User reviews

I first saw this in the early 2k on a dvd which I own.

Revisited it recently.

This second installment is about Sérafine (Julie Delpy), daughter of David Kessler and Alex Price from the first part, staying in Paris with her stepfather who is on the verge of developing a cure for stopping the transformation of Sérafine. The cure has the opposite effect as it forces werewolves to immediately transform into their beast form which made Sérafine kill her mother n injure her stepfather.

I liked the movie when i first saw but aft revisiting it, i didn't enjoy it.

The effects are too cartoonish n the werewolves look more like demons with bad cgi.

Most of the creature mayhem scenes are shot in flickering lights n there ain't any good transformation scene or gory moment.

Nonetheless the beautiful Julie Delpy's nudity will calm all viewers.

The dvd which i own has the ending of Andy visiting Serafine at a hospital, where she has given birth to a child, whose eyes shift to look like the werewolves.

The version i saw recently has another ending where the couple are shown getting married on The Statue of Liberty n they both jump for an adrenaline rush cos the cure is adrenaline, which stops the transformation.

OK, so I don't know why they decided to make another movie about a Yankee college student going to a European capital and becoming a lycanthrope. But still, "An American Werewolf in Paris" definitely has its moments. Some scenes were no doubt thrown in for comic relief, like "You can't just pop up and tell me what to do." I agree with a previous reviewer that people who slam this movie are comparing it too much to "An American Werewolf in London". Maybe there's a slight feeling of that one, but you have to take this one as something new - and rather campy - to really enjoy it. Tom Everett Scott and Julie Delpy do a pretty cool job. But either way, I think that I've had my fill of movies about US citizens becoming lycanthropes in the Old Continent.

So what do YOU plan to do the next time that there's a full moon?

When a trio of American teens travel to Paris for a daredevil challenge they decide to bungee jump off the Eiffel Tower. During the jump Andy manages to save the life of a girl attempting suicide. However when he later tries to find her again he finds that she has something to hide. When he and his friends attend a party held by friends for hers they find they are trapped by werewolves. Andy gets bitten and becomes part of a world he wants no part of.

This is a belated sequel to the 1980's classic `American Werewolf in London' and indeed it tries very hard to be just like it - the corpse black humour, the dreams within dreams sequences etc. However the story is different as it introduces a wider werewolf conspiracy idea to the plot. It actually works quite well - it's not better than many other creature features but it works OK.

The main problem with it is that it is very much another teen horror movie - with a stupid rock soundtrack, valley girl style humour and dumb spectacle. It lacks the original's black humour and it isn't anywhere near as tense as `London'. The special effects are totally CGI and they don't work as well as `London's' - it all looks too computerised, and seeing everything takes the scare factor out of it.

In fairness when you look at it as a stand-alone film it's not so bad even though it doesn't stand out from other teenage horror movies. But a sequel to `London'? - sorry but it's not a great addition to that piece of work. Tom Everett Scott looks like he's stepped out of American Pie into a horror movie! He's OK but he doesn't compare with Dunne all those years ago. Julie Delphy is actually quite good - she doesn't have much of a character but she carries herself well. The other characters are either rough French skinheads or American teens.

Overall it's entertaining enough - but it pales terribly when compared to the original.

This DVD is missing its calling as a Heineken coaster.... This is a great example of why no one should ever go see a sequel with a different director/writer than the original. Two hours of this turkey left me begging for Exorcist 2 reruns.

NO legitimate laughs. NOT ONE decent scare. The script was just a mess and I felt bad for the actors who had to perform it (they must have had sick relatives at home or monster coke habits or something).

The original was a makeup effects landmark. So naturally, the producers of the sequel thought it would be a great idea to to scrap makeup FX and do CG werewolves instead. These CG werewolves had me laughing a lot harder than any of the "comedy". It was just a total miss. If ya want a night's entertainment, go rent the original again. Or go take a film class and make your own horror film. You're bound to do better than these fools did.

