Amazon.com

Universal's first werewolf film falls in the shadow of the 1941 hit The Wolf Man. You might say it's a different animal, as this version carries none of the now-familiar trappings of the wolf-man legend: no wolfsbane, no silver bullets, no gypsy curse. Dr. Wilfrid Glendon (Henry Hull) is a London botanist whose search for a rare flower takes him to a "cursed" valley in Tibet where he's mauled in the moonlight by a wolflike creature. Back in London he meets the mysterious Dr. Yogami (a marvelously melancholy performance by Warner Oland), who explains they met once before "in Tibet... in the dark" before asking for a flower from his botanical find, the only antidote for his curse. Glendon scoffs at his stories of werewolves--until he transforms into a hirsute killer under the effect of the full moon. Although leaner and edgier than the famous 1941 Lon Chaney classic, The Werewolf of London stumbles with the corny Scotland Yard investigation of the murder spree and gets sidetracked in the bizarre bickering of two old drunken cronies. But it takes flight in wonderfully imaginative and eerie scenes and striking action sequences, while a Jekyll-and-Hyde dynamic turns a jealous squabble between Glendon and his young wife Lisa (Valerie Hobson) into the tragic twist of the curse: "The werewolf instinctively kills the thing it loves best." --Sean Axmaker ... Read more

Reviews (16)

A Forgotten Treasure
In the first major Hollywood film that deals with werewolves,Henry Hull gives a splendid performance hindered only by the fact that he did not allow makeup arist Jack Pierce to apply a more elaborate facial makeup.(Pierce would would eventually create the makeup for Lon Chaney jr. in 'The Wolf Man').The opening scenes in the dead of night in the Tibetan mountains set the mood effectively for what follows.In Tibet Dr.Wilfred Glendon(Hull) is attacked by a snarling shadowy creature while in search of an elusive flower that blooms only at night.Upon his return to London Glendon meets the tormented yet sympathetic Dr.Yogami(Warner Oland) who states upon inquiry that they met once before in Tibet 'For a minute in the dark.'After this meeting the story picks up pace and London is beset by not one,but two werewolves.This film is well paced and atmospheric.Strong performances by Hull and Oland are marred by the hammy fopish Lester Matthews as a 'childhood sweetheart'of Hulls wife.This is incredulous as Matthews is clearly in his late 30s to early 40s playing against 17 year old Valerie Hobson as his childhood sweetheart(Where was David Manners when he was needed?).The production values,direction and literate script make this a very good but not great entry in MCA/Universal's Monster Collection.

An excellent prequel
Man, I wishh I had every movie in the Universal Studios Classic Monster Collection. Check out the lists with those movies on it! If you think that's alot, here's this: The list is still missing some movies! Anyway, I like "The Wolf Man" better, but this film was excellent and definately a worthy prequel to The Wolf Man. How odd that Wales, Larry Talbot's home, is in Britian, just like London! Anyway, Wilfred Glendon (Henry Hull) is bitten by a werewolf in Tibet. He returnes to London with a rare moon flower. A Dr. Yogami (Wanrer Onald)tries to help him, Glendon scoffs at the thought of himself becoming a wolf. Later, when the full moon rises, Glendon becomes a werewolf. You might say it is a different species of werewolf than the Wolf Man, since it lacks hair, but is much more sinister and intellegent. A forogtten classic, a must-see!

Universal's first werewolf film is too often overlooked
Mention a werewolf, and you immediately think of the afflicted Larry Talbot played by Lon Chaney, Jr., in the classic monster films of the 1940s. Not only was Chaney not the first Wolf Man, he was not even Universal's first Wolf Man - that distinction goes to Henry Hull, who played a werewolf in Universal's 1935 classic Werewolf of London. This film, residing as it does in the shadows of Chaney's memorable werewolf films, is often overlooked; it is also unduly dismissed by some reviewers and horror fans. This is a much different type of movie than 1941's The Wolf Man, but it is really quite an enjoyable viewing experience.

Forget gypsies, wolf bane, pentagrams on the hands of victims, and the other werewolf staples Curt Siodmak put into his script of The Wolf Man. In Werewolf of London, botanist Wilfred Glendon (Hull) sees his troubles begin in - of all places - Tibet, where he traveled in search of a very special flower, the "Marifasa Lupina." This particular flower grows only in Tibet, and it blooms only in moonlight. He gets his flower, but he also gets a nasty bite from a werewolf for his troubles. Back home in London, he is hard at work trying to get the flower to bloom under artificial moonlight - apparently, it would make for some sort of major scientific discovery, but the flower takes on new meaning after a certain Dr. Yogami (Warner Oland) pays him a visit and expresses his own interest in the plant. Glendon doesn't believe Yogami's wild tales about werewolves - not until, that is, he turns into one that very night.

