Out of Universal Pictures comes The Wolf Man, directed by George Waggner and written by Curt Siodmak. It stars Lon Chaney Jr, Claude Rains, Warren William, Ralph Bellamy, Bela Lugosi, Patric Knowles, Maria Ouspenskaya & Evelyn Ankers.
"Even a man who is pure in heart-and says his prayers by night-may become a wolf when the wolfbane blooms-and the autumn moon is bright"
Larry Talbot (Chaney) returns to his ancestral home in Britain after learning of the death of his brother. Looking to solidify his relationship with his father, Sir John (Rains), Larry also starts to fall for local antique shop girl Gwen Conliffe (Ankers). While purchasing a silver wolf headed walking stick from her he hears of the werewolf legend; about how a man turns into a wolf at certain times of the year. Later that night Larry takes Gwen and her friend Jenny (Fay Helm) to a gypsy fête out in the countryside, from where Jenny then gets separated from the other two and is attacked by a wolf. Hearing her cries Larry comes to her aid and kills the animal, but during the mêlée he was bitten and soon he finds that the legend of the werewolf is not merely hearsay.
In 1935 Universal Pictures were still on a crest of a wave with their forays into horror. However, their release of Werewolf Of London was met with poor box office returns and critical indifference. Rightly seen as a fine film now, it was back then deemed too similar to Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1931 Paramount Pictures) and some way away from the tone of Frankenstein, Dracula & The Mummy. It seemed that there was no cinematic life in some poor lycanthrope. Forward 6 years then, and springing from the brain of Curt Siodmak (Wolf Man has no direct literary source), a legacy was about to be born.
The Wolf Man, the character, in the pantheon of Univeral Monsters, is as iconic as his stable mates who blazed the trail 10 years previously. The film itself is a classic of sorts, but a long way from being a truly great movie. Good? Yes of course. Just not as awe inspiring as the legacy would have us believe. Waggner's movie is shot on a B movie budget, with himself only being a modest studio director: lets be honest here, he wasn't, for example, fit to shine the boots of Messrs Whale & Browning. His direction is competent here but devoid of any visual flourishes or boldness of vision. There's also many flaws to be found on revisits, not just the continuity errors that scream out that a rush edit happened, but also in instances within the story. Notably; we are first asked to believe that the small in stature Claude Rains has sired the oak like Lon Chaney; then the big question of how come when Lugosi's wolf attacks Jenny, it is actually a wolf, but Chaney's is actually a wolf-man? Yes indeed.
But The Wolf Man is adored by many in spite of its flaws. And not just by people like me, who after viewing the film as a child was too scared to look out into the garden at nighttime for fear of some hirsute beastie coming to get me! As noted, the budget was B level, but there's nothing B level about the cast here. Rains, Bellamy & Ouspenskaya were class acts. Lugosi = respect and Chaney, with his slick transformation from amiable gent to tortured soul, put a marker down in horror cinema that is still remembered fondly today. The sets too belie the budget; where the Universal crew come up with a Gothic cobblestoned village, bordered by a moonlit and misty forest, where the gloom is only punctured by the glow of shotgun bearing villagers flaming torches. Now that's classic Universal alright, atmosphere goes a long way, and The Wolf Man has it in spades. Credit too has to go to Siodmak, two fold in fact. Most tellingly on why we forgive Wolf Man its problems is that the story is such a good one, so good in fact that most of it has been believed to be based on archetypal legend. Then there's the fact that our protagonist here is an average Joe, not an ignorant scientist or a cursed creature with dodgy family ties, an affable guy who whilst committing an act of bravery is doomed for his trouble. It's a nice veer from the norm of Universal Monsters.
