Sherlock Holmes
01. The Pearl of Death (1944) 10/10
02. The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes (1939) 10/10
03. The Scarlet Claw (1944) 9/10
04. The House of Fear (1945) 8.5/10
05. Sherlock Holmes Faces Death (1943) 8/10
06. The Hound of the Baskervilles (1939) 7.5/10
07. Dressed to Kill (1946) 7/10
08. Sherlock Holmes in Washington (1943) 6.5/10
09. The Woman in Green (1945) 6/10
10. Sherlock Holmes and the Voice of Terror (1942) 5.5/10
11. The Spider Woman (1943) 5.5/10
12. Pursuit to Algiers (1945) 5/10
13. Terror by Night (1946) 5/10
14. Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon (1942) 4/10
02. The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes (1939) 10/10
03. The Scarlet Claw (1944) 9/10
04. The House of Fear (1945) 8.5/10
05. Sherlock Holmes Faces Death (1943) 8/10
06. The Hound of the Baskervilles (1939) 7.5/10
07. Dressed to Kill (1946) 7/10
08. Sherlock Holmes in Washington (1943) 6.5/10
09. The Woman in Green (1945) 6/10
10. Sherlock Holmes and the Voice of Terror (1942) 5.5/10
11. The Spider Woman (1943) 5.5/10
12. Pursuit to Algiers (1945) 5/10
13. Terror by Night (1946) 5/10
14. Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon (1942) 4/10
List activity
10 views
• 0 this weekCreate a new list
List your movie, TV & celebrity picks.
14 titles
- DirectorSidney LanfieldStarsBasil RathboneNigel BruceRichard GreeneSherlock Holmes and Dr Watson investigate the legend of a supernatural hound, a beast that may be stalking a young heir on the fog-shrouded moorland that makes up his estate.Arthur Conan Doyle's "The Hound of the Baskervilles" may very well be the most famous story in the Holmes canon but it's far from the definitive. It's just too damn idiosyncratic to truly carry that title. For one, it takes place quite far from Holmes' home turf - deep in the Devonshire moors. Most notably, however, the great detective himself all but disappears from the entirety of the second act leaving all of the novel's sleuthing to trusty old Dr Watson. Holmes' absence works quite well in the novel where we're used to seeing the investigations from Watson's point of view but it presents something of an obstacle for adaptations, one which proves rather fatal in some cases.
Amazingly, by the time Basil Rathbone donned the deerstalker cap in 1939, the number of cinematic adaptations of Sherlock Holmes was already in the high double digits. He had already been portrayed by the likes of Eille Norwood and Arthur Wontner in a pair of highly successful film series and "The Hound of the Baskervilles" itself had already been adapted five times.
But the Rathbone film and the series which ensued from it became the definitive Holmes adaptations for decades to come. This was perhaps more due to the comparative lavishness of the productions than the faithfulness of their adaptations but their influence on the future Holmes films is irrefutable nonetheless.
"The Hound of the Baskervilles" was chosen as the first film in the series probably due to its fame. It's not a choice I personally would have made due to Holmes' noticeably reduced presence in the story but the result is an atmospheric and entertaining film, a breezy 80-minute adventure which certainly whets one's appetite for the Rathbone series to come.
The story follows the novel fairly closely and is set in Baskerville Hall, a remote house in the middle of the deadly Devonshire moors and the residence of the Baskerville family for centuries. Following the mysterious death of the old Sir Charles Baskerville, his nephew Henry (Richard Greene) inherits the house but before he even sets foot in the moors, he is already being hunted by an unknown assassin and the titular black hound which is said to be the embodiment of an ancient curse set upon the Baskerville family.
Directed by Sidney Lanfield, "The Hound of the Baskervilles" absolutely drips with atmosphere. The scenes on the foggy moors are especially effective due to the impressively artful and unfussy art direction from Richard Day and Hans Peters, as well as J. Peverell Marley's moody photography. Lanfield's direction is similarly unfussy, workmanlike yet dynamic and engaging.
Lanfield and writer Ernest Pascal keep the plot unfolding at a steady pace and with its 80-minute runtime the film never outstays its welcome. However, it does fall into a bit of a lull in its midsection when it shifts focus onto the developing romance between Sir Henry and Miss Beryl Stapleton (Wendy Barrie). Richard Greene is a likeable enough presence but he's not a particularly great actor and shares no chemistry with Barrie. Their love scenes are awfully stilted and dull especially compared to the much more exciting mystery unfolding around them.
This midsection of the film also runs into the issue of sorely lacking Holmes! The spindly Basil Rathbone cuts an aristocratic, austere figure in the part and even though he is still finding his way in the role he is undeniably commanding and magnetic whenever he's on screen. It's a crying shame that he is missing from almost half of the film.
Instead, we're left in the hands of Nigel Bruce whose performance as a more oafish and bumbling Watson is controversial, to say the least. I actually quite like Bruce in this film. He is a charming and warm fellow and a much more charismatic presence than Richard Greene but he works so much better as a sidekick than a protagonist.
The lack of Holmes also has the rather unfortunate side-effect of the film being awfully light on actual detective work for a mystery. Holmes pieces together the solution almost entirely off-screen robbing us of the opportunity to observe his unique methods. Also, much like the Conan Doyle novel, the film doesn't play fair with the audience and the central mystery is quite impossible to solve. In that sense, this film can hardly be called a mystery.
Similarly, for a thriller, "The Hound of the Baskervilles" is notably lacking in jeopardy. After a rousing first act set in London, the film's Devonshire section is a rather relaxed affair. The titular dog is only seen attacking twice in the whole picture and when he does show up he doesn't live up to his demonic reputation in the least. Similarly, there is very little dramatic urgency in the narrative. We never have the feeling that Sir Henry's life is truly in danger which robs the film of a constant sense of imminent threat.
For those reasons, I wouldn't quite list this 1939 version of "The Hound of the Baskervilles" among my favourite screen adaptations but it is nevertheless a thoroughly pleasant yarn. Well-shot and lavishly produced (especially when compared to Fox's other detective series from the period like Charlie Chan and Mr Moto), it is a very intriguing primer for the goodies yet to come.
7.5/10 - DirectorAlfred L. WerkerStarsBasil RathboneNigel BruceIda LupinoThe master sleuth hunts his archenemy, Professor Moriarty, who is planning the crime of the century."The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes" is not only the definitive detective picture of the 1930s but it is also one of the finest cinematic depictions of the great detective. Very loosely based on William Gilette's iconic 1899 play, this crackerjack adventure yarn moves at a furious pace as it follows Holmes (Basil Rathbone) and Watson's (Nigel Bruce) desperate attempts to solve an intricate series of murders revolving around the beautiful heiress named Ann Brandon (Ida Lupino).
What our fearless duo don't realize, however, is that the Brandon murders are a dastardly ploy to distract Sherlock Holmes while his nemesis, Professor Moriarty (George Zucco), the Napoleon of Crime, steals the Crown Jewels.
