Reviews & Ratings for
A Study in Scarlet More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 2:

[1] [2]

Index

19 reviews in total

---

29 out of 32 people found the following review useful:
A Holmes mystery with the feel of the canon, 5 September 2005

Author: briantaves from Washington, DC

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

By 1932, the California Tiffany studios had been hard-hit by the depression's increasing damper on the motion picture industry, and had most recently been taken over by the troika of Burt Kelly, Sam Bischoff and William Saal, producing under the achronym K.B.S.

One of the talented individuals attracted to K.B.S. during this turbulent period was Robert Florey, who had directed THE COCOANUTS, in which the Marx Brothers made their film debut, and co-authored the script of FRANKENSTEIN, then adapting and directing MURDERS IN THE RUE MORGUE.

A STUDY IN SCARLET was Florey's third project at Tiffany, and he was again scheduled to both write and direct--his preferred mode of working. While producer Bischoff had purchased the motion picture rights to the title of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's novel for only a small sum, Florey was told to compose a new scenario to co-star Anna May Wong opposite Sherlock Holmes.

A cause for the alteration of the original plot is that producers may have felt the title exceeded the worth of the actual story. Conan Doyle's original, written in 1887, was a vehicle for a denunciation of the contemporary Mormon practice of polygamy, which for American movie makers may have aroused concerns of censorship and regional distribution difficulties--just the type of difficulty a small, independent company like K.B.S. could not afford to risk. As well, half the narrative consisted of a lengthy confession, with Holmes only present in the prelude, which would have surely disappointed most filmgoers. While A Study in Scarlet was the first Holmes mystery Conan Doyle wrote, it had been filmed only twice before, with an English feature and an American short both appearing in 1914. Not until 1968 was the subject tackled again, this time by the BBC in a fifty-minute television presentation.

Given a week to come up with a narrative to fit the picture's title and Wong's presence, Florey collaborated with his friend Reginald Owen, who had been chosen to portray Holmes, and split the $1,000 script payment. They collaborated on the continuity in consultation with Art Director Ralph DeLacy in order to utilize as many standing sets as possible, economies always being especially important at a studio like Tiffany, even on as significant a project as A STUDY IN SCARLET.

At this point Florey left, having received the offer of a long-term contract from Warner Bros. on condition that he leave immediately to direct their comedic mystery GIRL MISSING. Bischoff allowed Florey to leave, with both agreeing that his replacement as director on A STUDY IN SCARLET should be Edwin L. Marin. Marin, age 33, previously had helmed only one movie on his own, a low budget item entitled THE DEATH KISS (1932). At K.B.S. he had just finished assisting Florey on THE MAN CALLED BACK and THOSE WE LOVE, "waiting for such a break."

Although the Florey-Owen script contained no similarities to the novel, their plot did demonstrate a familiarity with the world Conan Doyle created for Sherlock Holmes. Elements are present from other Holmes stories, especially The Sign of Four, "The Red-Headed League" and "The Five Orange Pips." There are many of the typical clues, devices, and mannerisms.

The title is incorporated to refer to a very exclusive organization called "the Scarlet Ring," a group of eccentric and highly ambiguous characters so suspicious of one another that they are afraid to even walk together. Upon the death of any member, his property is divided among the remaining survivors; suddenly they begin to die at an alarming pace under strange circumstances. This group of individuals were personified by an unusual group of actors, including J.M. Kerrigan, Halliwell Hobbes, Wyndham Standing, Tetsu Komai, and Cecil Reynolds.

Some critics have pointed out the movie's similarity to And Then There Were None / Ten Little Indians, with suspects killed one by one and their murder announced by a nursery rhyme. But if anything, the influence was the other way around, since Agatha Christie's novel was not published until 1939.

The script of A STUDY IN SCARLET was extremely polished and well-constructed, developing at just the right pace while carefully building the appropriate mood and environment. The movie breathes life into the classically eerie atmosphere of the British mystery, creating a pervasive feeling of fear in the fog-bound studio streets of the Limehouse section of London. Strange gatherings, arranged by secret codes, take place in abandoned, out-of-the-way buildings; dark and oppressive dead-end streets are places of isolation and terror; fog and shadows hide murderers and their victims.

Suspense is heightened by a number of devices. For instance, the killer is kept unseen, while at the same time menace is suggested by having the crimes viewed through the murderer's eyes using a subjective camera. The silhouette of a giant shadow appears on a wall as the victim stares at the audience and screams "It can't be you," followed by a close-up of a hand checking off the name of one more member of the Scarlet Ring who has been killed. The climax of this technique comes in a long-take with the still-unknown murderer visiting the crooked lawyer played by Alan Dinehart: the camera completely adopts the viewpoint of the killer as Dinehart opens the door and the unknown individual is offered a cigarette, puffs of smoke ascending in front of the lens.