Also impressive is the makeup by Jack Pierce and the lap dissolve effects by John P. Fulton. Dated now for sure, but the artistry shown by these guys back then is nothing short of amazing. Another point of reference to Chaney's eagerness to deliver was that he went all in for Pierce to work his magic. Henry Hull in Werewolf Of London six years earlier refused to succumb to the full makeup treatment. Chaney did, and immortality was secured as he turned into a horror star overnight. The Wolf Man was a big hit with audiences, so much so that the character would appear in 4 further movies as part of a creature feature ensembles (House Of Frankenstein et al); with Chaney playing him/it every time. Odd that such an iconic monster never actually had his own sequel really! Just one of the many strange and interesting things attached to this flawed but truly enjoyable movie. 8/10
"Even a man who is pure in heart-and says his prayers by night-may become a wolf when the wolfbane blooms-and the autumn moon is bright"
Larry Talbot (Chaney) returns to his ancestral home in Britain after learning of the death of his brother. Looking to solidify his relationship with his father, Sir John (Rains), Larry also starts to fall for local antique shop girl Gwen Conliffe (Ankers). While purchasing a silver wolf headed walking stick from her he hears of the werewolf legend; about how a man turns into a wolf at certain times of the year. Later that night Larry takes Gwen and her friend Jenny (Fay Helm) to a gypsy fête out in the countryside, from where Jenny then gets separated from the other two and is attacked by a wolf. Hearing her cries Larry comes to her aid and kills the animal, but during the mêlée he was bitten and soon he finds that the legend of the werewolf is not merely hearsay.
In 1935 Universal Pictures were still on a crest of a wave with their forays into horror. However, their release of Werewolf Of London was met with poor box office returns and critical indifference. Rightly seen as a fine film now, it was back then deemed too similar to Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1931 Paramount Pictures) and some way away from the tone of Frankenstein, Dracula & The Mummy. It seemed that there was no cinematic life in some poor lycanthrope. Forward 6 years then, and springing from the brain of Curt Siodmak (Wolf Man has no direct literary source), a legacy was about to be born.
The Wolf Man, the character, in the pantheon of Univeral Monsters, is as iconic as his stable mates who blazed the trail 10 years previously. The film itself is a classic of sorts, but a long way from being a truly great movie. Good? Yes of course. Just not as awe inspiring as the legacy would have us believe. Waggner's movie is shot on a B movie budget, with himself only being a modest studio director: lets be honest here, he wasn't, for example, fit to shine the boots of Messrs Whale & Browning. His direction is competent here but devoid of any visual flourishes or boldness of vision. There's also many flaws to be found on revisits, not just the continuity errors that scream out that a rush edit happened, but also in instances within the story. Notably; we are first asked to believe that the small in stature Claude Rains has sired the oak like Lon Chaney; then the big question of how come when Lugosi's wolf attacks Jenny, it is actually a wolf, but Chaney's is actually a wolf-man? Yes indeed.
But The Wolf Man is adored by many in spite of its flaws. And not just by people like me, who after viewing the film as a child was too scared to look out into the garden at nighttime for fear of some hirsute beastie coming to get me! As noted, the budget was B level, but there's nothing B level about the cast here. Rains, Bellamy & Ouspenskaya were class acts. Lugosi = respect and Chaney, with his slick transformation from amiable gent to tortured soul, put a marker down in horror cinema that is still remembered fondly today. The sets too belie the budget; where the Universal crew come up with a Gothic cobblestoned village, bordered by a moonlit and misty forest, where the gloom is only punctured by the glow of shotgun bearing villagers flaming torches. Now that's classic Universal alright, atmosphere goes a long way, and The Wolf Man has it in spades. Credit too has to go to Siodmak, two fold in fact. Most tellingly on why we forgive Wolf Man its problems is that the story is such a good one, so good in fact that most of it has been believed to be based on archetypal legend. Then there's the fact that our protagonist here is an average Joe, not an ignorant scientist or a cursed creature with dodgy family ties, an affable guy who whilst committing an act of bravery is doomed for his trouble. It's a nice veer from the norm of Universal Monsters.
Also impressive is the makeup by Jack Pierce and the lap dissolve effects by John P. Fulton. Dated now for sure, but the artistry shown by these guys back then is nothing short of amazing. Another point of reference to Chaney's eagerness to deliver was that he went all in for Pierce to work his magic. Henry Hull in Werewolf Of London six years earlier refused to succumb to the full makeup treatment. Chaney did, and immortality was secured as he turned into a horror star overnight. The Wolf Man was a big hit with audiences, so much so that the character would appear in 4 further movies as part of a creature feature ensembles (House Of Frankenstein et al); with Chaney playing him/it every time. Odd that such an iconic monster never actually had his own sequel really! Just one of the many strange and interesting things attached to this flawed but truly enjoyable movie. 8/10