Blood And Chocolate Movie
Storyline
TAGLINES
Temptation comes in many forms.
Everyone has two lives. The one we show the world. And the one that was never meant to be seen.
With the Five on her tail, a young beautiful werewolf named Vivian seeks peace in the arms of Aiden while escaping the never-ending infatuation Gabriel has on her. But when a string of accidental murders happen, this threatens to rip and expose her pack apart.
| Agnes Bruckner | Vivian |
| Hugh Dancy | Aiden |
| Olivier Martinez | Gabriel |
| Katja Riemann | Astrid |
| Bryan Dick | Rafe |
| Chris Geere | Ulf |
| Tom Harper | Gregor |
| John Kerr | Finn |
| Jack Wilson | Willem |
| Vitalie Ursu | Constani |
| Bogdan Voda | Albu |
| Kata Dobó | Beatrice |
| Rodica Mandache | Mrs. Bellagra |
| Helga Racz | Young Vivian |
| Lia Bugnar | Young Vivian's Mother |
| Katja von Garnier |
4.70 out of 10 (1145 votes)
Visitor Reviews
the worst movie in several years
posted on 30 Aug 2009can somebody kill me please!!!! is the worst movie i have ever seen a man killing dogs?? !!! there is only one good thing in the movie: The girl, thats it please don't waist your time watching this movie even if you like sci-fi don't do it...the wolfs are weaker than a Kittie, the guy is Rambo in an artist versionand now i have to write 10 lines to advice everyone about this piece crap? jeez!!i don't understand who can like this kind a bullshit, i was hoping the end of the movie rigth after it start
If you liked the book don't even think about watching this movie!
posted on 28 Aug 2009There were only two redeeming features about this movie; the beauty of Bucharest and its architecture, and the way they depicted the transformation from human form to wolf form. Forget about the plot or storyline from the book - they're completely absent from this movie. In fact, about the only things carried over from the book are the names of the main players. Even then you'll barely recognize the characterizations. If the film makers had made a good movie, even though unrelated to the book, I wouldn't have been so disappointed. Unfortunately, they did not. The plot and storyline are typical of low budget horror flicks, the acting is wooden, and the directorial efforts mundane. Oh yes, the way the loup garou bow to their leader is pure hoke. I suppose a nod of recognition is due for the animal handlers. The wolves were beautiful animals and well managed in their roles.
I did'nt read the book
posted on 24 Aug 2009First off, I don't get to go out to the movies much since I have kids. So to say that I wasted 2 hours of my life that I will never get back is an understatement. I read a lot of the comments here and most of the people have read the book and keep comparing it to the book. Because I haven't read it and have no plans to I can give an objective review of just the movie. The budget for this must have been around 2 dollars. The transformation from human to wolf was straight out of someones garage. When a lugaroo (or however you spell it) was human they had all these powers, like jumping (apparently they all like to jump a lot). But then they just turn into a regular wolf?? That makes no sense what so ever. This was in my top ten of worst movies ever made, its right up there with 28 days later.
oh em gee!
posted on 24 Aug 2009i don't know what to say? i read the book before i went and seen it, but oh em gee! it's nothing like the book! the peoples names are different, Kelly is not in the movie, they are out of high school it's set in Romania? not the states? it's i don't know but the guys were cute! and it didn't say nothing about Raf dieing in the book, and Gabriel didn't die either. Vivi did not end up with Aiden at the end of the book what was that? this movie was disappointing! i don't know why they did that? why make a movie based on a book and have nothing the same. i like the people choices though because they did good portraying the characters, but yeah no one was kinda the same.