Moriarty is first introduced in the film's wonderfully witty prologue where we see him in the dock of the Old Bailey. Far from having been caught, Moriarty is being cleared of all charges! The foreman of the jury stands up and announces that "according to the evidence, we have no choice but to find the prisoner not guilty," before adding gravely "May God forgive us".
It's a dramatic and instantly memorable introduction to the first truly colourful villain of the Rathbone Holmes series. The perfectly cast George Zucco makes the professor an uncommonly mischievous character whose eyes twinkle excitedly at the thought of crime and mayhem.
In one of the film's best scenes, Moriarty and Holmes share a handsome cab and have a chat in which every line is dripping with pure sarcasm wrapped in false bonhomie. "You have a magnificent brain, Moriarty," says Holmes, "I admire it so much I'd like to present it pickled in alcohol to the London Medical Society".
Unlike "The Hound of the Baskervilles", this film places Holmes front and centre which is an immediate improvement. Basil Rathbone's performance is also more assured as he truly makes the character his own. He shines in the witty, snarky interchanges with Moriarty and Watson and is a commanding presence in the film's several action-charged suspense scenes.
Nigel Bruce is also better served with a wider array of gags and comic situations. His Watson comes across less like an incorrigible bungler in this film and even gets the better of Holmes in the film's epilogue. The saving grace of Bruce's Watson is his warm, gregarious presence and the natural chemistry he shares with Rathbone. It's easy to see why Holmes likes having Watson around. He is genuinely good company.
The supporting cast is filled out with colourful rogues including E.E. Clive as a proud police inspector desperately in need of Holmes' assistance, Frank Dawson as Moriarty's butler who hates his employer as much as Moriarty despises him, George Regas as the menacing gaucho assassin, and Terry Kilburn as a Baker Street Irregular.
The best-supporting performance, however, comes from the inimitable Ida Lupino who brings a great deal of charm and fortitude to the underwritten part of Ann Brandon, the film's damsel in distress. It's a great shame that her love interest, Alan Marshal, is nowhere near as good as she is. Consequently, their romantic scenes are as hollow and devoid of chemistry as the ones in "The Hound of the Baskervilles".
Nevermind. "The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes" is still infectious, witty, clever fun. The screenplay by Edwin Blum and William Drake is full of twists and innovative set-pieces and Alfred Werker's direction keeps the film moving at something approaching a breakneck pace. Unlike "The Hound of the Baskervilles", there is no lull in this film, only the constant ramping up of suspense.
Sure, Werker's direction is awfully workmanlike and at times downright stilted but Leon Shamroy's fog-bound, atmospheric photography and the cast's dynamic performances are a saving grace.
The result is pure entertainment, one of the most vivid and engaging Sherlock Holmes films, an entrancing cinematic adventure which is as funny as it is mysterious and exciting. A rare joy and an underappreciated jewel in 20th Century Fox's crown.
10/10 - DirectorJohn RawlinsStarsBasil RathboneNigel BruceEvelyn AnkersWhen a German saboteur jeeringly predicts to the nation new depredations, via their radio "Voice of Terror", the Intelligence Inner Council summons Sherlock Holmes (Basil Rathbone) to help in the crisis.The first two Sherlock Holmes films starring Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce were handsomely produced period pieces true to the spirit if not always the plots of the Arthur Conan Doyle stories. Unfortunately, they were both made in 1939, a year which heralded the oncoming storms of war and which saw a significant decrease in the production of 20th Century Fox's B-movies eventually leading to the cancellations even of their long-running series like the Charlie Chan films. Consequently, Fox decided not to produce any further Holmes films.
But never fear! In 1942, Universal Pictures stepped in, acquired the rights to the Conan Doyle stories and produced a further twelve Holmes films starring the inimitable Rathbone/Bruce duo. These films, however, are a whole different beast than their 20th Century Fox predecessors. Not only were they made with noticeably smaller budgets but they were all set in the then present day. This move was presumably made for two sound reasons. For one, it would make the films cheaper to produce, and two, it would allow Universal to turn the adventures of Sherlock Holmes into flag-waving nazi-hating propaganda.
Sherlock Holmes fighting Nazis? Why, I never!
To be honest, this is not such an unusual proposition to me. After all, Holmes spent a fair deal of his career fighting foreign spies, saving the British government from embarrassment and ruin, and serving his King and country. So why shouldn't he do so in the 1940s? Furthermore, the idea of setting Sherlock Holmes films in the present day was hardly a new one. In fact, the vast majority of Holmes films made up to 1942 underwent temporal updates.
The first of this new breed of Holmes films, "Sherlock Holmes and the Voice of Terror" has what I consider to be a rather clever premise to insert the great detective into the WWII context. Namely, Holmes is asked by the desperately stumped Inner Council of British Intelligence to identify a dangerous Nazi saboteur calling himself the Voice of Terror. Based on the much despised Lord Haw Haw, the Voice of Terror makes gloating radio broadcasts mocking the British war effort and announcing the death tolls of his sabotages.
Unfortunately, after introducing such an intriguing premise, writers Lynn Riggs and John Bright don't seem to have a clear idea of how to turn it into a compelling mystery. They pile on needless complications, confounding twists, and shady characters trying their best to obfuscate what turns out to be a rather obvious (elementary?) solution.
Another interesting idea introduced and then wasted is Holmes teaming up with a group of criminals and hoodlums to stop the dangerous Nazi saboteur. This could have resulted in an amusing "M"-like adventure had Riggs and Bright focused on the dynamics between Holmes and his unusual assistants. However, after the scene in which he convinces them to help him, we never get to see them again making this rather lengthy scene feel like pointless filler.
Furthermore, this brief subplot is coached in some of the most heavy-handed, soppy propaganda I've ever seen in my life culminating in a teary-eyed, flag-waving speech delivered by barmaid Kitty (Evelyn Ankers) in which she urges a pub full of crooks to set aside their hatred for the great detective. "There's no time to think what side you're on," she shouts, "There's only one side: England!"
Quite aside from the heavy-handed propaganda, "Sherlock Holmes and the Voice of Terror" is hopelessly hoaky. For example, Holmes walks into the British Intelligence HQ at the beginning of the film and immediately launches into some parlour act deductions like a music hall performer. Later on, he opens the door to 221B Baker Street and a man with a knife in his back falls into his arms muttering a dying clue. After a particularly nasty sabotage during which the Voice of Terror has a whole train blown up a visibly distressed general begs Holmes to put an end to this reign of terror. "His son was on that train," the general's friend explains solemnly.
Having said all of these criticisms, the film does have a number of saving graces which don't quite make it good but turn it into a thoroughly watchable piece of hokum. Most obviously, the excellent Rathbone and Bruce chemistry is effortlessly carried over from the Fox films. Rathbone, in particular, is commanding as Holmes despite a truly laughable haircut. The cast also includes the always-excellent Henry Daniell and features a menacing turn from Edgar Barrier who voices the titular saboteur.
