31 Days of Horror Reviews 2018: Werewolf of London

Werewolf of London is kind of an underrated film that got shoved into obscurity due to The Wolf Man being more successful.

REVIEW

This film was released in 1935 so it’s not a sequel to The Wolf Man nor is it a prequel, it’s its own thing. The story is about a botanist, Dr. Glendon (Henry Hull), who on a trip to India to search for a rare flower is attacked and bitten by strange creature later revealed to be a werewolf. Upon returning to London, Dr. Glendon changes into a werewolf on the night of a full moon and the only cure is the rare flower.

It’s really easy to see this film as inferior to The Wolf Man, but it does have some charm. The entire werewolf mythology was made up and laid the groundwork for future werewolf movies which The Wolf Man expanded on and perfected. It also featured a different design of the werewolf, once again by Jack Pierce. Apparently there was some contention behind the scenes when it came to the design. Henry Hull objected to the Pierce’s original design and producers were concerned that it wouldn’t get past the censors, so they demanded Pierce tone down the design. His original design would later be used in The Wolf Man. The whole film relies on suspense and build up and maintains it throughout which makes up for the almost bland characters.

Another thing that sets this film apart from The Wolf Man is the transformation scene. Most people know how the iconic effect is pulled off in The Wolf Man with Chaney being very still and layers gradually added on. In Werewolf of London this effect is used later on, but isn’t the first transformation effect. The first has Glendon walking outside and passing in front of pillars and everytime he reappears, there’s a new layer of make up. It’s another simple effect based on the same concept, but very different.

Werewolf of London may not be as well known as The Wolf Man, but it is an okay film from Universal.