It seems like the entire online world is caught up in Wolfman fever. I don't think I have read a single negative thing about this remake, except for that brief period when Brett Ratner was attached. Every photo, every interview is eagerly devoured -- yikes, did not mean to make that pun.

One of the producers, Scott Stuber, spoke to Empire about the movie and dropped more than a few tantalizing hints about where this remake is going. The best news? Practically no CGI! Stuber says, "We really want to stick to the physical stuff. So much of what we're trying to accomplish is that when Benicio is the wolf, you really know it's Benicio Del Toro and you have the eyes and the emotion of what he is. That way you don't disassociate your emotion and you realise that the person, Lawrence Talbot, who you've got to know in the daytime is still Lawrence Talbot at night. That way you're empathetic towards him, you're angry towards him, you feel for him."

More after the jump ...

Entertainment Weekly has just unveiled the first two photos (second pic after the jump) of Benicio Del Toro as The Wolfman, along with a pretty sweet interview with famed makeup artist Rick Baker on how he went about updating the look 67 years after the first big-screen Wolfman hit theaters. Joe Johnston (Jurassic Park 3) directs this latest version, which also stars Anthony Hopkins, Emily Blunt and Hugo Weaving. The makeup looks absolutely insane; especially in the second photo which creeps the living hell out of me. Do we even need to tell you the story? Dude becomes a wolfman and craziness ensues. Unfortunately, we'll have to wait all the way until February 13, 2009 to watch this sucker come to life in theaters.

Head over to EW to check out larger versions of each pic, as well as to read that Rick Baker interview.

There are casting announcements that make you howl with despair (I'm looking at you, Wolverine) and there are ones that restore your faith in the magic of movies. This is one of those.

Variety has announced that Hugo Weaving will be bringing his deep and scary voice to Universal's upcoming remake of The Wolfman, and taking on the role of Detective Aberline. (Cue all the Matrix, "Evening, Mr. Talbot" jokes as Aberline hunts Talbot across the moors.)

Weaving rounds out an already impressive cast of Benicio Del Toro, Emily Blunt, and Anthony Hopkins. I know for many, the thought of touching those classic monster movies is complete sacrilege, but if you are going to do a remake, it doesn't get any better than this. Hopefully, Mark Romanek's departure is the only calamity to befall this production and it make a painless transformation (ha ha) to the big screen.

The only flaw remaining is that February release date. I'm glad studios are now realizing people like to see good films in all the months of the year, but The Wolfman really ought to command an October or November release. The atmosphere is just ripe for some Gothic horror. And some of us don't want to see the 25th Saw installment.

"He's a male bimbo. He's a mimbo!"

Following last week's Wolfman fiasco, a friend of mine asked me whether I thought Brett Ratner would ever direct another big-budgeted film again. And when I say big-budgeted, I'm talking action, adventure, big stars -- the type of film with franchise potential. It's no secret the internet pretty much despises this man. For those who might not remember, director Mark Romanek dropped out of The Wolfman recently, and a whole bunch of directors were in talks to replace him. At the top of that list was Brett Ratner -- and once sites like AICN got hold of that news, all hell broke loose. Harry Knowles (in an un-Knowles-like hate-spewed rant) went off on Ratner, how he's a cruddy director and that Universal would be idiots to bring him on. Eventually, Jurassic Park III director Joe Johnston took over the project.

But not before the internet (including sites like ours and many others) went off on the Ratner decision. Word is Universal was pretty taken aback by all the hostility, and, in the end, it may or may not have played into their decision to go in a different direction. After all, do they really want months of Ratner bashing when their film has been awarded with nothing but love up until this point? I wouldn't want that. Who would? And that's what brings me to this question: With all the major movie sites in agreement that Ratner is the worst choice for practically any film, will this hurt the dude's future career behind the camera?

It's a very weird place to be in for a major studio, because, in all honesty, the guy's films bring in lots of money. Mass audiences are attracted to his name. But, going forward, will there be a studio willing to deal with all the Ratner web bashing in order to make it to theaters in the hopes that their marketing department could defeat all the bad word of mouth? Rush Hour 4 aside, do you think Brett Ratner will ever direct a big-budgeted fanboy film again?

I always love it when Brett Ratner's name gets tossed into the pot with regards to a new, hip fanboy-ish project, because the fanboys run out to cry foul. It hasn't seemed to hurt his career, though, since moviegoers still flock to his flicks because the studios tend to sell them well with flashy trailers and whatnot. The latest flurry of Ratner rage was brought on by a story over at AICN which claims the director is Universal's choice to replace Mark Romanek on The Wolfman. Harry Knowles, who broke the news (and says it comes from a very reliable source), makes a pretty good argument as to why the studio should let Ratner's name go in one ear and out the other.

Knowles says, "Brett Ratner makes watchable films. Movies that go through your system as if consumed off a soapy plate. They're empty - hollow works. He's a terrible ACTOR's director. His basement is a disco, and the Wolfman has no disco in his soul. This is a PERIOD film - to make a convincing period film you need a director for an eye for details... Someone that knows this world and period. X3 was a financial success - but that was based on an incredibly successful franchise by Singer. Ratner killed it." Although I'm not as attached to The Wolfman as others are, I completely agree with Knowles opinion of the guy. Ratner's a joke -- he'll make your film look pretty, like the last girl left in the bar after six hours worth of vodka shots. But when you wake up next to her the next morning, the guilt -- coupled with a massive hangover -- leads to regret. Why, exactly, did I pay $10 bucks to watch that piece of sh*t? Oh yeah, the trailer looked good.

While the news is not official yet, there's definitely enough here to hurt your ears. Here's hoping Universal listens to the cries and goes in a different direction. What do you think?

Happy Halloween from Cinematical! As a special treat, we've put together this gallery of some of the great movie monsters, from Lon Chaney Sr. as the Phantom in the 1925 silent film The Phantom of the Opera, to Lon Chaney Jr. as The Wolfman. We have an array of Dracula's, from Nosferatu (1922 and 1979 versions) to Dracula (Bela Lugosi, Christoper Lee, Frank Langella, and Gary Oldman -- who do you like best?). We have a slew of evil children and evil adults in the mix as well. Tell us who your favorite movie monsters are, and who we missed including in our gallery.

If you missed catching any of our Spooktacular Halloween Coverage, you can catch up with it all right here! And don't forget to let out your own inner monster by entering our fabulous Halloween Costume Contest.