This isn't your ordinary werewolf. After his transformation, Glendon goes looking for a bloom of the flower (which, while not a cure for his affliction, would prevent him from killing those he loves the most) and then, before heading out into the streets, stops to put on his coat, hat, and scarf; he is relatively conscious of what he is doing, although he is powerless to stop the blood rage pumping through his veins. The actual transformations, several of which are shown in the film, are rather impressive for such an early film. He's not overly hairy, but there is a definite look of evil intelligence in his eyes.

Of course, you have to have a leading lady in this type of film, and that role is filled quite well by the lovely Valerie Hobson (1935 was quite a year for Hobson, as she played Dr. Frankenstein's wife in Bride of Frankenstein as well as a werewolf's wife here in Werewolf of London). Warner Oland gives a memorable performance as Yogami, but I must lavish special attention on three older ladies. Spring Byington is quite a hoot as Glendon's rich lush of an aunt, but Ethel Griffies and Zeffie Tilbury absolutely steal the show as Mrs. Whack and Mrs. Moncaster. These two ladies deliver a comic tour de force as inebriated best friends who take a great interest in Glendon when he comes asking to rent a room from one of them. Back in the old days, movie studios (or more likely, censors) didn't think audiences could withstand all of the frights and chills of a harmless monster movie like this without a few stiff doses of comedy thrown in to the mix - oftentimes, such comic relief failed miserably, but here it is spot on indeed.

Despite the fact that Glendon is as unsympathetic a character as you can find (the antithesis of Lon Chaney, Jr.'s Larry Talbot), I have to give this movie five stars. The plot has a level of complexity to it that adds to its impact, the makeup and special effects are quite impressive, and it has that unidentifiable something that a good horror movie has to have to succeed. Werewolf of London isn't as entertaining as Universal's Wolf Man films of the 1940s, but it is definitely worth watching.

Before the American Werewolf in London...
...there was the "Werewolf of London," staring Henry Hull and Valerie Hobson, who is better known for her role as Elizabeth in "Bride of Frankenstein."

Although George Waggner's "The Wolf Man" seems to always steel all the credit as the definative classic werewolf film, "Werewolf of London" is an underrated jem and the origional werewolf film and a true classic. Although the plot is very "Frankenstein" like, it has a great cast, great looking werewolf for a first time ever, great atmosphere, great music, and great lighting.

All in all, though "The Wolf Man" gets all the credit, "Werewolf of London" is just as good and worth the watch.

the werewolf of london
Living in Australia it has always been difficult to view the 'obscure classics' but in todays times it is only a click of your mouse button. I for one feel priveliged to have viewed this movie.The tension is from the start with the errie backdrop and the certainty of our poor hero's fate. The special effects of the time ensure the enjoyment of the viewer, that is to say we must rely on the actors ability to convince us of the horror and torment he is going through. The movie flows from scene to scene and by the time the credits roll you are still transfixed to the screen totally enthralled by what you have seen.If you are interested in the Universal classics this is definately one for your collection. You will not be disapointed. ... Read more

Reviews (5)

MCA/Universal Classic 1933 - early look at Cary Grant!!
MCA/Universal is re-releasing the great Stars of early Hollywood Classics. It is truly great to see these stars in their early careers.

"The Eagle and The Hawk" - starring A young Fredric March & Cary Grant. (With a cameo of the fabulous Carole Lombard). This World War I film is a psychological battle of the aerial dog fighting between young men and the lasting effect on these young pilots and observers.

March & Grant are bitter enemies who respect each others professional abilities. Who team up to become the squadrons best aerial team. The stress of the job and the constant exposure to death take their toll on our stars.

Excellent protrayal of young men and their experiences in war.

The acting of March & Grant are tops. A brief visit of Carole Lombard eases the pain & sufferings.

This VHS, Standard version is a good copy with an original trailer included. Enjoy.

A Shining Example of Good Film
We've been watching a lot of Fredric March movies in the past several months. It amazes me how many times he appears in uniform. This is one of at least four times in WWI uniform. Anyway.

It was really interesting to see him working with Cary Grant, who plays a former labourer with an attitude. But deep down he has compassion on Fred's character, a former polo player who can't deal with all the killing and death he is witnessing. He thought the war would be a party. The movie shows his progression from a carefree soldier to one who has nightmares and is losing his sanity. Although Cary Grant acts as if he can't stand Fred, in the end he steps in and - well, watch the movie and you'll see.

Jack Oakie plays a loafer at home and a loafer at the front. Occasionally he does fly the airplane, but only once do you see him in the plane - always he's sitting in a wheelbarrow reading "A Night in a Turkish Harem", lounging in a bathtub, and so forth.