Also superb is Elwood Bredell's photography which far outshines any other Rathbone Holmes film. Breddell has a knack for turning even the most cramped set into an atmospheric den of suspense. Like in Michael Curtiz's "The Unsuspected", his photography features some dazzling dynamic range. Look, for example, at the aforementioned Kitty scene set in a dimly lit dingy pub. And yet, the close-ups of her inspired face as she delivers her speech are absolutely luminous. An inner brightness seems to be shining from her very being and producing some gorgeous lens flares.
"Sherlock Holmes and the Voice of Terror" is not particularly effective as either a thriller or a propaganda piece. It's far too thinly plotted to be the first and too overwrought and downright self-parodic to work as the second. And yet, the excellent cast and Elwood Breddell's fetching photography do make it worth watching.
5.5/10 - DirectorRoy William NeillStarsBasil RathboneNigel BruceLionel AtwillSherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson must protect a Swiss inventor of an advanced bomb sight from falling into German hands."Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon" smartly tones down the hoakyness and the flag-waving patriotism of its immediate predecessor but it ultimately generates very little excitement as it meanders its way through a doddering little spy yarn which feels more like a second-rate Bulldog Drummond story than a Sherlock Holmes mystery.
The screenplay was written in part by W. Scott Darling, one of the worst writers to work on the Charlie Chan series, and it exhibits one of his most damaging hallmarks - an almost complete lack of structure or urgency.
The film begins with an extended prologue in which Holmes (Basil Rathbone) helps a Swiss scientist named Tobel (William Post Jr.) defect to England. The characters pretend that this is some sort of a daring feat but, in truth, this entire sequence comes across as comically easy. Not only is Tobel guarded by only two bored-looking Gestapo men but they are also taken in by an extremely obvious and tired trick unworthy of the genius of Sherlock Holmes.
After some 10 minutes, Holmes and Tobin finally find themselves in Old Blighty where the writers cook up some more narrative blind alleys for the film to stumble into. For example, Tobin, for some bizarre reason, drugs Dr Watson (Nigel Bruce) in order to have a meeting with his fiancee Charlotte (Karen Verne). Why Holmes or Watson would prevent Tobin from meeting his fiancee is never explained. Furthermore, their romance plays no part in the plot whatsoever and we never see them interact again in the rest of the film.
Finally, about halfway through, some semblance of a plot rears its head in the form of Professor Moriarty (Lionel Atwill), the Napoleon of crime, who has, again for some inexplicable reason, started working with the Nazis. He is after Tobin's revolutionary invention - an extremely accurate bombsight - which the good doctor has promised to the English.
I must confess I don't particularly care for Lionel Atwill's performance as Moriarty. He is far too thuggish and obvious to be convincing as the smartest criminal in Britain, one who is so clever and so analytical in his approach to crime that no one even suspects him of being anything more than a kindly academic. This Moriarty is no different than the brutish henchman in his employ and is clearly no match for Rathbone's wily Holmes.
The rest of the film is a kind of cloak-and-dagger story. Rathbone gets to don three different disguises throughout the film, each less convincing than the last. Most of the set-pieces lead nowhere in particular such as the one in which Holmes is captured by Moriarty's henchman only to be released in the very next scene after Dr Watson sternly shouts at them. Eventually, the film reaches its conclusion not so much due to Holmes' brilliant detective work but more so because the film reached the 70-minute mark.
The pleasures of "Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon" are very few and far between. Rathbone and Bruce are as terrific as ever but the script gives them thin material to work with. Watson barely gets any decent gags and Holmes marches through the film with a one-dimensional determination. Nothing seems to truly challenge his deductive powers and at no point does he appear even remotely stumped.
This is the first Holmes outing for Roy William Neill who would go on to direct the rest of the series and who does a fairly straightforward, workmanlike job of it. The film suffers, however, due to the absence of the brilliant cinematographer Elwood Bredell who singlehandedly made "Sherlock Holmes and the Voice of Terror" atmospheric and picturesque. His replacement Leslie White does poorly here. The film is shot in a dull, overlit, televisual manner. The streets of London during the Blitz are neither dark nor foggy and Moriarty's shadowy hideout is lit up like a supermarket.
Even though the film is set in wartime there is no sense of devastation or terror. Even though the Blitz is obliquely mentioned, characters still spend their days living in luxury and their nights galavanting around London. Meanwhile, the Nazi threat is embodied in the form of two bungling Gestapo men and a handful of Moriarty's henchmen. A strong atmosphere of dread and anxiety can do a great deal to lift a film but "Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon" just hasn't got it. Instead, it seems to be set in an uncanny simulacrum of WWII London as imagined by Hollywood designers and writers. A parallel dimension, perhaps, in which Nazi planes never reached British soil.
"Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon" is thus a flat slog, a meandering spy tale as thin on suspense and excitement as it is on mystery and deductive reasoning. The only thing worse than this screenplay is Basil Rathbone's awful haircut. I can't wait for him to finally comb his hair.
4/10 - DirectorRoy William NeillStarsBasil RathboneNigel BruceMarjorie LordSherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson travel to Washington D.C. in order to prevent a secret document from falling into enemy hands.A vast improvement over the previous two instalments, "Sherlock Holmes in Washington" is a taut, clever spy yarn which still feels more like a Mr Moto adventure than a Sherlock Holmes mystery but at least provides a consistently engaging story and some quite effectively suspenseful scenes.
The story begins with the disappearance of a British spy on board a train bound for Washington. The British government quickly engages Sherlock Holmes (Basil Rathbone) not only to find out what happened to the spy but more importantly to find the top secret documents he was carrying which must, under no circumstances, fall into the hands of those dastardly Nazis.
Unfortunately, the film tips its hand far too early by revealing almost immediately not only what happened to the spy but also where the papers are hidden. This is the only major misstep in what is otherwise a nicely put-together thriller because it puts us several steps ahead of Sherlock Holmes which is not where you want to be in a mystery. The result is a series of sequences in which we watch Holmes trying to figure out information we already know. Not only does this rather make the great detective look like a dunce but it also halts the film's narrative progression.
The screenplay by Bertram Millhauser would have been better served if the information was dosed throughout. Nothing would be lost if we found out the information along with Holmes rather than before he even shows up in the film.
Speaking of Holmes, I feel like the character hasn't been all that well used so far in the Universal films. Gone are the witty barbs and devious mind games from the two Fox films. Instead, the Universal writers use Holmes as a kind of exposition machine doling out wooden dialogue to his baffled collaborators. Some of the lines Basil Rathbone has to deliver are genuine clunkers and I marvel at his ability to say them with a straight face. "I beg your pardon, Lieutenant Grogan," he says at one point, "you see, I'm so accustomed to working quite alone at my lodgings in Baker Street that I sometimes forget the more modern scientific methods so particularly effective here in America." Gee, take a breath, Sherlock!
