Tag: 1935

Werewolf of London (1935)

Posted on by fenrisfil

No October Review Challenge can be complete without at least one classic Universal monster movie. This time around I’m bringing you the first feature length werewolf movie “Werewolf of London”. While “The Wolf Man” (1941) was far more iconic, and added silver bullets to the lore, it is this movie that really defined the movie version of the werewolf. Specifically the impact of the full moon and the idea of a bite transmitting the affliction. These may not have been invented for the movie, but they became the standard because of it. Almost every werewolf movie that followed would use that lore (Most ancient werewolf tales featured neither of these tropes). Ironically, when a movie like “The Company of Wolves” (1984) goes for a more authentic take on the creatures, it feels like a novelty.

Werewolf of London is directed by Stuart Walker and features creature effects by Jack Pierce (The Man behind the iconic look of Universal’s Frankenstein’s Monster). Henry Hull stars as “Wilfred Glendon”, a world-renowned botanist who has just returned from a journey to Tibet to get an incredibly rare plant. On his journey he was attacked and bitten by a strange creature. However he survive the attack and succeeded in bringing the plant back to England. It seems however that was a werewolf and the curse has now been passed on to Glendon. Only the flowers of this rare plant can help stave off his transformations. But the plant doesn’t seem to want to flower and he has a rival for it’s effects, the wolf that bit him in the first place!

Of Wolf And Man

The first thing to note here is a bit of trivia in regards to the werewolf design. Originally the werewolf was designed to be more “bear” like and then something closer to what was eventually done for The Wolf Man. Finally they arrived at the minimalist design we see in the movie. The reason for this was simply that the script called for characters to recognise who the werewolf was. Henry Hull felt the heavier makeup jobs would make this seem unrealistic. The end result provided werewolf fangs and ears but not a lot else. Probably the most notable feature is the widows peak, which was later copied for Eddie Munster (Likely for simplicity rather than favoring this movie over The Wolf Man).

Now, that said, the look actually does work for the context of the movie. Unlike in The Wolf Man, there isn’t the issue of a werewolf appearing as a full on wolf and then it’s victim only turning into a hairy humanoid. This is at least consistent. What is interesting too is the werewolf howl is actually a combination between the actors voice and a real timber wolf’s howl. This, honestly, didn’t work so well. This is why sound design and Foley is such an art in movies. Going down the obvious route rarely provides the results that works for the audience. Of course these effects from 90 years ago have aged and that does impact watching the film in 2024. Once you’ve seen movies like American Werewolf and The Howling it is hard to go back and watch these old school wolf men.

Universal Appeal

The film provides a short, simple story somewhat similar to the plot later used for The Wolf Man. The difference is this version is less mystical and features a treatment, if not a cure, for the affliction. So in a way it is more complex than the more famous film that would follow. The truth is however this is really just an excuse to get the werewolves into the story. The later films simplified that further by making the initial attack more random in nature. This film, like those that follow is really more about how the victim deals with the affliction. What made The Wolf Man work so well was that it really emphasized the tragedy of the situation. Glendon, by contrast isn’t particularly likable at the best of times. We see the tragedy, but we don’t really feel it.

Visually the movie has all the charms you’d expect from a universal horror. A good use of light and shadows and some nice looking sets. The film shows Glendon’s transformation in stages by having the actor walk behind the scenery. Thus hiding his face and as he emerges the next stage of the makeup becomes visible. This is likely done because of the limitations of effects in the thirties. Yet it actually aged surprisingly well, partially aided by the lighter make up job. What has aged a little is the music. In 1935, movie scores were still relatively new and while the music is not bad, it is somewhat intrusive and distracting in places. It’s notable, but it has at least aged better than the pre-Kong Universal horrors like Frankenstein and Dracula (Which featured very little music and none of it original).

Conclusion

This movie is an important part of horror movie history. It was the first feature length werewolf movie. It gave us the trope of turning to a wolf at the full moon and gaining the curse from being bitten. The minimalist approach to the make up influenced the werewolf make up in “Wolf” (1994) the TV series “Penny Dreadful” and of course for Eddie Munster. The basic plot (Botany aside) has been revisited in almost every werewolf movie that followed. However, compared to all of those other movies this film is lacking. A lot of the film feels comedic (Probably intentional) and the lead isn’t likable enough to really feel the tragedy of the situation. This movie is a starting point. An outline for werewolf stories to come, but without the detail filled in. As a result it more a curiosity than a recommendation. 5.5/10

Rating: 5.5 out of 10.

Bride of Frankenstein (1935)

Posted on by fenrisfil

For tonight’s review it’s time to watch the oldest film on my October Challenge list, A film that I’ve owned on DVD for decades and a long overdue watching! This is “Bride of Frankenstein” from 1935. The sequel to Universal’s groundbreaking “Frankenstein” (1931), the movie sees the return of Karloff the role that made him famous (Going from his non-credit as “?” in the original to simply “Karloff” here and in many future roles). Colin Clive returns in his role as Henry (Renamed from the novel’s “Victor”) Frankenstein and James Whale returns as director. Dwight Frye also returns though in a new (but basically the same) henchman role. They are joined by Ernest Thesiger and Peters Heggie joining the main cast for this sequel.