Carole Lombard had a platinum blonde and overly made up bit part as a trampy-looking woman who shows kindness to Fred when he's on leave. I couldn't really figure out what purpose she played in the movie... kind of strange.

I don't have a lot to say about this movie except that it is really really good, and you should see it by all means.

Another Great Fredric March Performance
Just this year I have discovered Fredric March, and what a great actor he is. He does not disappoint in "The Eagle and the Hawk" either. He plays an ace American flyer in the Royal Flying Corps, who was at first eager to go to war, but once in France and actually participating in the war, he finds that war is not the romantic glamour thing he envisioned it would be. War, he found, is actually killing people. It disturbs him greatly to realize that so many must die, and that he has a part in so many deaths. He begins to slowly lose his grip on his sanity, for none of the other men seem to feel the way he does, about the senslessness of war, of killing young boys just free from their mothers. He is a skilled flyer and earns many medals, but in the end they mean nothing to him, for he earns them by killing, which he cannot stand. The commanding officer grants him 10 days leave to hopefully "cheer" him up, but it does not work, for at the party he attends, all people want to talk about is the war; even one woman's young son asks him gory details about planes going down and people dying. It is during the leave that the Carol Lombard character enters the picture. I don't think she was really necessary. I personally felt she wasn't right for the role. I didn't care for her personality, her make-up and hair, and her ridiculous fur coat! But she was there to listen to Fredric talk to himself about the senselessness of war, and he needed to vent, and she was there. I think another woman would have been better, a more naturally beautiful one, one with more naivity and gentleness of spirit. I believe that the scene had much more potential than it was given. Anyway, Fredric goes back to war, and finally cracks up, and kills himself. The Cary Grant character, who was antagonistic toward Fredric March in the whole movie, is kind to him in the end, and makes it so noone knows he lost his sanity, but that instead he died a war hero. I do not know why Fredric March is not on the cover of this video, HE is the star, not Grant or Lombard! I recommend this for a good example of Fredric March's acting. I should mention that his scene where he was having the nightmare of all the people who died was very touching. This isn't a very long movie, so give it a watch, you'll like it.

Memorable Movie!
This is a memorable antiwar movie with Fredric March as a reluctant hero, co-pilot Cary Grant, everyone's pal Jack Oakie, and society dame Carole Lombard. Great film. Wonderful Acting. Important Message. --Diana Dell, author, "A Saigon Party: And Other Vietnam War Short Stories."

The Eagle and the Hawk
"The Eagle and the Hawk" is an excellent anti war movie and has good aerial footage. All the actors in it did a great job! If you are a fan of classic movies you are sure to enjoy it. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Worthy Addition to the Univeral Horror Classics
My expectations weren't very high for this movie. I was expecting it to be much like THE SPIRAL STAIRCASE, having a few creepy scenes, but no good acting to make the rest of the movie interesting. EDWIN DROOD, however, succeeded on all levels. It was surprisingly funny (usually intentional) and light in certain scenes, and suberbly moody and dark in the others. The acting was excellent. I was especially impressed with Douglass Montgomery as Neville and Zeffie Tilbury as the old opium lady. But, if you're like me, you'll pick up this movie because it stars Claude Rains. And you won't be disappointed! If you think Claude Rains is talented at playing creepy, wait until you see him playing stoned and creepy!

DICKEN'S SWAN SONG
Film adaptation of Dicken's Byzantine novel about an odd, tortured, drug-addicted choirmaster who vies for the affections of an attractive young woman who is visiting his village. But when things don't go his way, he decides to eliminate what he perceives to be his only obstacle, her fiance (and his nephew), Edwin Drood. Dicken's novel was left half completed at the time of his death and simply ended with Drood missing. In both film versions (there's a 1993 British remake), it's decided that Drood is murdered, and, rather ironically, they picked the same murderer from among Dicken's stable of eccentric characters. Rains is superb in his fourth film as a opium addict (who's a cathedral choir master!) who lusts after delicate Heather Angel. During a raging storm on Christmas Eve, Rains strangles Manners and after dumping the corpse in a quicklime pit, tries to pin the murder on Montgomery. A gothic film with shadowy photography, it's pretty creepy due to its very unusual storyline and twists in logic. ... Read more

Reviews (5)

Not So Good, Not So Bad, Definitely Not David Lean
It is undeniable now that David Lean made THE film of "Great Expectations," oft-filmed Charles Dickens novel, and by looking at this 1934 rendition of the same novel, you will be just reminded of the fact. Still, this possibly oldest film version of the story about the boy Pip, who falls in love with a girl Estella, and aspires to be a gentleman to get her love, has some virtue of its own.