Our other hero Dr Watson (Nigel Bruce) is not used to any greater advantage either. In fact, Watson seems to have undergone a brain reduction surgery between this film and the last one. Not only is he written like a complete dunderhead but Bruce plays him with a kind of glazed look in his eyes throughout and has him making grunts and squeaks like one of the Three Stooges after being hit over the head with a frying pan.
Thankfully, the story is sound and director Roy William Neill does a crackerjack job of staging some awfully suspenseful scenes. My favourite and certainly the most imaginative is the one in which the secret documents (cleverly concealed, of course) are passed around a house party with none of the guests aware of their true value. It's a very witty, almost Hitchcockian scene, beautifully choreographed and shot.
Also top-notch are the film's villains played by the always-reliable Henry Daniell and George Zucco. Zucco is deliciously devious as the mastermind behind the plan while Daniell plays his chief henchman with the kind of suave menace he is so good at playing. It's no surprise that both men were at different points cast as Professor Moriarty.
"Sherlock Holmes in Washington" is far from a perfect thriller but it's an exciting and thoroughly entertaining spy thriller with some rather unexpectedly imaginative touches. What the Universal films absolutely need, however, is better screenplays, more in line with the kind of stories Sherlock Holmes is best known for. Also, someone please change Basil Rathbone's hair, he looks like a grandmother.
6.5/10 - DirectorRoy William NeillStarsBasil RathboneNigel BruceDennis HoeyDuring WWII, several murders occur at a convalescent home where Dr. Watson has volunteered his services. He summons Holmes for help and the master detective proceeds to solve the crime from a long list of suspects including the owners of the home, the staff, and the patients recovering there.After three films in which Sherlock Holmes fought Nazi scum, "Sherlock Holmes Faces Death" finally puts the great detective back into his natural habitat - solving mysterious murders in austere British mansions. Here Holmes has to contend with far more imaginative and intriguing dangers than spies and gangsters. We get a raven with a taste for blood, a clock which strikes thirteen, a serial murderer killing his victims with a needle to the brain, and an ancient riddle which leads the great detective on a treasure hunt.
"Sherlock Holmes Faces Death" is a welcome return to form. It's a film clearly cut from the same cloth as "Charlie Chan's Secret", "Castle in the Desert", and, of course, the Rathbone adaptation of "The Hound of the Baskervilles". And, as if to mark the occasion, Basil Rathbone has finally gotten a haircut and no longer resembles a 1950s grandma! Praise Osiris!
Oh, what a deliciously spooky atmosphere this film has thanks in no small part to some beautiful sets left over from Universal's "Dracula" and Charles Van Enger's moody photography. Unlike Lester White who lit the previous two films in the flattest manner possible, Van Enger bathes this film in shadows and contrasts. Especially beautiful are the shots in the long-forgotten crypt which Holmes uncovers in the third act leading to a rather exciting and well-executed climax.
The story is inspired by one of my favourite Arthur Conan Doyle short stories, "The Musgrave Ritual", and it benefits greatly from its treasure hunt plot. The best and most amusing scene in the film is the one in which Holmes gathers all the characters together in the massive hall to help him solve the ancient Musgrave riddle by playing a game of human chess.
Still set in the midst of WWII, "Sherlock Holmes Faces Death" begins when the surly Philip Musgrave (Gavin Muir) is murdered in his ancestral manor. Coincidentally, half of the manor has been repurposed as an army hospital led by none other than our old friend Dr Watson (Nigel Bruce).
Watson's more cartoonish tendencies are noticeably toned down in this film even though he does get to perform a rather feeble and ill-fitting version of the "Who's on First" routine. Still, he's more dependable and less buffoonish than he was in the previous film. Perhaps this is because of the presence of Dennis Hoey's Inspector Lestrade who is the film's proper comic relief. There is actually a rather funny gag involving Lestrade which is set up and then paid off in the most unexpected moment when you've almost forgotten about it. To say more would be to spoil a good belly laugh.
"Sherlock Holmes Faces Death" also features Basil Rathbone's finest performance since "The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes". He's magnetically commanding in this film, beaming with energy and intelligence. His climactic battle of wits with the killer might be his best-acted scene so far in the series.
The film's weakness, however, is in its murder plot which is both curiously sluggish and awfully predictable. Written by Bertram Millhauser, the story itself has great promise but director Roy William Neill seems more interested in maintaining the spooky atmosphere than creating any genuine mystery. I spotted the killer almost instantly as I don't think Neill and the actor playing the character made any effort to hide their identity. It doesn't help that the killer's motivation is rather thin and that his chosen methods prove irrelevant since the film doesn't bother to make much of a mystery around them.
There is also supposed to be a romance subplot going on but Neill and Millhauser shove it so far into the background that I rather forgot about it. It revolves around the youngest Musgrave sibling Sally (Hillary Brooke) and a recovering American soldier (Milburn Stone). While Hillary Brooke is quite charming in her role, Milburn Stone is aptly surnamed and the two don't share much chemistry. This is not surprising as none of the films in this series so far have had even a half-decent romance subplot.
Even so, "Sherlock Holmes Faces Death" is the best entry in the series since "The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes". It's a spooky, witty, entertaining ride which puts Holmes back into the kinds of stories he's best known for. I didn't mind his Nazi fighter role as much as some Sherlockians do but I must concur with them that he works much better solving enigmatic murders and uncovering centuries-old treasure.
8/10 - DirectorRoy William NeillStarsBasil RathboneNigel BruceGale SondergaardSherlock Holmes investigates a series of so-called "pajama suicides". He knows the female villain behind them is as cunning as Moriarty and as venomous as a spider.The good citizens of London are in the grips of terror as the city is plagued with an outbreak of mysterious suicides. As if possessed by demons, the victims all seemed to wake up in the middle of the night and leap out of their bedroom windows for no apparent reason. As the death toll mounts, all the terrified inhabitants of the greatest city in the world can say is "Where is Sherlock Holmes to save us now?"
Indeed, where is the great detective? Well, he's dead. Or, at least that's what the newspapers are saying. In what must be one of the goofiest scenes in the entire series, Sherlock Holmes (Basil Rathbone) gets a bad case of vertigo while fishing in Scotland and takes a tumble down a mountain leaving nothing but his deerstalker and a distressed Dr Watson (Nigel Bruce) behind.
Of course, anyone who's read "The Adventure of the Empty House" will know what kind of game is afoot and when a rich gambler named Ranji Singh arrives in London will instantly recognise him as the great detective in disguise. His plan? Capture the mysterious Adrea Spedding (Gale Sondergaard) who seems to be orchestrating the suicides.
"The Spider Woman" is a momentous occasion in the Basil Rathbone Holmes series. Not only is it the first film since "The Hound of the Baskervilles" not to have the protagonist's name in the title but it is also the first of the Universal films whose plot is not connected in any way to the war. Thus, the move away from propaganda which began tentatively with "Sherlock Holmes Faces Death" is now complete.