I'm Glad I Didn't Let the Reviews Scare Me Away
posted on 18 Aug 2009While this probably won't go down as my favorite horror movie ever, I thought Blood and Chocolate was a very solid, interesting vampire story. It's kind of sad that people jump instantly to comparing it to Underworld. Underworld and Blood and Chocolate are both in the werewolf movie genre, but there are plenty of movies out there that are similar if viewed superficially. Think cop movies, or 99.9% of all romantic comedies. That doesn't mean that there isn't a lot of room for variation under those superficial similarities.Where I found Underworld to be lackluster, I really enjoyed Blood and Chocolate. It's true that there aren't a ton of special effects, but I personally found the transformation between man and wolf to be quite beautiful. I also thought that the characterization was interesting, the acting excellent, and the storyline compelling. These elements placed against the perfect dark romantic setting of Bucharest made for a very enjoyable movie.I'm glad I went ahead and saw this movie despite the negative comments and reviews. If you're expecting deep scares or blockbuster special effects, this is not the film for you. If you'd like a more thoughtful and introspective story that touches on the effects of living through violence and what it means to be different, outcast, and a member of a violent, isolated group, then this film is probably worth your time.
If you haven't read the book, you may like it.
posted on 14 Aug 2009A viable effort to turn one of the greatest supernatural teen books into a movie to capture a new audience, Blood and Chocolate has been changed from it's original form to be adapted to an older teen audience. The acting was good, the characters were interesting, and the story wasn't bad, but the changes that occurred are what make this film a problem. All the characters have become older, the location has changed, and there are a few really silly scenes, but the actors try to give it some depth and keep it alive. The directing was good, not the best I've seen, but not the worst. The screenplay had it's quarks, but I think if you haven't read the book you might enjoy this film for what it is. The hardest part about adapting a book is trying to keep the most important elements in it, which Blood and Chocolate has tried to do. Not the most horrible film ever, but not the best book adaption. 5 stars for good acting, some great shots and effort.
hardly like the book, but *can* be enjoyed
posted on 12 Aug 2009It's been said over and over that the movie is nothing like the book; this is essentially true. While the book had an ending that was both unexpected and much more realistic (in some ways) than what you expect, the movie has a fairly typical movie-like third act. This isn't totally a bad thing; in some ways, it made the story a bit easier to enjoy without too much thinking.That, really, is the key to enjoying Blood and Chocolate; don't turn off your brain, but don't try to make it any more than it is. The acting is fine, not great, not terrible, but serviceable. Everyone is suitably pretty, casting is solid. While it is sort of cheesy and not exactly an Oscar contender, nothing is too outrageous or schlocky. I've found that it is a good movie to watch if you feel like watching a movie and don't care what you pick up; there's some action, some horror (well, only vaguely,) some romance, some... something. An all-around "okay" movie, and not the worst worst way to spend an evening.
Worth watching if there is nothing great available.
posted on 12 Aug 2009I enjoyed this film. It isn't life changing, deep or even particularly thought provoking, but it does draw you in and keep you 'entertained' throughout.Many of the comments below extol the book and damn the film, you'd think they would know better to expect a fairly run of the mill film to outshine the fiction it was based on. I haven't read the book but I may now.The story is compassionate and attempts to re-consider the wolf-person theme by treating them as an oppressed minority, I couldn't help but think that they were a metaphor for the Roma, a thought that bears scrutiny I think.The cinematography was atmospheric and Bucharest became the star, lots of beautiful rococo buildings and a pleasantly eastern soundtrack. I kept wondering if the film wasn't a Hollywood offering because the characters all seem normal and manage to avoid behaving in the usual American manner (not an "oh my god" in earshot), but no, the ending isn't European.I was really pleasantly surprised with the beautiful human to wolf transitions, the makers restrained themselves from fx to the benefit of the film, it reminded me of the early eastern European fairytale films (the singing ringing tree). Don't be concerned about gore or substance abuse as mentioned below, there is little more blood than a few cut fingers and bloodstained clothing, and the only substance that gets abused is absinthe (which may well be an illegal substance in your country as it is here), it gets drunk sparingly, injected once and burnt fairly often. See this film.
wrong country
posted on 10 Aug 2009OK lets start out with location,location,location. I mean if you are going to make a film at least make sure you tell everyone the correct country ! At the beginning of the film it starts out by saying that they are in Romania,WRONG they are actually filming in Rome which would be cool and all but you can't let US know that by showing very noticeable landmarks that can only be found in Rome.The biggest one being the statue of Romulus and Remus and the mother wolf,they just happen to be the founders of Rome. And Romania and Rome arn't even close to each other or speak a remotly close language.Rome is a city and Romania is a country how do you screw up that bad ? But they do,which pretty much ruins the movie,so next time you watch pay closer attention to the beauty of Rome,NOT Romania !
