Werewolf of London

Six years before “The Wolf Man” (1941), Universal Pictures tackled the theme of lycanthropy in “Werewolf of London”, a somewhat forgotten film skillfully helmed by a director (who subsequently moved on to producing) capable of balancing tension and drama without showing disdain for brief comedic interludes (traits also found in other movies of the period, such as “Mystery of the Wax Museum”, 1933).

Technically compelling, the film stirs interest on a content level thanks to a certain originality in the way the material is treated, with the science fiction component given subtle emphasis within a context that’s traditionally linked to an exclusively metaphysical conception of horror (in this sense, the unfortunate Dr. Glendon is the victim of a pathogen rather than of a true curse).

As further confirmation of that scientific focus, we have scenes such as the one which meticulously describes the supposed physiological properties of the “Mariphasa” plant, and more generally, we can consider the weight placed on the reflections and doubts expressed by the protagonist. At any rate, the fact remains that we’re still left with the conviction – born of typical 19th-century anxieties – that science is meddling in fields where it has no right to interfere (“Only God can make a daffodil“; “It don’t leave nothing for heaven to do“; “Father in Heaven, don’t let this happen to me again“). This contemplation of science is reminiscent of eternal classics of 19th-century literature, from Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein” (1818) to Robert Louis Stevenson’s “Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” (1886), whose ending is substantially identical to that of Rouben Mamoulian’s 1931 film adaptation, incidentally.

Soundly theatrical performance by Henry Hull, who turns titular werewolf Dr. Glendon into an emotional character struck by a profound sense of torment and anxiety.