The sense of locale was enhanced by the use of a nearly all-British cast, something unusual for a Hollywood-made Sherlock Holmes picture. Reginald Owen in particular was given the necessary latitude to offer a different interpretation of the Holmes personality. Owen portrays a much more human, less remote man, more akin to the personification offered by William Gillette in his stage play, to whom Owen even bore a certain physical resemblance.

By the time A STUDY IN SCARLET was released, in mid-1933, K.B.S. and World-Wide had folded, with Fox handling the distribution. The picture opened to an excellent critical reception.

---

22 out of 22 people found the following review useful:
"...of abominable memory.", 1 October 2006

Author: theowinthrop from United States

Sherlock Holmes became such a quick fixture in motion pictures that it is possible to write studies on the various movies and actors centered on that character.

This particular film was an early Hollywood take on Holmes in the sound period. It is interesting to note that it came out only three years after Sir Arthur Conan Doyle died in 1930. By the time this had come out Hollywood had done silent and sound films about Holmes with William Gillette, John Barrymore, and (more recently) Clive Brooks. But the three best Holmes' of the sound period were still to come along: Arthur Wontner in Great Britain, Basil Rathbone in Hollywood, and Jeremy Brett (on television). Holmes in this version was Reginald Owen, best remembered for his "Ebenezer Scrooge" in the 1938 version of "A Christmas Carol". Owen was a very good character actor (villainous in films like "The Call Of The Wild", but funny as anything in "The Good Fairy"). He had played Watson already, so he was one of the few actors to essay both friends parts. But he seemed too laid back to be a good Holmes.

"A Study In Scarlet" appeared in December 1887 in "Beeton's Christmas Annual", a long forgotten magazine in Great Britain, which is only now recalled because of Conan Doyle's novella. If you are lucky enough to stumble onto the Beeton's of that month and year (and it is the original) than hold onto it - it's worth many thousands of dollars.

It's in two parts. The first half is "The Lauriston Gardens Mystery", wherein Dr. John H. Watson (our narrator) introduces us to his friend and roommate Sherlock Holmes, and then to the adventure (set in April 1881) where he first became aware that Holmes was a consulting detective, and was consulted by Scotland Yard's Detectives Tobias Gregson and "G." (no further name ever given) Lestrade (not "Lastrade" as the movie's cast of characters named him). Lestrade would be the best known of the detectives in the saga who would consult Holmes (and would be most memorably played by Dennis Hoey in the Rathbone films). Here he's played by Alan Mowbray - not badly but with little electricity.

The plot of the first portion of the novella is about the murder of two men, one by poison and one by a knife wound in the heart. Holmes traces the story back to the old west, where in the second half (entitled "The Country of the Saints") it is linked to the Mormons in Utah.

Most (if not all) was jettisoned, into a story about murder for insurance, centering around Anna May Wong and Alan Dinehart. Dinehart's character Thaddeus Merrydew, is based on a single line of writing in the four novels and fifty six short stories that were written by Conan Doyle. In "The Adventure of the Empty House", when reading a list of people with "M" in their name (he is searching for the biography of Colonel Sebastian Moran), he finds a reference to "Merrydew of abominable memory." That's it! No "Thaddeus Merrydew", just "Merrydew". Somebody concocting the script remembered that one reference. I may add, this was also the last time in movies there was any villain named Merrydew against Mr. Sherlock Holmes.

As an early talkie film about Holmes, it is worth seeing - but it is not among the best Holmes movies.

---

18 out of 22 people found the following review useful:
Not Based on the Original Story of the Same Name, 18 November 2003
Author: Hans C. Frederick (schweinhundt1967@postmaster.co.uk) from Parma Heights, Ohio, U.S.A.

I first started reading the Holmes saga almost 40 years ago.Since then,my search has included all of the stories in the Canon,a great number of the pastiches,a vast number of the films,plays,and T.V. specials,and other works.So,while not considering myself a TRUE expert,nonetheless,I have a working knowledge of many of the adaptations.

There has yet,to my knowledge,to be a dramatisation of the original story of this name.And,it seems,for good reason.The plot involves the murder of 2 American tourists to London,both of whom being members of the Church of Latter Day Saints.The framework story then opens,and shows a fictionalized,and highly derogatory account of a Mormon totalitarian police state.Dissidents are terrrorized,nonconformists are murdered,and travelers are slaughtered so that new additions can be obtained for the harems of the Elders.

Understandably,given these details,one can understand as to why NO adaptation has yet,and probably never will be completed.Not only would it never play in Salt Lake City,but it would also alienate a major religious body.