The villain this time around is an alluring femme fatale but "The Spider Woman" is nothing like any film noir I've ever seen. In fact, it's a rather strange film, tonally inconsistent and full of bizarre moments and quirky details. I've already mentioned the downright parodic prologue featuring Holmes' supposed demise but the film keeps getting stranger. Holmes has to contend with poisonous spiders, sleeping gas booby traps, and a horrifically disfigured pygmy assassin. At one point, he finds himself hidden behind a shooting gallery with Hitler and Mussolini as targets. The strangest scene, by far, is the surprisingly disturbing sequence in which a mute child menacingly hops around 221B Baker Street while fixing Dr Watson with a stare resembling that of "The Midwich Cuckoos".
And yet, the film remains curiously unengaging. All the way through, I felt that it could have been served better by a more dreamlike atmosphere, a kind of Val Lewtonesque approach which would tip the whole thing into the realm of phantasmagoria. Roy William Neill's direction is unfortunately far too workmanlike for something like that and "The Spider Woman" feels more incoherent than nightmarish.
Bertram Millhauser's screenplay doesn't make much sense and feels cobbled together out of spare parts. Frequent and seemingly random references to other stories in the Sherlock Holmes canon only seem to corroborate this feeling. A poison gas is named "The Devil's Foot", for example; Watson mentions the case of the Giant Rat of Sumatra; the solution is lifted straight out of "The Speckled Band". Is this 1943's idea of fan service?
The plot is equally unhinged. Like Moriarty's plans before, the Spider Woman's plot relies more on chance than sound thinking and Millhauser doesn't quite connect any of the many dots he introduces. Why did Holmes fake his death? How does that help him solve this case? Who is Adrea Spedding? What is the deal with the mute child? What is the deal with the pygmy?
Much like a fair number of these Rathbone Holmes adventures, what "The Spider Woman" could really use is some mystery. Why do so many of these films tip off the killer's identity right from the start? Why don't we ever see Holmes make any real deductions? Why not write a proper murder mystery?
Thankfully, the film is bolstered by some of the best performances so far in the series not least from Gale Sondergaard who proves to be an even match for Basil Rathbone. The scenes between them sparkle with wit and menace in the same way that the marvellous scenes between Rathbone and Zucco did in "The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes". These are some true mind games.
The film also features a few rather funny moments courtesy of Nigel Bruce and Dennis Hoey as Inspector Lestrade. Bruce doesn't have as much to do in this film but he does get the funniest gag he's had in any of the Universal films which involves Watson mistaking a revered entomologist for Holmes in disguise.
"The Spider Woman" is far too conventionally shot to reach the heights of absurdity its plot promises. The screenplay is frequently incoherent and the pace is a tad too sluggish for my liking but the film does have a certain charm and entertainment factor which make up for some of its logical failings. It's not much of a mystery but as a B-movie, it's a fairly fun ride.
5.5/10 - DirectorRoy William NeillStarsBasil RathboneNigel BruceGerald HamerWhen a gentlewoman is found dead with her throat torn out, the villagers blame a supernatural monster. But Sherlock Holmes, who gets drawn into the case from nearby Quebec, suspects a human murderer.A letter from a dead woman sends Sherlock Holmes (Basil Rathbone) and Dr Watson (Nigel Bruce) on the trail of a seemingly supernatural beast stalking the marshes around the little Canadian village of La Mort Rouge. Strongly inspired by "The Hound of the Baskervilles", "The Scarlet Claw" is closer in tone to one of the Universal horror films than any of their Sherlock Holmes films.
However, it also proves to be one of the more compelling whodunnits in the series even though the killer's motivation proves to be more than a little contrived. Never mind! The screenplay by Edmund L. Hartmann and Roy William Neill, based on a story developed by Paul Gangelin and Brenda Weisberg, provides us with a neat hook (or should that be a sharp claw?) in the form of the mysterious beast and several quite unexpected twists and turns.
To speak of the killer's identity would, of course, be an unforgiveable spoiler but the manner in which the film hides it is deliciously clever. Furthermore, the screenplay offers several decent suspects and red herrings along the way unlike the previous Sherlock Holmes films which either telegraphed the killer's identity from the start or didn't even bother concealing it.
The film's biggest quality, however, is its thick, gothic atmosphere buoyed by George Robinson's shadowy, chiaroscuro photography. There are quite a few memorably creepy images in the film such as the one of Lord Penrose (Paul Cavanagh) standing over the corpse of his wife or the one in which Holmes and the inn-keeper Journet (Arthur Hohl) seem to be floating in a dark void as the killer's shadow looms large over their heads.
Paul Satwell's score is far from subtle but there is a certain campy charm to its screechy insistance. It adds nicely to the overall atmosphere of cosy horror which should be considered a genre all of its own.
Finally, a word on the excellent production design from Ralph M. DeLacy and John B. Goodman. Even though they are clearly working on a tight budget, they manage to create a wholly convincing and engrossing replica of a small backwoods town surrounded by woods and gripped by an ancient terror. The Holmes series hasn't had such evocative sets since "The Hound of the Baskervilles".
But "The Scarlet Claw" is a better film than "The Hound of the Baskervilles". There is a more palpable atmosphere of tension and dread about it, a constant sense of tension and threat hanging in the air. The mystery is also presented more clearly and there is a much larger pool of potential suspects. Finally, the mysterious creature of La Mort Rouge works better on screen than the rather cuddly looking dog who was meant to be the titular hound.
While the conclusion might not pass the most stringent of logic tests and the film itself could stand to lose a few dialogue-heavy minutes, "The Scarlet Claw" proves a gripping, atmospheric, and wildly entertaining mixture of Universal monster movies and the Sherlock Holmes canon. Spearheaded by the reliably commanding Basil Rathbone and his comic sidekick Nigel Bruce, the film moves along swiftly and creepily under the capable though workmanlike direction of Roy William Neill.
9/10 - DirectorRoy William NeillStarsBasil RathboneNigel BruceDennis HoeyWhen a valuable pearl with a sinister reputation is stolen, Sherlock Holmes must investigate its link to a series of brutal murders.Sherlock Holmes (Basil Rathbone) is the laughingstock of London in "The Pearl of Death", an astonishingly entertaining and exciting adventure which, in some ways, feels like Universal's take on the brilliant "The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes".
The film also has a subtly deconstructive air about it as it shows how Holmes' penchant for showmanship could prove to be his ultimate downfall. While Rathbone's Holmes is perhaps not as haughty as most, he does allow himself more than an occasional moment of unbound arrogance. In the film's intriguing prologue, for example, we see him send a greeting card to a criminal he's just foiled.
In another such moment, he disables the security system of The British Museum in order to prove a petty point only for a gang of criminals to steal a priceless pearl at that very moment. Embarrassed, with his reputation in tatters, Holmes has to track down the pearl and its dangerous thieves in order to prove he is still the greatest detective of all time.