Despite being a sequel to the original movie, this is also an adaptation of Mary Shelly’s legendary novel “Frankenstein; or The Modern Prometheus” and focuses on elements of the story the original simply didn’t have the time to utilize. Specifically it deals with two sections on the novel. First of all The Monster’s infatuation with a poor family in a nearby village and brief friendship with the families blind father. Secondly and more importantly (As it gives the film it’s title) it deals with Frankenstein’s abandoned attempt to create a bride for the Monster. In the novel this second creature never sees life, but here of course it will.

Gods and Monsters.

Much like with the original, the new monster is credited only credited as “?” in the credits, but is actually played (Very briefly) by Elsa Lanchester. Elsa does get a credit though since she also plays Mary Shelly in a completely unnecessary lead in that portrays her telling the tale. After the lead in, we basically pick up exactly where the first movie left off and get to see that both Frankenstein and his Monster survived. While the former is recovering from injuries and regretting his attempt to play God he is visited by the sinister “Doctor Pretorius” (Thesiger), who informs him that he too has created and life and wants them to work together. Out of curiosity he agrees to see Pretorius’ creations.

This is where we reach the worst and most ridiculous part of the movie as Doctor Pretorius displays his collection of Homunculi, that is doll size humans created through alchemy. It’s worth noting there’s a lot of examples of such little creatures in old school horror and it’s frankly always very silly. Many years later Army of Darkness probably had the best take on this with the Mini-Ash monsters but even that was designed to be funny. Here it is painfully out of place but fortunately not referenced again in the movie. Prestorius’ main aim is to create a mate for Frankenstein’s Monster.

4.0.1

She’s Alive! Alive!

While all this is going on the Monster himself has escaped the mob and is hiding in a local village where he stumbles upon a blind man playing a violin. Attracted by the music he enters the house and is greeting welcomingly by the man. The two strike up a friendship and over an unclear amount of time he is able to teach the Monster a few words. But some local travelers looking for directions recognize the monster and try to attack it. In the melee the old man’s house is burned down. All parties survive and the Monster flees to a nearby crypt where he follows Prestorius’ goons and discovers the plan to create him a mate. He assists in pressuring Doctor Frankenstein into working on the project by kidnapping his fiance.

Finally we have our tragic conclusion, which I’ll avoid spoilers for, but you can probably guess how it goes. Most of the strength of this story comes from the quality of the original novel, with this sequel having picked two of the most emotionally relevant elements of the novel to focus on. Karloff does do an excellent job as the Monster, despite objecting to having to speak. He gets considerably more screen time than he did in the original here and makes the most of it. We also have a number of fantastic visuals, building on those provided with the original.

The Difference A Few Years Can Make.

One notable difference between here and the original movie is the addition of a unique thematic score by Franz Waxman. Back in 1931 when Frankenstein came out, it was still the early days for the “Talkies” and most films had very little music, using mostly pre-existing stock music or diegetic music (i.e. performed by people in the fictional world and heard by the characters). When you watch Frankenstein these days, the lack of music in the vast majority of the film is painfully noticeable.

Here, this is not a problem and this is possibly one of the most ground break scores of it’s era. This is exactly what you would expect from a Horror score, powerful, discordant and containing distinct themes for the Monster, the Bride and the evil Doctor Prestorius. The end result here is that this film has aged much better than the original. Where the original does have an advantage though is being pre-code it could be a bit more risky with what it depicts, while here they have to play a little safer, but I don’t feel this impacted it much.

Conclusion

Overall, this is a great movie for it’s time and has aged better than several other Universal classics (Notably the most famous ones, “Frankenstein” and “Dracula”). The human aspects of the story come through substantially better than in the original and it’s good to see a sequel return to the source for inspiration instead of going off on a wildly tangential path. It is unavoidably dated in some aspects though due to it’s age. The prologue and the Homunculi scenes both take from the movie to some degree instead of add to it (More so with the latter) and with such a short movie (As these Universal classics tended to be) you really don’t need to be wasting time with such nonsense.

Ultimately I always rate movies for how they work today and not in the time (Since my goal is to inform potential viewers not make a historic statement) that lowers my score somewhat. In the 30’s, this may well have been an 8/10, but for me in 2023 it is a 6.5/10.

Rating: 6.5 out of 10.

BONUS ROUND

Unrelated to the movie itself here is a couple of things I learned from seeing it. First of all I now understand where the phrase “Gods and Monsters” comes from. This is what James Gunn is calling his first phase of his DCU, it sounded familiar but didn’t realize it was from Bride of Frankenstein. I doubt there is any deeper meaning to that choice, but it shows Gunn likes his Monster Movies anyway (No shock for someone that broke through making horror comedies).

Secondly, after seeing the Bride hiss at Frankenstein in revulsion at the end of the movie I now understand that Jeanne Arnold “Grace Munster” repeatedly hissing at Herman in “Munster, Go Home!” was actually a pretty funny reference to this movie (Given she was literally hissing at Frankenstein’s Monster). At the time it just seemed weird but fitting the films tone, now it scores some bonus points. Well played Munsters, well played.