Better Than 'The Wolf Man'

I like The Wolf Man better. Werewolf of London suffers from a rather boring cinematic style set in an urban city, not at all like the eerie, dream-like foggy environemnt of the woods in Wolf Man. Also, Glendon is a wooden character and not very sympathetic, whereas Lon Chaney Jr.'s characterization of Talbot really sets him up as an average joe caught in the wrong place at the wrong time and forced to do terrible things. I also think that the prolonged humour scenes in Werewolf of London, with the drunken busybody old woman and her friend - who are always punching one another in the face - detracts from the intensity of the film.

They're both decent films, but I like The Wolf Man better.

I totally disagree. WEREWOLF OF LONDON is a decent flick but THE WOLF MAN is a great, great film.

I just posted on the "What This Movie Has That The Wolfman Doesn't" thread, and love both versions; however, you are correct, and, as I posted above, there are two different levels of thinking by the two afflicted characters. The transformations in "TWOL" is excellent, both for the time and compared to CGI (I find that stuff BORING!!!) I might just have to agree wholeheartedly with you, come to think of it!
Let's drink a beer to it!!!

They both balance out about the same. I kinda enjoyed the idea that the werewolves in WoL weren't salt of the earth like Larry Talbot but were narrowly ambitious and sinisterly motivated.



She makes a beautiful zombie doesn't she?

I too like WoL better that TW. I find WoL's quirky 'scientific' Jekyll and Hyde take far more interesting than the cartoony curses and old folklore stuff of the TW, and I've never liked Cheney's Wolfman make up. He looks like an 'old lady dog' with a silly hairdo to me.


I wanna find out why I'm working - the answer can't be just to pay bills and pile up more money.

This movie was OK, but I found The Wolf Man to be much more entertaining and satisfying. It seemed far more spooky, suspenseful, and atmospheric.

Come, fly the teeth of the wind. Share my wings.

There's not much wrong with WOL, aside from the fact--as most of you have already pointed out--the lead character, played by Hull, is hardly the sympathetic character that Lon Chaney was during the 1940s.

But both are excellent films, imo. I would rate WOL an 8, and The Wolf Man a perfect 10....

Werewolf of London certainly had it's moments, loved the intro of the movie especially, but Wolfman's characters were more likeable. London's tend to be more forgettable...