The gang is led by the menacing Giles Conover (Miles Mander) who has just as big of an ego as Holmes. He takes great pleasure in seeing his foe in such dire straits and can hardly restrain himself from gloating. Conover doesn't care if people know he's a crook as long as they can't prove it. He even turns himself in goading the police to find the pearl and charge him if they can. Of course... they can't.
Mander's performance as Conover is one of the gems of the film. He makes him a menacing yet witty presence with a devilish glee in his eye. It's a terrific villain performance which reminded me very much of George Zucco's definitive Moriarty from "The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes".
Even more memorable, however, are Conover's underlings who do his dirty bidding. One is the perfectly charming and deviously clever Naomi Drake (Evelyn Ankers) and the other is her horrifically disfigured boyfriend known as The Creeper (Rondo Hatton). Hatton, now an iconic horror figure, makes for a superb henchman in the film. Shown mostly in shadows and silhouettes, The Creeper is an unusual enemy for Holmes. He'd be more at home in a superhero film and could even be seen as an early prototype for Bane. This doesn't make him any less effective, however, and due to his genuinely scary presence, "The Pearl of Death" has a constant atmosphere of tension and threat.
Bertram Millhauser's screenplay is unusually taut and focused. There are no romance subplots, red herrings, or filler sequences. The story, as clear as can be, moves at a perfect pace and delivers thrill after thrill. The film is also not lacking in mystery as some of these more suspense-oriented Holmes films have been. Millhauser's screenplay takes inspiration from Arthur Conan Doyle's "The Six Napoleons", cleverly integrating the central mystery of the titular statues into its adventure plot.
The film is also interesting for briefly but intriguingly exploring the relationship between Holmes and Watson (Nigel Bruce). When Holmes' reputation is in tatters and the whole of London is making fun of him, Watson is the only person who sticks by his friend and even gets into a fistfight defending his honour. Who wouldn't want a friend like that?
Nigel Bruce gets a chance to do his usual schtick portraying Watson as something of a dullard but most of the comedic responsibilities are once again delegated to Denis Hoey's Lestrade. Hoey doesn't get enough credit, in my opinion, as an integral part of this series. He is a very funny performer whose Lestrade is uncommonly likeable even though he is clearly a few French fries short of a Happy Meal.
The director of photography here is Virgil Miller, the same man who shot "Charlie Chan at Treasure Island" which is my personal favourite of that series. Even though "The Pearl of Death" is not a horror film, Miller infuses it with a suitably spooky gothic atmosphere whenever The Creeper is around. These scenes are indeed the film's best but Miller's work shines throughout.
With its memorable trio of villains, a complex and intriguing plot, and some welcome character development for Holmes and Watson, I am confident in saying that "The Pearl of Death" is the finest film in the Rathbone series. It is also an absolute hoot, full of humour and twists, as only a good old-fashioned 1940s B-movie can be.
10/10 - DirectorRoy William NeillStarsBasil RathboneNigel BruceAubrey MatherSherlock Holmes investigates a series of deaths at a castle with each foretold by the delivery of orange pips to the victims.Drearcliffe House is a mansion perched on top of a steep Scottish cliff overlooking the remote village of Inverneill. As forbidding as its name implies, the house is inhabited by seven kooky men in search of a quiet life who refer to themselves as the Good Comrades. Unfortunately, their peaceful co-existence is interrupted when a devilish assassin begins murdering the Good Comrades one by one, announcing each murder with the arrival of an envelope containing seven orange pips.
The more I watch these horror-tinged instalments of the Basil Rathbone Sherlock Holmes film series, the more I realize that they live or die on the talent of their cinematographer. Thankfully, "The House of Fear" is shot by the inimitable Virgil Miller whose chiaroscuro lighting and creative framing turn the Universal sound stages into veritable pits of terror. He does a remarkable job giving the film a real sense of place - creating, seemingly out of nothing, the chilling atmosphere of the windswept Scottish Highlands and the eeriness of the remote Drearcliffe House stalked by a maniacal serial killer.
The sets in "The House of Fear" are not as lavish or as memorable as the ones in "The Scarlet Claw" nor is the material itself as engrossing and imaginative as "The Pearl of Death" but Miller absolutely makes the most of what he is given. Using Dutch angles and deep, dark shadows, Miller creates a world of crooked morals and long-held secrets. Nothing is quite right in this film and every character is a sort of cockeyed parody of a stock mystery character. There's a captain, for example, but instead of being the usual Agatha Christie archetype of patriarchal stoicism, Captain Simpson (Harry Cording) is more of a pirate with his scraggly beard and variety of tattoos. The doctor (Paul Cavanagh) is a scoundrel once suspected of murdering his wife, the Scottish laird (Aubrey Mather) is a kooky, loveable softy, and the maid (Sally Shepherd) is an austere, broad-shouldered matron and the film's herald of death.
The screenplay by Roy Chanslor is most credited as being based on "The Aventure of the Five Orange Pips". However, even a cursory glance reveals that the two stories have little in common besides the titular gimmick. Instead, "The House of Fear" is a rather conventional "old dark house" thriller in which a masked killer moves through hidden passageways picking off the characters one by one. For that reason, this film has more in common with "The Cat and the Canary" than any Arthur Conan Doyle tale.
After a properly spooky first act, the film falls into a bit of a rut repeating the same formula over and over again - a character receives the orange pips, becomes hysterical, falls asleep, and is then found dead the next morning. In between, a whole host of strange things happen which are never properly explained. After all, they're only there to fill out the already brief runtime. Why, for example, does the killer lock Inspector Lestrade (Dennis Hoey) in a cupboard only for the hapless policeman to be freed by Holmes moments later? Why does the killer attempt to strangle Dr Watson at the most inconvenient moment?
The result is a film whose structure is both repetitive and plagued with randomness. A lot of the events in the film feel contrived rather than logical and are never satisfactorily explained. And yet, "The House of Fear" contains the best mystery of all the Universal films so far. The central whodunnit plot is quite nicely conceived and the solution, while not exactly hard to figure out, is rather clever. Unfortunately, it seems that Roy Chanslor never figured out how to stretch the material out to 69 minutes in a reasonable fashion.
Far too much of the runtime is also devoted to the misadventures of Dr Watson who spends a great deal of the film muttering pointless exposition to himself. "Someone's left the door unlocked", "The chair's been moved", etc. There is a seemingly interminable sequence in the middle of the film in which Watson witnesses a series of inexplicable (and never explained) strange occurrences including a moving armour and disappearing suspects.
But "The House of Fear" works more often than not. Virgil Miller's exquisite photography creates a nice atmosphere of classic Universal horror, the central mystery is cleverly conceived, and Basil Rathbone is, as ever, on top form delivering yet another commanding and charismatic performance as the great detective.