Crappy nominal sequel to An American Werewolf in London. It really has nothing to do with that movie besides the similar name and some ripped-off ideas. Pretty shameless cash-grab that thankfully was not well-received. It's a terrible movie with some awful performances, a script I wouldn't wipe my ass with, and some particularly shoddy CGI special effects. Tom Everett Scott has a very unappealing screen presence. I just can't with that guy. Julie Delpy is slumming here but we do get her obligatory topless scene. I don't know the names of the actors playing Scott's buddies. They were generic and forgettable so I won't bother to look them up There's very little time devoted to the werewolves, perhaps due to the poor FX. Most of the time is spent on the lame comedy. Avoid at all costs. A real waste of time.

One of two movies I have actually thought about asking for money to stay until the end. Most movies have at least one thing that is worth staying for, even if it just to laugh at how bad it is. I never found it for this movie. Nothing was good, from the script, to the very bad effects. The worst movie I have ever seen.

I loved this movie, although it seems that many people hated it. Do they realise this is an obvious spoof? Yes the special effects were dodgy, yes the acting was laughable, that was the point! This movie is similar in style to starship troopers, not as good though. Lighten up and you'll enjoy this b-grade spoof on horror flicks.

I have mixed emotions about this film, especially as it compares to its forerunner,

"An American Werewolf In London." That film had it's funny moments, it was still more of horror tale than anything else. This updated version, now set in Paris, does not have that "edge" at all and simply isn't in the same class....but it does have some good things going for it that the first film did not have and overall it's still fun to watch.

So, "werewolf purists" aside, most of whom think this film is pure garbage compared to the London version, I'll still give it decent marks since I don't care what others think. I liked it even though I agree "London" is better and I prefer that version, too.

The first 30-40 minutes of this movie is strictly played for laughs including a hysterical scene with a "balloon" in a restaurant. It also introduces the lead female character, played by Julie Delpy. I don't see enough of this actress. She doesn't seem to make that many films, or least ones I hear about over here in America. This French actress has a face that is classic beauty, so the film got points for having her in it, and she looks great.

When the horror starts, it can get scary and the special effects are good. I also liked the lack of profanity in this film, unlike the first one: no f-words and no Lord's name in vain - amazing!

However, there are plenty of sexual remarks and there is one scene with a guy running out of bar tied to a cross which was blasphemous to me. The soundtrack is heavy metal which isn't appealing to a middle-aged guy like me, either. This film is geared a lot more toward 20-somethings, if that helps anyone.

It's entertaining.....just don't expect it to live up to the first film.

I say this with a heavy heart. An American Werewolf in London is a brilliant film and one of John Landis's best. But An American Werewolf in Paris has none or little of the charm, heart and atmosphere that made London so good. It certainly didn't feel like a sequel, as has been perfectly summed up already if anything it's more of a film with a cash-in title.

Are there any redeeming qualities? Yes. Julie Bowen and especially Julie Delpy are a welcome presence and give good performances. For me all the other performances were bland. Also it does begin well, but sadly that's about it.

Anthony Waller's direction is uninspired, with the exception of some decent shots something is lost in translation and I can't point my finger on it at the moment. The effects are low-key but the movie is very effects heavy, now I don't mind this, but the effects for me didn't do much to enhance and some of the more advanced visuals jarred. The story is messy and lacks the fairy-tale quality of An American Werewolf in London, the soundtrack doesn't fit with the movie at all and the script is pretty dire complete with sluggish pacing and characters that I didn't care anything for apart from Delpy's perhaps. An American Werewolf in Paris tries to be a horror and a comedy, but it succeeds at neither, the comedy is wretched in my opinion and the scary elements are more laughable(apart from the occasional jump) than shocking.

Overall, a big disappointment. 3/10 Bethany Cox

I've seen this movie several times, and I just can't get enough. Every time I see it, I discover some new detail that I enjoy more and more each time.

It combines a tasteful comedy, with a sublime horror. The actors all seem right to their parts, and it bring freshness to werewolf movies, it's not just the killing, it's truly amazing.

