just realize that as he answers, he'll be typing with one hand

Thanks, and thanks Urge. I'm a very patient, acceptable movie watcher, I love atmosphere, I don't mind low-action. I think I'll check the set out.

Thanks again, guys.

Well, first, John Fulton did that amazing "walking transformation" scene that seems to be one continuous shot but is really several shots joined together, with the pillars going by as a separate element to cover the edits. It's cooler and freakier, I think, than any of the basic Lon Chaney werewolf transformations. So this movie gets BIG BIG points for one kickass transformation IMO. (Henry Hull's werewolf makeup also looks pretty demonic and scary.)

The werewolf dresses up, puts on a hat even, before going out. You know, so he'll blend in. It's cool.

The scene with the fake British people admiring the carnivorous plant exhibit is hilarious. Most people would never go anywhere near plants that are moving and waving giant tentacles around. I wouldn't. Would you? I didn't think so. Weird scene.

This is a neat movie showing how hard Universal was trying to find an interesting werewolf movie concept.

dude, i am SOOOOOOOOOO far behind in my horror film collections......next stop, FRANKENSTEIN!

For me, WEREWOLF OF LONDON is mostly an interesting oddity -- something you watch, thinking "Cool, they made a werewolf movie before THE WOLF-MAN."

It has some nice ideas, but there seems to be a general agreement that Henry Hull evokes little sympathy as the werewolf. It's also a bit disappointing that there are two active werewolves in the movie, but we only get to see one transformed. There's even a fight between the two characters at the end, but one has just taken an antidote to stop the transformation (a rather foolish move, strategically, since it results in his death at the claws of the one who does transform).

The script was developed for Karloff and Lugosi. One assumes Karloff would have played the Hull part, with Lugosi instead of Oland. That might have been more fun to watch.

I really like this movie, not bad.

Same bro:p

I did get around to watching it recently, quite enjoyed it. Here, give me a sec and I'll find my mini-review...

Here it is:

I started watching this once, and fell asleep within the first 10 minutes. Today I decided to watch it properly, and I thought it was pretty good. Not as good as Universal's later "The Wolf Man", but still a good film in it's own right. Henry Hull made a good werewolf, though he wasn't nearly as easy to sympathize with as Cheney Jr.'s later portrayal. I really liked the plot, very different than most werewolf flicks. I especially liked the fact that there were two werewolves present, though we only get to see one transform. Most of the transformations were pretty run-of-the-mill, but the walking transformation was phenomenal. This film's main flaw was it's pacing; even at barely over an hour in length, it seems to drag on very badly. Overall if you're a fan of werewolves, this early feature is a good one to check out.

7/10