8.5/10 - DirectorRoy William NeillStarsBasil RathboneNigel BruceHillary BrookeSherlock Holmes investigates when young women around London turn up murdered, each with a finger severed. Scotland Yard suspects a madman, but Holmes believes the killings to be part of a diabolical plot.Three different actors have played Professor Moriarty opposite Basil Rathbone's Sherlock Holmes. First was the wittily intelligent George Zucco in "The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes", next up was Lionel Atwill who offered a more thuggish and less refined take on the role in "Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon", and finally there was Henry Daniell who played the Napoleon of crime in "The Woman in Green". In his autobiography, Rathbone named Daniell as his favourite saying that while "there were other Moriartys, none were so delectably dangerous". Personally, my favourite Moriarty remains George Zucco whose playful interactions with Rathbone foregrounded Moriarty's intelligence rather than his brutishness. However, it is undeniable that Henry Daniell makes a terrific villain and that his performance is one of the highlights of "The Woman in Green".
Daniell, a much underrated character actor from the 30s and 40s had already appeared twice in the Rathbone Holmes films both times playing a sleazy, arrogant character at odds with our great detective. His approach to playing Moriarty is quite similar, giving the character an icy elegance which neither Zucco nor Atwill had. The best scene in the film is without a doubt the one in which Moriarty calls at 221B Baker Street to personally threaten Holmes' life. The scene is bursting with tension even though both men remain perfectly courteous. It's just a terrible shame that it is the only scene the two men share in the film.
"The Woman in Green" was written by Bertram Millhauser and it shares some similarities with "The Spider Woman" which he also wrote. Both films feature mysterious, vaguely supernatural women orchestrating a series of murders. Here it is titular Lydia Marlow (Hillary Brooke), a talented hypnotist, who uses her powers to convince rich men that they are the serial killer murdering young women on the streets of London so that Professor Moriarty can swoop in and blackmail them.
Millhauser once again takes inspiration from all kinds of Arthur Conan Doyle stories. He lifts the entire third act of "The Empty House" and quotes liberally from both "The Final Problem" and "The Adventure of the Cardboard Box". The result is a strangely undisciplined script which begins as a serial killer thriller then segues into adventure mode before hurtling headlong into mesmerism-tinged horror, and finally ending with the most abrupt and rushed climax in the entire series.
Unfortunately, the only thing the film lacks is mystery since Moriarty's entire dastardly plot is outlined to us in the first act. This places us several steps ahead of Sherlock Holmes which is never a good place to be in a detective film as we spend far too much of the film waiting for him to catch up.
Thankfully, the film is a whole lot of fun and Roy William Neill does establish more of a coherent tone than he did in "The Spider Woman". Consequently, "The Woman in Green" makes for a diverting if not terribly memorable entry in the Rathbone Holmes series.
Much like the two films which came before it, "The Woman in Green" is greatly improved by the work of cinematographer Virgil Miller who gives it some much-needed atmosphere. Especially good are the scenes in which Lydia Marlow hypnotises her victims by making them stare at their own reflections in a bowl of clear water. Moodily shot by Miller and head-spinningly edited by Edward Curtiss, these scenes are some of the most atmospheric in the entire series.
Strangely, this film also contains what is easily the most hackneyed scene of the whole series. It is the film's climax which feels like it was cobbled together in a matter of hours. Especially egregious is the way a major character's death is handled with a single wide shot. The result is a finale which lacks any suspense or urgency rather dampening the effectiveness of the film as a whole.
"The Woman in Green" is a fun film on its own terms but it is a definite step down in quality when compared to the excellent trio of films preceding it. Virgil Miller's cinematography and Henry Daniell's performance certainly stand out but on the whole, "The Woman in Green" is not particularly memorable.
6/10 - DirectorRoy William NeillStarsBasil RathboneNigel BruceMarjorie RiordanHolmes is recruited to escort the heir to a European throne safely back to his homeland after his father's assassination.After a highly successful and entertaining string of horror-tinged mysteries, the Rathbone Holmes series returns to its cloak and dagger roots with "Pursuit to Algiers", another middlingly diverting yet instantly forgettable spy yarn in the manner of those early wartime propaganda films like "Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon". It is also hard not to draw parallels with some of the Charlie Chan films from the period when Fox was becoming tired of the series and began slashing its budgets. Similar to films like "Charlie Chan's Murder Cruise" and "Charlie Chan in Rio", "Pursuit to Algiers" has a distinctly cheap feeling to it with its limited cast, single claustrophobic setting, and repetitive plot.
The film begins decently enough with our heroes being lured to a secret rendezvous with the prime minister of Rovenia (one of those fake Eastern European countries which were popular in mystery fiction of the time). After the assassination of the previous king, a new ruler is to be installed. The trouble is that the young prince is currently residing in Britain and needs an escort back to his homeland to protect him from falling victim to the same people who killed his father. Quite why Sherlock Holmes, the greatest detective of his time, is chosen to be a bodyguard to a foreign monarch is never satisfactorily explained but never mind, it's all in good fun.
Eventually, Holmes, Watson, and the young prince find themselves on board of a ship along with a group of passengers any of whom might be the assassins. This is a decent enough premise for a mystery film if not particularly original but the screenplay by Leonard Lee does not even pretend it wants to be a detective film.
In fact, Holmes identifies the assassins less than halfway through and mysteriously does nothing about it letting them roam the ship freely. Most of the film then sees our heroes merrily whiling away the days until their arrival in Rovenia while the hapless trio of assassins try various ploys to kill them. "Pursuit to Algiers" thus morphs into a strange "Home Alone" prototype starring villains who distractingly resemble Dick Dastardly and Muttley. Their plans are about as clever as well including hiring a surly knife-thrower and hiding a stick of dynamite in a Christmas cracker.
All of these shenanigans are played far too seriously by director Roy William Neill who seems to be trying desperately to find at least a shred of tension in all of this nonsense. Sadly, he utterly fails and the film is never in the least bit suspenseful or intriguing.
Another major issue is that the young prince is a horridly uncharismatic character who barely has three lines in the entire film. Most of the time, he stands like a plank of wood behind Holmes and Watson. I have no idea why the filmmakers expect me to care about him or the future of Rovenia in the least.
The film's major saving grace is Nigel Bruce whose comedic schtick is at last put to good use. During the voyage, Dr Watson becomes infatuated with a young singer (Marjorie Riordan), tries his best to avoid a tiresome health freak with a revolver in her handbag (Rosalind Ivan), and is thoroughly creeped out by a mysterious steward who keeps bringing him wrong drinks (Ashley Cowan). I found Watson's little misadventures far more intriguing than the main plot.
Sherlock Holmes, meanwhile, has become something of a psychic. In the previous films, the writers at least tried to make his deductions seem like they are based on some sort of logic. In "Pursuit to Algiers", however, he appears to divine the solutions out of thin air. Furthermore, his memory is incredible. Not only does he remember the face of a knife thrower he glimpsed at the circus many years before but he also knows everything about a club the young singer works at, an old woman's jewels, and Rovenian fashion. None of this is in the least bit elementary, my dear Holmes.
"Pursuit to Algiers" is nonsense of the highest degree. It completely abandons any pretence at logic or clever plotting and indulges in all of the worst tendencies of 1940s detective B-movies. It must be said, however, that it is never tiresome or dull and some nice comedic interludes from Nigel Bruce keep it a thoroughly pleasant watch even though none of it ever feels remotely like a Sherlock Holmes story.
