From reading the Wikipedia article on werewolves, it seems to me that you have some misconceptions about werewolves.
- True love saving werewolves is definitely not universal.
- Being weak to silver is a relatively recent addition.
- Werewolves go back way past the 1800's.
- Popular outlook on werewolves has changed with the passage of time.
You also didn't mention the full moon, or their connection to the witch trials. As for your actual ideas on changes:
- Dying to explosions isn't exactly a crazy new idea.
- Forcing Eldritch Horrors and... the Loch Ness monster, to be a part of the werewolf 'mythos' seems needlessly restrictive.
Anyhow, don't get me wrong, you can write literally anything you want, and having your own spin on werewolves is fine. However, I really doubt any sudden change in the wider perception of werewolves will come about from anything that happens here, but hey, I'd be happy to be proven wrong.
The last question is, should werewolves be changed? I made it clear that I don't think they will be (not suddenly at any rate), but as for if they should... I don't know. I barely know things about them in the first place, so I'm hardly in the position to declare it one way or the other.
As such, I'll leave you with another criticism: you want to change werewolves, but you didn't articulate why strongly enough. Think about what thematic role werewolves might play, because just changing surface level things doesn't really matter (I'd argue) in the context of changing the way people perceive them. It seems irrelevant in the bigger picture, and so thinking about that would be the next step in this discussion, because you've only mentioned a few surface level things.
Anyhow, there is more to mention (probably), but I'm outta time so I'll leave it there.
P.S. "sorry for being a grammar Nazi, but it's a force of habit." == triggers me. Like, if you will call yourself a grammar Nazi, you ought to capitalise correctly! (Altho, I guess capitalisation isn't a part of grammar... but still!)