---

15 out of 18 people found the following review useful:
Good for Its Era & Genre (Has No Real Similarity With the Story of the Same Name), 11 April 2005
Author: Snow Leopard from Ohio

This early sound-era portrayal of Sherlock Holmes is good for its era and genre, with solid acting and an interesting story that is set in a believably mysterious atmosphere. An important note is that the story has no real similarity with the Arthur Conan Doyle story titled "A Study in Scarlet", but rather draws its characters and material from several different stories, plus at least one Agatha Christie novel. As long as you don't expect to see the original story, there is certainly enough to make this a feature worth seeing.

Reginald Owen is solid as Holmes, although he does not leave his mark on the role in the way that Basil Rathbone and Jeremy Brett did. Owen does have the unique distinction of having played both Holmes and Dr. Watson (having played the latter in "Sherlock Holmes" the year before "A Study in Scarlet").

The rest of the cast likewise play their characters in a straightforward fashion, allowing the story and atmosphere to get the main focus. The one who does stand out is Anna May Wong, who adds beauty and a mysterious presence, although unfortunately she does not get a lot of screen time.

The story itself has numerous turns, and keeps you guessing. The atmosphere might not always be Holmes-like, but it is quite suitable for the story, and it is aided by good use of the lighting and photography. Overall, if you can set aside the misleading (for Holmes fans) title, it is an entertaining mystery with some good touches.

---

11 out of 12 people found the following review useful:
Nicely Atmospheric, 16 October 2006

Author: Hitchcoc from United States

I had never seen Reginald Owen in anything but a somewhat weak Christmas Carol. He plays a larger, more imposing Sherlock Holmes. Holmes' appearance is usually rather striking, so actors play on his idiosyncrasies. In this movie, he sort of blends in. The story has nothing to do with the story. It will probably never be produced as written because of it's religious issues. This is an attempt to apprehend the big cheese in a series of murders involving the "Scarlet Circle." Men are dying according to the same poem used in Christie's Ten Little Indians (And Then There Were None). Holmes is aware of what is going on, but can't really strike quickly. This results in deaths not being prevented. While there is a seriousness to this film, there is a lot of humor as well. The characters are rich and interesting and the acting is pretty good. See it for another angle on the Holmes canon.

---

9 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
Did Agatha Christie see this movie first?, 20 October 2007

Author: tom-2678 from United States

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

An interesting movie and a worthy part of the Sherlock Holmes tradition. The most interesting part for was the use of the count down notes as the members of the organization died. It even included a red herring note. If the viewer is paying attention, it is a clue to the actual murderer.

Agatha Christie, the well known English mystery writer who also has had many books made into movies, used a similar motif in her book, Ten Little Indians. The most fascinating part, though, is that this movie was made in 1933 and Ten Little Indians was published in 1939.

Christie may have borrowed from this movie for her plot.

---

6 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Don't study it too hard, 5 November 2009

Author: hte-trasme from United States

"A Study in Scarlet" was produced by the low-budget E. W. Hammons at the low-budget Tiffany Studios starring a former Watson (possibly cast because of his association with Holmes films), Reginald Owen, as Sherlock Holmes. The presence of Holmes and Watson is the only connection to the Arthur Conan Doyle story of the same name, and that, in and of itself, is not a bad thing. I have no problem with a Sherlock Holmes film straying from slavish fidelity to the creator of the character. However, this one seems to deviate from the original not as a result of the filmmakers' creativity being exercised in order to make something new, but often in ways that make Holmes into someone that resembles a generic detective protagonist more than the most recognizable of them all.

It's a little odd to see a supposed Sherlock Holmes dart around wearing clothes clearly dated to the 1930s (the only appearance of the famous deerstalker is in cartoon form in the opening titles), but since the story doesn't depend on anything terribly time-period appropriate, the transposition to the contemporary setting doesn't have too much of an effect. A curiosity here is that we are repeated told that Sherlock Holmes lives at 221A Baker Street, not the traditional 221B, even though he still seems to be living upstairs. Whether that's a simple error on somebody's part or a nod to the liberties being taken with the original stories there is no way to tell.

Owen, unfortunately, is rather stiff and unremarkable in is portrayal of Sherlock Holmes. Many point out that he doesn't look the part (and, traditionally, he doesn't) but that hasn't been a problem for countless other actors. If he had managed to make the role his own through his performance it wouldn't have been for him either. He has little presence and seems to think that if he bellows each line with enough conviction and self-satisfaction he'll sound as if he knows what he's talking about.

Sadly the rest of the actors are rather wooden and unimpressive as well, including Anna May Wong. Warburton Gamble makes no impression as Watson, and some of the murder victims are laughably unconvincing in their hesitant screams for help at their dying moments. Everything is taken deadly seriously except for some overplayed comic relief involving characters at a pub, which only semi works.

