a graphic sex scene and some very gory kill shots. This odd fusion of genres is probably why Bad Moon hit theaters with such moderate success.Bad Moon is also different for its incredibly short run-time of just being over eighty minutes long, it does go by quickly and scenes that are shown are meaningful. The introduction is great, starts to fall apart in the middle but eventually saves itself close to the end. What is absolutely disgusting about the film is the horrible transformation scene that is quite possibly the worst I have ever seen in a werewolf movie, it was really, really bad. Bad Moon is certainly original but by no means a great werewolf film, probably wise to skip it.

First off, this movie is BAD. If you're attempting to work through the entire horror section of your local Blockbuster, feel free to give this one a pass. Even if you're a big fan of werewolf movies (as I am), there are better ones to be had, such as American Werewolf in Paris, or even Cursed with Christina Ricci.On to the movie! For starters, the acting in this is horrible - I didn't care a whit for anyone in it, and was puzzling throughout the whole thing why it took them so long to suspect the brother. He acted odd as soon as he reached their house to stay, and by the time they were sitting down to dinner after Thor (the German Sheperd) was taken away, he was acting like a serial killer, only minus the charisma. The lines the kid had were trite and pathetic, and perhaps it was just me, but I found the mother's eyebrows to be quite distracting - they were abnormally dark for the hair color, and screamed "Bad dye job! Bleach me please!". One would think that was a small thing, but watch and see - the camera seems to focus on them throughout the movie, and it was truly distracting. To sum up the acting, perhaps it was the screen writer's fault, but one could pretty much predict what they were going to say a mile off, and I was pretty much hoping for a 'rocks fall, everyone dies' ending by say, the middle of the movie. Best actor was the dog who played Thor, hands down.Scare factor for this movie? 2/10. I tend to jump during scary movies, and though I felt a small bit of unease throughout the thing, there was no point where I even flinched. It's just "Oh, there's the werewolf again, whoopee." And when I say 'unease', don't think the feeling of overwhelming malice in awesome Japanese horror movies, it was a very tiny fraction of that. Personally, there were a small handful of scenes where body parts/gore were seen, and there was a stupid and pointless sex scene in the first 10 minutes (And wow, you get to see a NIPPLE, dude! Booobs!) - thus, I fail to see why this wasn't given a PG-13 rating. If a kid over 10 or 11 sees this, they're not going to be scarred for life, trust.F/X? Well, definitely not as bad as The Howling, but not really anything to write home about, either. The initial werewolf we see in the Amazon looks HORRIBLE. I'd expect to see something like that in a b-movie 70's flick. I will give a bit more credit to the transformation scene much later in the movie, (where the sister discovers her brother is the werewolf) which at least made me stop and examine it, and finally give a nod of faint approval. Definitely not the most realistic thing I've ever seen, but there was a part close to the end of it where his head is all misshapen that made me raise my eyebrows in surprise.I also had to add a more personal bit about the emotional impact of this movie, or the lack thereof. I felt bad for none of the people who were killed - there was a logger doing a survey that got whacked before we found anything about him (after ignoring the alarming sounds of a large predator nearby, Darwin at work here), and a pointless fraud who provoked Thor in an attempt to sue the family who was killed later off-screen. Apparently there were 5 or 6 hikers/logging people who were also killed when the brother was out at the lake in his Airstream. The most horrible point in the movie was where Thor was being taken away by animal control, I really felt for his attempts to get back to his family and protect him from the Bad Person among them. Everybody acts in a manner that screams "Stop doing stupid things!", and wow, am I tired of seeing that in horror movies!I found out this movie was (loosely) based on a book, so perhaps that explains why it's so bad. Apparently, most of the family was cut out (2 kids, a cat, and a father, the latter of which I was wondering the story behind throughout the movie), and the book was from the viewpoint of Thor. Sounds like this is another one where you should read the book, and skip the movie - I know I'll be hunting down the book, myself, though it may be a small chore, since it appears to be out of print. I read a short summary for it, and it positively screams to me that all the interesting bits were hacked out for no particular reason.