This movie was not a terrible successor to the 1981 classic An American Werewolf in London. There are ways in which it could have been worse. The possibility that Seraphine could have been David's (the werewolf in the original) daughter was presented in a rumor mill while the film was still in post, the idea turned my stomach. Thankfully, they took it in a different direction. The humor is good, the special effects are somewhat lacking, but overall the idea was a great one. Fans of the original shouldn't be mad, the two films stand on their own, as separate entities. Will they make another? The question is already being tossed about, I hear.

I had been a huge fan of the original "American werewolf in London" and, while I had no real hopes this would be as good as that one (which was just funny good, not really good), I had hoped to be entertained. I was not. Aside from some physics bending during a bungie jump scene, a really weak plot and some really stupid characters, the movie just went nowhere. I've watched training videos that were more fun to watch than this mess.

As a sequel to An American Werewolf in London, this film is sure to disappoint many. It certainly doesn't have the talent that was involved on that one. No John Landis. No David Naughton. No Jenny Agutter and other more-than-competent actors. No Rick Baker and dazzling, innovative special effects. I could go on...and on. But if one distances themselves from seeing this film as a sequel(and really it is not a sequel at all...it doesn't have any of the same characters from the first film), this film is not that bad on its own. Sure it is relying on your memories of the London film to get fannies in the seats. Yep, it uses the same character TYPES and situations(dead victims talking and being funny comes to mind quickly). Other than that and the fact that werewolves are involved(and a romance of course), I found few other similarities. This film is definitely going for more laughs and takes itself even far less serious than An American Werewolf in London. The leads...Scott and Delpy are pretty good. The rest of the actors are pretty good too, with Julie Bowen as a slutty American and the guy playing Claude particularly good. I also loved all the French police and the gentle humour inherent in every line they said. The script has some genuine scares laced throughout the picture but always comes back to the humour. French werewolves enjoying feasting on Americans was a particular funny storyline. Director Anthony Waller creates a fast-paced film with some excellent sequences interspersed with some sophomoric plot strands. By no means is this a great film, or even a great horror film/spoof, but it is a film that should grab and hold your attention. Make you jump a few times and laugh out loud now and then.

It took me nine years to finally see this film. Back in 1997 it sounded like a dreadful idea. However, now, with a Blockbuster Video movie pass, I can take chances on certain films without actually having to 'pay' for them.

It's a dumb film. What made "American Werewolf in London" work was it was more of a serious film than a comedy, and the comedy was wonderfully dark, which added well to the horror element. "Paris" seems aimed toward attention-deficit teenagers, though it's rated R. The lead character is too goony to be of much interest or to be taken seriously, plus he'd have been killed in his early-on rescue scene; therefore, the film doesn't even try to make the unrealistic set-up seem realistic. (You can't buy into a drama or horror film if the film doesn't strive to be true in its own world.) CGI werewolves aren't scary. "London" has outdated effects, of course, but they're still wonderful to watch for the audience is being treated to a painful and prolonged transformation. A real-seeming, nice guy -- not some bland goofball -- is going through something horrific, and the special effects strive for realism and therefore one can buy into the transformation, all the while knowing it's not real. Turning an actor into a cartoon werewolf is not engaging and therefore there's nothing to buy into.

The ending is one one of those "ha-ha" wrap-things-up-in-a-bow scenes that plagued so many horror/suspense films of the 90s, such as the also-unnecessary "The Vanishing", a weak remake of a gut-wrenching Dutch film.

The daughter of the werewolf from AWIL is alive and living in Paris where her mother and stepfather are trying to overcome her lycanthropic disease. A trio of American tourists on a thrill seeking trip around Europe manage to stop her from plunging to her death from the top of the Eiffel tower and are embroiled in a horrific but often hilarious plot involving a secret society of werewolves based in the city and a drug which allows werewolves to change at any time... This time there's no need for a full moon...

This film is so bad, it could be the worst film I've ever seen. The characters in the film are very dumb, we don't even care about them, and seem to have fun making the movie instead of making a good horror film.

There are so many horror clichés in this film, but I think they were trying to make fun of them. This film relies on humor more than making a scary film. And for the funny scenes, I did not believe it one second. I thought they were trying to make a horrible film on purpose! And in this horror film, it has violence, gore, and tons of sex scenes (AKA a lot of nudity). That's probably the lines for a horror movie. The sex scenes comes out of nowhere, like the director told the actors to perform them because of the line "sex sells".