Here we go loups-garoux.
posted on 04 Aug 2009Whilst researching a project in Bucharest, Aiden (Hugh Dancy), a handsome graphic novelist falls for the beautiful and enigmatic Vivian (Agnes Bruckner). The only problem is that she is a loup-garoux—a shape shifter who can take on the form of a wolf at will—and she has been promised to Gabriel, the leader of the pack (brmmm, brmmm!).I may be wrong, but I can't help but think that Blood and Chocolate has been designed specifically to exploit unconventional teens who, like the shape-shifting creatures in the film, are considered outcasts of mainstream society. The wolf-people are portrayed as attractive, noble creatures, part of an elite pack who believe themselves blessed and far superior to normal humans; when they hunt, it is the only dregs of humanity they feed upon, and they live by a strict code of honour. It's easy to see how non-conformist kids might identify with them... and be suckered into buying this crap.Call me a cynic, but I can almost hear the producers of this film calling like sirens to their target audience. "Hey there, little goth girl...", they whisper seductively on the night breeze, "fed up with writing melancholy poetry in your tear-stained journals? Done with painting your fingernails black to match your soul? Worn out your special edition DVD of The Craft? Don't worry... buy Blood and Chocolate; it'll make you feel special... wanted.... cool."Well, that sort of rubbish might fool some, but I can see this film for the clichéd, cheap, tedious, and rather predictable tosh that it is. After all, how good can a werewolf film be (for that is essentially what this is), without a prolonged and painful looking man-to-beast transformation scene?**Actually, I'm just kidding here... the shift from human to wolf was actually quite magical, and probably the best thing about the film.
Don't expected it to be a scary werewolf flick
posted on 31 Jul 2009I began watching this movie expecting it to be a somewhat scary werewolf flick like "The Howling". Instead it wound up being more like the movie "Wolfen" with Romance intertwined with it. In fact .. the romance of the movie between Aiden (a human graphic novel writer) and a chocolate candy store worker named Vivian, kept me interested in the film. If you looking for a good love story then this is your movie. If it's gore, guts, and howling ... you can forget it here. I felt like I could whip each and every wolf I saw in the film, bare handed ... well not exactly bare handed. Let's say with silver dust or a silver dagger in my hands ... LOL!
forget the movie, read the book
posted on 17 Jul 2009OK, so the film was OK, it wasn't a film where after you have seen it you go, Oh My God that was awesome.... however!!! i found the film to drag on a little, and it seemed a little bland. what i will say to you all is read the book. the book is one of the best reads for me, its short so doesn't take days to read like many good books do, but it has so much more crammed into its pages than the film. for instance the main characters are both of a school age, who actually meet at school, in the book you meet his parents (whereas in the film he is running from them), you also meet a lot of his friends, who happen to give a very good mini story within the book, there are just far to many things to mention that the book missed out, lets just say the film didn't follow the story line at all....honestly read the book it! the book gets 10/10
If you love the book the movie will be a great disappointment!
posted on 03 Jul 2009I read the book like most of the other people on this page and I went into the movie not expecting much from what i have already heard. Even so, I expected the main plot line to be kept intact or at the very least key scenes to be present...but no. There wasn't a single thing from the book that went to the movie aside from the character's names and the fact that they are loup garoux. Completely different plot altogether from Gabriel appearing "evil" not to mention being Rafe's father!!!!! to Vivian's father AND MOTHER ESME not dying in a fire but being killed by hunters. The two biggest disappointments had to be how Aiden found out about the werewolves and Vivian not transforming in front of him and her ending up with Aiden in the end instead of Gabriel. I could certainly continue the list of what was wrong but given that everything was incorrect and disappointing its unnecessary. I think that anyone who wants to see this and has read the book will point out all the errors themselves.If you have not read the book you may actually enjoy the movie. Its an interesting story and I cannot say if i would have liked it or not without reading the book but friends have enjoyed it having nothing to base it on. However, if this book is one of your favorites like it is mine do not waste your money on this movie. You will be severely disappointed. If you want to see it just because of the book i suggest waiting a month or two until it is out on video.