5/10 - DirectorRoy William NeillStarsBasil RathboneNigel BruceAlan MowbrayWhen the fabled Star of Rhodesia diamond is stolen on a London to Edinburgh train and the son of its owner is murdered, Sherlock Holmes must discover which of his suspicious fellow passengers is responsible."Terror by Night" is the younger, leaner brother of "Pursuit to Algiers". Both films see the great detective Sherlock Holmes employed as a common bodyguard to escort someone or something from point A to point B on board a claustrophobic vehicle. In "Pursuit to Algiers", he was escorting a prince on board a ship. In "Terror by Night", he is escorting a priceless diamond on board a train. Of course, the diamond is stolen, there is a murder, and the killer is one of the passengers on board.
I am quite partial to a good train-bound thriller but "Terror by Night" is no "Murder on the Orient Express". Written by Frank Gruber, the film devotes far too much time to comedic shenanigans and general mucking about instead of constructing a taut mystery. This train is full of cartoon kooks and loonies and the poor, unfortunate Dr Watson is destined to run afoul of all of them. First, he is accosted and accused of being an imposter by an arrogant maths teacher. After that, he thinks he's discovered the diamond only to end up with a tea kettle. How compelling!
Nigel Bruce does his usual schtick quite competently but there is a definite sense that the film is spinning its wheels for most of its brief 59-minute runtime. The story is thin and predictable and the writer struggles noticeably to stretch it out to feature length without significant padding. The villain is easily identifiable because it's the only character who's not a comedic caricature. The story is eventually resolved not through brilliant detective work but rather through some utterly improbable double crosses and a final switcharoo which wouldn't fool the Scooby Gang but somehow works on our dastardly bad guy.
The tight budget is even more noticeable here than it was in "Pursuit to Algiers". The train set is so cramped that most of the action is played in close-ups and two-shots. The absence of a great cinematographer like Virgil Miller is also keenly felt. DP Maury Gertsman does a competent job but is unable to make the cheap sets look convincing or atmospheric. His lighting is also quite bland which robs the film of any sense of terror promised by its title.
Like all of the Rathbone Holmeses, however, "Terror by Night" is a decently entertaining romp significantly improved by the presence of its commanding star. Even though he was at this point tired of the role, Basil Rathbone is still as charismatic as ever. His Holmes is always in charge of the situation with his unflappable good humour and a keen eye for detail. Nigel Bruce and Dennis Hoey provide, as usual, good support and a fair share of laughs.
The supporting cast, however, is a mixed bag. On the one hand, we have our mysterious killer whose identity I shan't reveal but whose performance is easily the highlight of the picture. On the other hand, there is a fair share of rather annoying comedic performances. There's also Renee Godfrey who delivers what must be the worst English accent I've ever heard in my entire life. I kept waiting for Holmes to expose her as either a bad Nazi spy or Dick Van Dyke.
"Terror by Night", sadly, bears all the hallmarks of a film series on its last legs. It's formulaic, repetitive, thinly plotted, padded, and ridiculously cheap. Shame, because the setting is very promising and Rathbone delivers yet another terrific performance.
5/10 - DirectorRoy William NeillStarsBasil RathboneNigel BrucePatricia MorisonSherlock Holmes sets out to discover why a trio of murderous villains, including a dangerously attractive female, are desperate to obtain three unassuming and inexpensive little music boxes.I must confess that following the rather tepid trio of instalments preceding it, I began watching "Dressed to Kill" without much enthusiasm. At this point, Basil Rathbone had shot a dozen Sherlock Holmes films for Universal over the course of four years and the wear was definitely beginning to show. The budgets were noticeably smaller, the plots regrettably thinner, and the formulas ever more repetitive. There was little sign of the enthusiasm and charisma which were the mark of the series in its heyday. And yet, the final film of the series, "Dressed to Kill", was a surprisingly delightful entry, a brief return to form exhibiting little of the tiredness which had plagued the past three films.
To be fair, "Dressed to Kill" is something of a retread of my personal favourite Rathbone Holmes film "The Pearl of Death". Both films have Holmes squaring off against a trio of villains who will stop at nothing to acquire seemingly worthless items. Any fan of Arthur Conan Doyle will, of course, recognise that both films lift their plots from "The Six Napoleons". And yet, "Dressed to Kill" manages to put a clever little spin on the premise all of its own. The items the villains are seeking in this film are music boxes all of which play a variation of the same tune. Holmes quickly figures out that the items themselves are of no interest but that the key to the mystery lies in the tune instead.
The authors of this clever little musical mystery are our old friends Leonard Lee and Frank Gruber. Together they've managed to write a far better and tighter screenplay than apart. "Dressed to Kill" features some actual detection, a few neat and unpredictable twists, and a trio of menacing villains led by yet another mysterious femme fatale this time rather well-played by Patricia Morison. Another element taken straight out of "The Pearl of Death" is Ms Morrison's henchman who is madly in love with her. Unfortunately, nothing much is made of this subplot and the henchman himself is less memorable than The Creeper, one of the highlights of that excellent film.
The highlight here is Patricia Morison instead playing the seductive Hilda Courtney whom Holmes deservedly compares to Irene Adler. Morison's performance is quite interesting because she doesn't play up the usual femme fatale characteristics. She doesn't try to be a smouldering sex bomb or a mystical tease like the previous female villains of the series. Instead, she meets Holmes on a more intellectual level setting devious traps to ensnare the great detective and taunting him with some well-written dialogue. She also gets a chance to put on a disguise which she does so well that she genuinely fools not only Holmes but also the audience.
The budget is also noticeably higher than it was in "Terror by Night" or "Pursuit to Algiers" allowing for a greater variety of locations and a more dynamic plot. It also makes for a better showcase of cinematographer Maury Gertsman's talents. Even though his work is never as atmospheric as Virgil Miller's or as stylish as Elwood Bredell's, I was quite impressed with some of his elegant camera movements, especially in the surprisingly large amount of scenes set in cars.
The film's one major downside is a somewhat languid pace. The film is definitely too long at 71 minutes and could have used some trimming at the screenplay stage. I do, however, appreciate the way Lee and Gruber open up the story by having Holmes venture into all kinds of environments. One of the film's most interesting scenes sees him visiting an actors' pub in order to identify the tune played by the music boxes. The film also introduces us to a few interesting side characters including Watson's old school friend Stinky Emery (Edmund Breon) who is certainly one of the most colourful people to appear in the series.
"Dressed to Kill" is far from the most original or exciting of the Rathbone Holmes films but it is an elegantly entertaining and rather clever little mystery. A definite step up from the previous three films, it's a high note to end the series on. While Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce certainly could have continued playing Holmes and Watson with as much gusto and charisma as ever, perhaps it was wise to wrap up the series before it entered its Monogram phase.
7/10