All of the acting in the film are horrible. The CGI was mediocre. I really didn't like that that much either. Well, here are some good things in the film: The last 10 or so minutes in the film have some horror elements. It's more like a creature fight between two werewolves.

If you would like to see a horror film, STAY AWAY from this one. I think people who love this movie are so dumb. Maybe they've seen another film. This is one of the worst movies ever with everything bad in it and characters who don't even know they are in a werewolf film.

Well, what can be said about a "horror comedy" that features neither horror nor comedy? There are no characters in the film, but much too many plot lines - all underdeveloped and mostly superfluous.

The computer generated creatures look bad, a bit like Disney versions of oversized rats without a tail. The walking dead are the biggest rip-off apart from the title, the shall look like the dead in Landis' movie, but are far removed. They just look like bad actors with abit of plastic and bull's blood added.

Two plot lines really showed some promise (the love story and the "company" story), but failed as miserably as the director, the writers, the SFX department, the production and the actors.

This movie wasn't bad to me , maybe because I like werewolf movies, and the werewolves looked fine to me , not as good as werewolf in London but it's worth watching.

Luckily the makers of this movie went with a different point of view altogether. Genuinely funny although the end could have been a bit better. Don't judge this movie to harshly. It's not to be compared with its predecessor but why should you. Quite enjoyable.

I don't know why this movie has only 5.1 I honestly don't know cuz this movie is one of the best werewolf movies out there Together with London Bad Moon This one is also very good Good story Love the werewolf in this movie.

Well, if you've seen this movie and you've never seen the original (American Werewolf in London), either because you've never heard of it, you didn't like this one and felt that the original must have been worse, or you just haven't gotten around to it, see the original.

I know, this review is for this movie, not the original, but I still want to recommend that you see the original as it broke so much ground in the concept of a horror comedy, a genre that has so few movies in it that when a good one is made, it stands out.

OK, now this movie here is still a fun movie and it is in the horror comedy genre, so it's got some work to do if it wants to appeal to any group of people out there.

Yes, there are a bunch of people who love horror movies, and probably even more who love a good comedy, but it's difficult to appease both even when you stick with only one genre, let alone trying to find an audience for one that mixes two that are not typically put together.

This movie has some pretty darn good special effects, an actual plot, pretty good acting overall, some interesting settings for their scenes, a little nudity, some blatant humor (things like site gags and one liners) and even some subtle humor that is more biting than outright humor, and it even has (for those who care) a little nudity.

The action scenes are pretty dang fun if not a little gory, and a few surprises for those who enjoy those as well.

See the original if you are only going to see one, but otherwise, see both.

Well, as it usually goes with sequels, then this 1997 follow up "An American Werewolf in Paris" to the 1981 classic "An American Werewolf in London", it just didn't live up to the predecessor. Not even remotely close.

Sure, I will say that writers Tim Burns, Tom Stern and Anthony Waller did manage to put together a good enough story, and it was certainly entertaining for what it was, but it just lacked the punch and appeal that the 1981 classic had.

And then there was the issue of the horrible CGI werewolves that just looked beyond dubious. It simply was beyond me why they opted to use CGI werewolves, especially when it was such eyesores to look at. It totally ruined what could have otherwise been a good sequel. And even more impressive is that the CGI werewolves in this 1997 were totally and fully outclassed by the practical effect werewolf in the 1981 movie. Amazing that something 16 years older managed to best something that should be been more efficient.

The movie did, however, have a good cast ensemble, with the likes of Tom Everett Scott and Julie Delpy in the lead roles.

A shame that the atrocious CGI werewolves ruined the movie, because "An American Werewolf in Paris" could have been a much more enjoyable and outstanding movie. Instead it ended up being a rather forgettable sequel that will always be in the shadows of a 16 year older movie.

My rating of the 1997 "An American Werewolf in Paris" from director Anthony Waller lands on a bland five out of ten stars.