Parody
posted on 01 Jul 2009Well just few comments because I was quite disappointed: 1. The Romeo was really LOOSER so it was quite hard to sympathy with him...and the fact that he was an American makes me think that in fact this film was parody on Hollywood, where even the loosest American is much more than citizens of other nations (the last scene in car makes my point). 2. The jumping scenes were really funnyIsn t this ridiculous that I should write more lines about this film in order to submit it...I don t wanna spoil it to US folk although I was rather spoiled by the plot myself. 3. I have to admit that the Juliet was quite attractive
Love it!
posted on 29 Jun 2009I thought this movie was beyond amazing. Although it didn't go along with the book much, it still kept me very well entertained. It kept me guessing the entire time, waiting for the end to see what happened. I knew in the book, Aiden and Vivian had ended things, but I was honestly hoping the movie would not do that. I think Bruckner and Dancy did an excellent job at playing Aiden and Vivian. They really pulled off the love connection and made it seem real to viewers. Riemann also did an excellent job pulling off the character of Astrid, she captured the perfect picture of Astrid from the book. I thought the movie did an excellent job of pin pointing the important parts of the book and skipping the less significant ones in order to get the point across. Overall, if you look past the book and just see this movie as a movie, it was excellent and defiantly worth seeing over and over again.
The attack of the yuppie werewolves!
posted on 27 Jun 2009What can one say about this piece of crap? It's another one of those pointless movies that feel more like lousy music videos á la Justin Timberlake. Cool, dangerous teenagers running around, spitting out lame, pseudo-mystical clichés and being goofy, no story, no talent, no credibility or lure whatsoever.Obviously the people behind this piece of garbage believed that murals, birds, creepy Gothic atmosphere music and a breeze are all that takes to make a movie.All the so called actors are completely forgettable and they all look like they spend ten hours per day in front of a mirror, and maybe one hour per year actually improving their acting abilities. Yuppie werewolves, wow this redefined lame.And you really need to be completely out of ideas or a totally shameless moron to make another movie about a supernatural creature that is trying to break away from it's bloody heritage. Will she embrace evil or will she embrace her human side, distancing herself from the primitive, bloodthirsty impulses that are flowing through her veins? Halfway through the movie I was hoping for an asteroid to land on my head and spare me the misery...Why should anyone wanna watch this when there's Underworld and about ten million other movies on the same theme that are actually good.Horrible, utterly and completely horrible. If you stare at a wall long enough you will come pretty close to understanding how it felt to watch this.
Adaptation...?
posted on 21 Jun 2009Good in its own right, but my God, if they only changed the title and the names of the characters, they wouldn't get sued for copyright infringement because no one would notice any similarities! I have officially decided that if I want one of my novels adapted, I have to be the director or the whole thing will be screwed up badly. No similarities. Whatsoever. Now, I didn't like the book much; the movie is how I believe the book should have ended. But if you're going to make a book a movie, follow the plot of the book. Because with this many differences, they could have gotten away with an "inspired by" note in the credits.
One of the worst (actually the worst) movie iv'e seen in a long while
posted on 01 Jun 2009The only reason i didn't delete this movie after 20 min is because we already wasted 20 minutes on it...the only and i repeat the ONLY effect that they used is a weird kapoera (from India?) jump on a half meter wall/trash cans, i mean, effects doesn't make a movie but... sheesh.... me and my friend hoped the entire movie for some real effect (a huge wolf?! something!?>!?!) but noooooooooooooooo... all we got is a jump! on a 0.5 meter wall + they used pharmacy's ..... and they found guns?! in the pharmacy?! i mean what the hell? oh i forgot, there was another effect- contact lances as green eyes! every 10 min we shouted "the only thing that can save the movie from the disgrace is a giant wolf who kills them all!!! besides that the script was so awful that you don't know who you would like to die first. you actually pray (and i mean PRAY!) that the "good?!" guy will die, hopefully in the beginning.make yourself a favour and send letters to delete the movie from every archives in the world.