The story is pretty faithful to the book even though the ending is changed (or Hollywood-nized) to make some of us just groan. The book's retrospective, remorseful feelings of the hero Pip is gone; Estella stops to be Estella at the end, and Pip never sees kind-hearted Joe after leaving the village. This sentimental treatment is, some Dickensians may claim, worse than moving the entire setting to modern America as Ethan Hawke's version did.

But as a whole this film is all right. Thanks to Henry Hull's acting as Magwitch, the film is given certain power, which should have been made use of more (but as you know, the story doesn't permit that). The pace is good, the designs are decent, but the famous opening at the dark marshes is clearly shot in somewhere in studio, and it is too obvious. And the director seems to be at a loss how to deal with Miss Havisham (and her wedding cake), one of the most eccentric persons Dickens created. Do not expect David Lean-esque fantastic photography here. This is a kind of a film that you may see many times around this era; not so good, not so bad.

Strangely, though the characters' names Mr. Wopstle and Biddy (both play memorable parts in Pip' life in the book) are credited with the names of the actors, I do not think I saw them in the video. Where did they do? Deleted scenes in the cutting room? ...

Lastly, you may enjoy the appearance of Jane Wyatt as Estella here. If you are one of millions of Star Trek fans, you may remember her as Mr. Spock's mother in one episode of the series, and the feature film "Star Trek IV."

Too Old and Creaky for My Tastes
Found this at the local library and decided to check it out, especially since Jane Wyatt is in it. I liked watching her in "Lost Horizon", and the only other things it seems she was ever in were "Father Knows Best" and "Star Trek" as Spock's mom.

She makes for a sweet Estella, which I'm not used to, as I'm very familiar with the later version with John Mills. It was interesting to see that the same Mr. Jaggers is in both movies--I wonder how often that sort of thing has happened? The only other instance I can think of is Clark Gable reprising his "Red Dust" role in "Mogambo". Most jarring were two things about Miss Havisham. First, that this is only the second time I've ever seen this actress, who plays Mother Goose in "The March of the Wooden Soldiers", so that was a surprise to see her resurface somewhere else finally. Second is that, for whatever reason, she's not always wearing her wedding dress, which she's supposed to do, according to the book, at least. That was a strange decision for someone to make.

But overall, I found the movie to be unsatisfactory. Very stagey and stiff, and Henry Hull as Magwitch was extremely irritating and over the top as far as I'm concerned. I thought his character got blown way out of proportion. To top it off, this was another one of those times where I even dozed off for a bit, and when I came to, had no desire to rewind to see what I had missed. A bad sign if ever there was one.

Hence, my expectations were too great to be realized. Stick with the John Mills-Alec Guinness version from now on.

CLASSY IF STAGEY DICKENS ADAPTATION
This 1934 Carl Laemmle production of Charles Dickens'great novel is reverent, well acted, and generally faithful to the author's vision. Henry Hull is particularly exceptional as a boorish but affable Magwitch, and of course Jane Wyatt (Estella), Phillip Holmes (Pip), and Florence Reed (Miss Havisham)all play their roles with heart and dignity.

Unfortunately, the overall staginess of the production makes it pretty slow going at times. This is a fault common to many pictures from the era, and in this case it keeps a good movie from being great.

Also, as Hollywood is wont to do, the film makers modified Dickens' original ending to make it less sombre. Though this hardly ruins the picture, it does detract a bit from the story's inherent power.

Even so, this version of Great Expectations is more than satisfactory, and well worth watching for anyone who ever wondered, like Pip, if they would ever find their destiny...or their love.

A bit old fashioned, but true to the classic story
As this version of the classic Dickens' novel was filmed in 1934, it doesn't have the special effects we modern audiences are used to, but the story rings true. The acting was good and so was the casting. Philips Holmes, in the role of Pip as a young gentleman, was 27 at the time and Jane Wyatt, best remembered for her later role in the TV series "Father Knows Best", cast as Estella, was only 23 and full of youthful fervor. Francis Sullivan played Jaggers, a role so meant for him that he played it again in the 1947 version of the film. I loved the performance of Florence Reed as Miss Havisham although the garish makeup she wore when we first meet her was a bit startling. And Henry Hull, as Magwich was an excellent convict.

We must remember that, in 1934, talkies were still new and so there is a musical score that seems overdone and old fashioned by today's standards. But it follows the action, adding tension where necessary. Also, I sometimes felt that the actors' performances seemed to be more geared to the stage than the movies. I enjoyed the film completely, however, and especially liked contrasting it to the other versions I've seen. The 1947 one was good too, but somehow I liked this the best. And the less said the better about the awful 1998 one in which the story was so changed that it was unrecognizable from Dickens' original intention. The story and the film is a classic and I recommend this version.

the best great expectations i have ever seen
but i have not seen any others. in fact, i really didnt see this one but i feel left out not writing a review ... Read more