There is a good mystery story at the heart of this film about a circle of criminals whose members are being murdered one-by-one, but the execution (including the direction which, the exception of one clever shot inside Merrydew's office near the end, mainly doesn't go beyond static two- an three-shots) is too lackluster to serve it well. The scriptwriter deserves credit for a good concept and for a good method of developing the story through showing us going on in all quarters without completely explaining its significance, but nobody else seems to have been trying very hard.

It's still entertaining most of the time, and fun for viewers who will eat up anything Holmesian, but it's far from the best executed film version of the detective's adventures.

---

7 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
A decent Holmes, 30 December 2006

Author: xredgarnetx from Connecticut

As long as one understands this version of A STUDY IN SCARLET bears no resemblance to its source material, one can enjoy the performance of Reginald Owen -- best known for playing Scrooge -- as the inimitable Sherlock Holmes. The story as such involves a secret group of individuals who are being knocked off one at a time. A fortune is at stake! Holmes is called in and more or less immediately identifies the killer(s), but the movie stretches events out to feature length, and a bad movie it is not. Owen makes an acceptable Holmes, even though the story has been moved forward to the time in which the movie was made. Warburton Gamble's Dr. Watson leaves something to be desired, but most movie Watsons can be found lacking. Only Ian Fleming in 1935's TRIUMPH OF SHERLOCK HOLMES and the Dr. Watsons of the Jeremy Brett TV series come even close to the Watson of the Conan Doyle stories. Worth a look as a novelty.

---

5 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
worth a look for Anna May Wong, 14 September 2008

Author: kidboots from Australia

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

There were a few Sherlock Holmes - Reginald Owen wasn't the best one. "A Study in Scarlet" boasts an impressive cast - even down to Hobart Cavanaugh in an uncredited bit as Innkeeper Thompson. The plot does seem to have more in common with Agatha Christie's book "And Then There Were None" but that wasn't published until 1939. Even though it was filmed at the California Tiffany studios it certainly had an authentic English feel to it. The amazing thing is how the cast (most of them American actors) came up with very creditable English accents. You didn't even get that in A productions let alone the cheaper films.

Reginald Owen had played Dr. Watson to Clive Brooks' Sherlock Holmes in the 1932 film of that name but in this film he played Sherlock Holmes.

A body is discovered in a railway carriage pulling into Victoria Station. A code containing the words scarlet and Limehouse is printed in the paper. He is the second member of a secret society (of which Alan Dinehart is the head) to die. They divide up the money but decide not to give any to the victim's widow, Mrs Murphy (Doris Lloyd). She then goes to Sherlock Holmes with a rhyme she found among her husband's things. After the meeting another member is shot through the heart. Sherlock Holmes talks to the widow Mrs. Pike. Played by Anna May Wong with a very creditable English accent. Even though she is given top billing she is not given much to do - she does look very exotic though. The members are killed off one by one - each one receiving a little poem before hand. It is clear that Thaddeus Merrydew is the master mind behind all the murders but the actual murderer was a surprise.

June Clyde plays the heroine Eileen Forrester. She made a little splash in early musicals ie "The Cuckoos" (1930), "Hit the Deck" (1930) then in 1932 she was named a Wampus Baby Star. That kept her career going until the end of the 30s. Allan Dinehart, that oily villain of so many 30s movies plays Thaddeus Merrydew. Billy Bevan, an old silent comic, has a part as a helpful patron at the inn.

Recommended.

---

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
"My interest is to bring the criminal to justice.", 26 October 2004

Author: classicsoncall from United States

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

A secret London society agrees to disperse the assets of it's deceased members to the remainder of the group. It doesn't take long for the victims to start dropping off one by one. Enter Sherlock Holmes (Reginald Owen), brought into the case by the wife of victim number two, upset that there isn't even the hint of an inheritance coming her way. Adding to the mystery, the group communicates via cryptic ads placed in a London newspaper.

"A Study in Scarlet" is a credible mystery that gives the viewer a few false leads, but is ultimately solved by Holmes in uncanny style. The title of the film originates from the name of the clandestine group - the Scarlet Ring. There is a familiarity to the plot as each of the victims receives a poetic message referencing the number of members still left alive, as in the Agatha Christie based "And Then There Were None", even though that film came a dozen years later in 1945.

I must say, after viewing Basil Rathbone in the title role as the Sherlock Holmes archetype, it takes a bit of getting used to Reginald Owen depicting the sleuth; he's got a little too much padding. Conversely, Warburton Gamble's Dr. Watson doesn't seem to have enough, a la Nigel Bruce's portrayal. That aside, "A Study in Scarlet" is worth the effort, particularly for it's dark and moody atmosphere, and Sherlock Holmes' deft use of the English language.

---

---

Page 1 of 2:

[1] [2]

Add another review

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Ratings	External reviews
Plot keywords	Main details	Your user reviews
Your vote history