So disappointed
posted on 28 May 2009Me and my co-workers expected so much of this movie.We were all very disappointed in it.I can point out many (not all) faults.1) Vivian was the ARTIST. Not Aiden. Aiden wrote poetry and lived with his parents.2) Vivian and Aiden were juniors/seniors in high school.3) The book took place in the states.4) ESME DOES NOT DIE! 5) Astrid is a bad person and NOT Rafe's mother. She was Rafe's LOVER.6) Gabriel was more...better. AND he wasn't such a...bad character. He ends up with Vivie in the end. He doesn't die.7) Ivan dies in a fire. He was not shot by humans 8) Vivian was the one who showed Aiden her for first, claiming hat she wanted him to see her as she was.9) Astrid was killed by Gabriel.10) THERE IS NO ROMANIA! Where the hell did they get Romania? Alright...I'm done for now...Sorry ^^;
A Nutshell Review: Blood and Chocolate
posted on 30 Aug 2009From the producers of Underworld, this movie looks like a cheap cousin to the popular wolves versus vampires movie starring Kate Beckinsale. Based on a book by Annette Curtis Klause, and directed by Katja von Garnier, it's difficult not to draw comparisons because of the subject material and similar themes, this time though doing without the vampires, and sets the spotlight firmly on a group of hunted werewolves called the Loups-Garoux. Sexy sounding, but essentially a useless name for useless beings.The group of Loups-Garoux proudly stands by their tradition of being able to transform into wolves at will (and that is their only power mind you), and because of their abilities and lust for blood, they are hunted down by Men with their guns and silver bullets (who and what else). In order to survive persecution, they go underground and keep their identities secret, only to come out during the night for frequent partying at rave clubs (and to pick up chicks), as well as attending strange rituals such as gathering in the woods to partake in hunter-prey chases with wounded men as victims.In essence, they're a bunch of self-preserving cowards who hunt in packs, believing whole- heartedly that unity is strength. As mentioned, they got unimpressive abilities which probably forces them to do so, not by choice - only remarkable agility and the preference to scale walls and run along rooftops. Led by an uninspiring, cowardly leader Gabriel (Kylie Minogue's ex Olivier Martinez), he holds on to the unexplained hokey prophecy as well as the tradition of the leader of the pack to handpick a wolf-maiden to bed every 7 years. No wonder he's holding onto power without the necessity to do much to further their cause (which is?), and sets his sights on marrying Vivian (Agnes Bruckner).Vivian however, being the headstrong ingénue, falls for a plain human, graphic novelist Aiden (Hugh Dancy), and this is where references to Underworld come into full swing. The reluctance in the formation of a forbidden relationship from the girl with secrets, the revenge killings and the hunting down of Aiden, and with Vivian protecting her love, all reeks with familiarity. While Underworld had a rich backstory created for its characters and beings, Blood and Chocolate failed to have anything interesting in either wolf or man to engage the audience.And the execution here is painfully boring. No special effects, not even the baring of fangs, save for coloured contact lenses. It's relatively low-budgeted, and the transformation of man to beast, is so cheap, even a 10 year old kid with a no-frills video editing software will be able to achieve. Fights are confined to chases between wolves and man, and the usual scruffy fisticuffs. Don't forget the loopholes galore too after transformation, which is seldom seen on screen as it'll pose more questions.The only redeeming grace however, is the on-location filming in the streets of Bucharest, a beautiful romantic place, totally ideal for a romanticized tale of man-beasts. The soundtrack too had a tinge of Hindi(?!) music influences, which I totally enjoyed, but too bad, the film had been intrinsically destroyed by a lack of a strong storyline, plagued with non charismatic and weak villains with zero diabolical plans, with preference to hang around and do nothing, save for showing off their pitiful skills (which I suspect is because of the lack of budget).With a strange title, Blood and Chocolate correctly named itself - a weird and silly mix which doesn't go down well at all. Only watch it on disc if you've got time to spare.