She-Wolf of London

What a swizz! Not only does this film clearly not take place in London, but there isn't a she-wolf to be seen. Instead, this creaky potboiler utilises a plot that must have seemed trite even way back in 1946: a pretty young heiress, Phyllis Allenby (June Lockhart), believes that she has fallen victim to the lycanthropic Allenby curse unaware that her 'aunt' Martha (Sara Haden) is actually trying to drive her insane so that she can a) lay claim to the family fortune, and b) set up her own daughter Carol (Jan Wiley) with Phyllis's fiancé Barry (Don Porter).

If you can't guess what is happening after Martha has given Phyllis her umpteenth warm drink to help her sleep, then you really should consider giving up watching films and take up something less taxing on the brain, like basket weaving perhaps. As mysteries go, this one is pretty easy to solve, and offers little in the way of genuine excitement or tension. Thankfully, the lovely June Lockhart (who would go onto play Maureen Robinson on the classic sci-fi series Lost in Space) is easy on the eye and helps the time pass a lot less painfully than it might otherwise have.

A young woman comes to believe she is responsible for a series of gruesome murders due to a family curse. Disappointing mystery film from Universal falsely advertised as a horror movie. It's even included on their Wolf Man Legacy DVD set. The movie is not a horror film and features no werewolves or other supernatural occurrences. I can excuse the disappointment over the misleading title and judge the movie on its own merits. What I can't excuse is that, as a mystery, it's decidedly predictable and unexciting. There's no suspense and if you can't predict who the killer is, congratulations on seeing your first movie ever.

June Lockhart, years from being immortalized as one of the great TV moms, plays the lead character as doe-eyed and dull-witted. Her childish belief that she is a serial killer is backed up by no reason. So the audience neither feels tension that she might be the killer (we know she's not) nor sympathy for her since she's so dense. The supporting cast is nice, as it almost always was with Universal in the '40s. Don Porter, Dennis Hoey, Sara Haden, Lloyd Corrigan, Jan Wiley are all fine. The Universal "look," as well as a nice supporting cast, make it watchable for fans. But I doubt casual viewers will find much of interest here.

There's not a whole lot to recommend about this film. It is a Universal Horror...though at the end of all the major horror series at the studio. It does have June Lockhart in an early role...along with Martin Kosleck in a ambivalent rather than evil role, and Dennis Hoey playing a surprisingly adept Scotland Yard inspector (he must have finally won a bet with a studio executive and got away from the bumbling Lestrade of the Rathbone/Bruce Sherlock Holme's movies). The movie has great sets, though I assume they are redressed from some other Universal horror film...they do look somewhat familiar.

On the other hand, this movie is dull...and the plot is easy to figure out after about fifteen minutes. If you've seen Curse of the Cat People, you've got a start on the plot of this movie.

Apart from excellent settings and costumes, not to mention the always reliable pulchritude and charm of June Lockhart, this Val Lewton wannabe is mainly a misfire.

More's the pity too, since it abounds in shadowy night scenes, fog, and much cloak and daggery, including a final act complete with tilted camera angles, and poisoned milk, (a la Hichcock's "Suspicion").

But there is no real grue and no real tension, and what we are left with is a lame, (though slickly produced) thriller whose main interest accrues from its interesting cast and glossy staging.

Still, given the paucity of Victorian melodramas at your local cineplex--you could do much worse.

When watching the She – Wolf of London, don't expect to see a female version of the Wolf Man, This should not be classed with the Wolf Man, Frankenstein, Dracula, the Mummy or any of their offshoots. It's an enjoyable movie but it should be considered not so much a horror movie but more of a mystery. If you are looking for a good horror movie, this isn't it. The acting is good, sets are good, plot a bit weak. It's a good chance to see June Lockhart playing a major role early in her career. I found that the movie did keep my interest but the horror factor never really came into play. Although it wasn't what I expected, I still enjoyed it. It certainly isn't a must see movie, but it isn't a waste of your time either.