This film starts off in Tibet and in that segment misplaces one of the actors who is never seen again. I still wonder what happened to the good Dr.'s companion. I picture him still sitting on that rock. Ah, well, that's not the worst thing about this film. I honestly couldn't tell whether or not some scenes were supposed to be funny.
The New York Times review written at the film's release says
Designed solely to amaze and horrify, the film goes about its task with commendable thoroughness, sparing no grisly detail and springing from scene to scene with even greater ease than that oft attributed to the daring young aerialist. Granting that the central idea has been used before, the picture still rates the attention of action-and-horror enthusiasts.100 Misspent Hours offers this mixed praise:
Despite its sometimes dragging pace, often ridiculous script, unnecessary and unfunny comic relief, and implausibly portrayed supporting characters, Werewolf of London is among the more entertaining 1930’s horror films I’ve seen.
Arbogast on Film examines Valerie Hobson's scream. Goatdog has a review.