Werewolf of London

We’ve talked about Universal werewolves before, and we’ve talked about Jack Pierce before, but we have not yet talked about Jack Pierce’s first werewolf movie at Universal. This movie often gets overlooked in the Universal monster canon, but it’s important. It’s the first ever mainstream, Hollywood werewolf movie. Today, we’re talking about Werewolf of London.

Werewolf of London was a 1935 horror film with screenplay by John Colton and directed by Stuart Walker. The film stars Henry Hull, Warner Oland, and Valerie Hobson. Werewolf of London follows a botanist named Wilfred Glendon who is bitten by a werewolf while on an excursion in Tibet, although he doesn’t know it’s a werewolf that did it at first. He’s warned about the dangers of being bitten by a werewolf, but doesn’t believe it’s a problem for him because why would it be? One day while working in his botany lab under a light meant to simulate the moon, his hands start to change - though at first, he’s able to stop it with one of his plants, later that night after somebody seems to have stolen the plant that can help, he makes the full transformation.

Henry Hull, the lead in the film, was a seasoned actor. Between 1917 and 1966 he appeared in more than 70 films. Prior to Werewolf of London, he had worked with Dracula director Tod Browning, and he’d worked with Werewolf of London director Stuart Walker on 1934’s Great Expectations. Henry Hull almost wasn’t the lead in this film though. At one time, Bela Lugosi and Boris Karloff were attached. And what a different film it would have been! Boris Karloff would have been the lead, Dr. Glendon, and Bela Lugosi would have been Warner Oland’s character, Dr. Yogami. Unfortunately, it just didn’t work out with their schedules, but if it had worked out with Boris and Bela, I have no doubt we’d talk about this movie as the core werewolf in the Universal Monster canon.

The lack of Boris Karloff and Bela Lugosi isn’t the only reason this movie often gets overlooked. As I mentioned at the start, the werewolf makeup was designed by the incomparable, brilliant Jack Pierce, but while the makeup is good it isn’t quite as intricate or impressive as some of his other work. This is likely for a few reasons. There have been rumors that Henry Hull didn’t want to sit so long for makeup each day, and didn’t want his face covered quite so much. I’m not totally sure that’s true, I have a hard time believing Universal or Jack Pierce would have just let that slide.

The Wolf Man (1941)

More likely, this was the first major screen werewolf and it’s possible they just didn’t quite get it all the way right the first time. Plus the script calls for Dr. Glendon to be recognized when he’s the werewolf, so it makes sense that his look had to be toned down - compared to say, 1941’s Wolf Man.

And by the way, I think that’s the biggest reason this movie often gets overlooked in the Universal Monster canon. Because just 6 years later, Universal made another werewolf movie, starring Lon Chaney, Jr. and in that one, they went all out on the monster. No holds barred. So where this movie maybe missed the mark on the monster, The Wolf Man stepped in and made it right.

But that doesn’t mean this movie isn’t worth watching. It totally is. It established pretty much all the core werewolf rules that Universal followed in later movies, and set the scene for every other werewolf movie as well. In my Wolf Man video last year, I told you how werewolf lore used to be pretty varied. Since werewolves didn’t originate from a particular book like say, Dracula or Frankenstein, the myth of the werewolf was pieced together with bits of old stories, superstitions, and other lore.

Werewolf of London established the werewolf transforming with the full moon, a plant providing the antidote, and perhaps most importantly - the curse of the werewolf being passed through a bite. This existed previously in vampires, but not in werewolves. There’s one werewolf rule established in this movie that I wish other werewolf movies carried forward with them, and that’s if a werewolf doesn’t kill during a full moon, he will never revert back to his human form again. I sort of love that … I think it’d set up for some real desperation, and some real horror in a film.

There are two types of werewolf transformations that happen on screen in Werewolf of London. One I like much better than the other. The more basic version is similar to what we see in 1941’s Wolf Man. On screen, before our eyes, he transitions from man to werewolf. Usually by panning to different parts of him as we see them change. It’s fine, probably still new and exciting to moviegoers at the time, but it doesn’t feel so exciting to me.

The second version is less technologically sophisticated if you will, but more creative and is the one that stands out to me. As Henry Hull starts to transform, he walks behind some columns, and each time, as her emerges, the transformation is more complete. Again, probably not as “magical” as the other one may have seemed to audiences still familiarizing themselves with such special effects and monsters, but it’s so smooth and it works so much better in the movie.

Werewolf of London’s budget was just under $200,000 and when it was released on May 13, 1935 it was a box office disappointment. Reviews seemed to think it was good, but it had nowhere near the fanfare and excitement of Universal’s previous horror films like Dracula, Frankenstein, or the Mummy.

I wonder if audiences just didn’t quite see this werewolf as as monstrous as the other monsters. Bela Lugosi and Boris Karloff fully embodied their monsters. From head to toe, there was no doubt they were a monster and they had this rich life within. Henry Hull … he often still strikes me as a human running around in a costume. He never fully embodies the monster, so it’s never truly terrifying. Again, I think this is rectified in Lon Chaney, Jr’s Wolf Man, and it’s another reason his werewolf is the one we remember.