Sherlock Holmes and the Deadly Necklace (1962) Poster

User Reviews

Add a Review
17 ReviewsOrdered By: Helpfulness
The German Sherlock Holmes
bensonmum229 February 2008
Warning: Spoilers
On paper, Sherlock Holmes and the Deadly Necklace looks like a sure fired winner. Christopher Lee as Holmes, Thorley Walters (who I swear seemed to be channeling Nigel Bruce at times) as Watson, the capable Terence Fisher directing, and Curt Siodmak writing the screenplay, - what could go wrong? It might have been great had the people behind this German/Italian/French co-production not messed with the script and hired a German co-director. The end result is middling at best. Even though the movie may be enjoyable at times, it bears little resemblance to the real Sherlock Holmes. Lee has described it as a "mess". As he put it in an interview, "It was a hodge-podge of stories put together by the German producers which ruined it".

In the movie, Holmes is once again hot on the trail of Moriarty. Holmes feels Moriarty is responsible for two recent murders related to a necklace believed to have once been the property of Cleopatra. Through disguise and trickery, Holmes will attempt to reclaim the necklace and put a stop to Moriarty's nefarious scheme.

The best part of Sherlock Holmes and the Deadly Necklace is easily the cast. Lee and Walters are both as good as you might expect. However, I'm not sure what brainiac decided not to hire either man to dub their own voice, but it was a huge, distracting mistake. The supporting cast is populated by a few familiar faces including the lovely (but terribly underused) Senta Berger and Leon Askin (known to most people as General Burkhalter on "Hogan's Heroes"). But Hans Sohnker, unknown to me before watching Sherlock Holmes and the Deadly Necklace, as Moriarty is the real standout. He goes toe to toe with Lee and comes out looking quite good.

If you're a fan of Sherlock Holmes, there may be some curiosity value to this movie. Or, if you're a Chirstopher Lee completist, it's worth checking out. Otherwise, skip it.
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Dubbing? Rudimentary, my dear Watson
Glen McCulla4 December 2011
There are several criminal aspects to this sub-krimi German co-production, first among them being the fact that the filmmakers neglected to get Christopher Lee and Thorley Walters in to loop their own dialogue. It's somewhat jarring to watch an actor with so readily identifiable a voice as Mr Lee speaking, yet the words come out of his mouth spoken by what sounds like a Transatlantic drawl. Or an American dubbing artiste doing a poor Lee imitation.

If one can get past this surreal experience however there is fun to be had. Lee and Walters are ideally cast as Holmes and Watson, at times certain shots looked like Sidney Paget illustrations come to life. Hans Sohnker does a creditable job projecting a sinister air as Moriarty, despite the handicap of dubbing even more atrocious than that of the English-speaking cast. He's no Eric Porter or even George Zucco, but better than some lesser efforts. The direction, however, co-credited to the masterly Terence Fisher of many a Hammer classic fame, is somewhat workmanlike. Perhaps Fisher's heart wasn'tin it, or he was held back by his Teutonic cohort, but it's not in the same league as his and Lee's earlier essaying of "The Hound of the Baskervilles".

The supporting cast are more than adequate, with the lovely Senta Berger in an early role adding some class and beauty to a female cast of East End slatterns played by burly hausfraus. It really is a shame though that Lee's icily incisive portrayal of the great detective, perfect for the role in every way, was only seen in this film and a couple of early '90s productions. Still, there's always the consolation of being the only actor (so far as i know) to have played bot Sherlock and Mycroft Holmes, as well as Sir Henry Baskerville. That's got to count for something.

By the way, i saw this under the title "Sherlock Holmes and the Deadly Necklace" (somewhat reminiscent of the Basil Rathbone series, the middling entries of which it is on a par). The alternate title of "The Valley of Fear" is somewhat misleading, as apart from characters such as Holmes, Watson and Professor Moriarty this film has very little in common with the Conan Doyle novel of the same name. However, for a Holmes fan wanting a diverting hour and a half on a rainy afternoon, this more than does the trick.
7 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Suprisingley good Sherlock Holmes- movie
kriitikko22 June 2005
I had my doubts about this film when I bought it, at the time I had become fan of Sherlock Holmes because of TV- series starring Jeremy Brett. Before that I had seen only few Basil Rathbone movies, which were enjoy ables but not as great as Brett's work. But I had to see Christopher Lee as Sherlock Holmes.

Well, first I was disappointed, because film is placed at 1910's instead of late 1800's. But jazz background music, great atmosphere that these black and white pictures have, and of course Christopher Lee as world's greatest detective saves a lot. Also Thorley Walters gives a good performance as Dr. Watson. The scenes where Holmes and prof. Moriarty are having an intellectual war between each other's and Homes showing how much the police has not seen on this case are must seen scenes for every Sherlock Holmes- fans.

Film is directed by Terence Fisher and I think it is even better then he's Hammer- film "the Hound of the Baskervilles" also starring Lee as a romantic hero. I only wish they would have cast also some British Hammer- actor as Moriarty.
10 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
"Deadly is the word."
jamesraeburn200319 April 2005
Sherlock Holmes (Christopher Lee) and Dr Watson (Thorley Walters) investigate the theft of Cleopatra's necklace that was uncovered by archaeologists in Egypt.

The ingredients for a good movie were all here. Christopher Lee as Holmes, Thorley Walters as Dr Watson and director Terence Fisher who did a superb version of "The Hound Of The Baskervilles" in 1959 was brought in to direct. Some consider the latter to be the best ever Sherlock Holmes film. It was certainly a strong contender for this and it was one of Hammer's finest hours, but alas, this low budget German production was a disaster from the word go. The storyline wasn't worthy of Conan Doyle and the music score which varies between jazz and pop robbed the film of any atmosphere. And to make matters worse the voices of Christopher Lee and Thorley Walters were dubbed by second rate English actors because the producer didn't want to fly in Lee and Walters from Germany for just one day in order to do the dubbing. The film has some historical interest for the amount of talent involved and the art director did a first class Baker Street set, but apart from that this is a very unwatchable dud and in Lee's own words in an interview "...deadly is the word."
17 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Quite all right.
ChrisHawk7816 May 2001
Terence, Fisher has most certainly produced a fine Sherlock Holmes movie. Christopher Lee, seen by many as THE Sherlock Holmes does a fine bit of acting and Thorley Walters plays a bit bumbling but convincing Watson. (You would not know him, when you have seen him as Watson in THE ADVENTURES OF SHERLOCK HOLMES' SMARTER BROTHER) The music is brilliant and the atmosphere is very much what a Holmesian fan would be expecting. Unfortunatly the film has a few blunders as well. The most eyecatching would be the Deerstalker and Inverness which Holmes are wearing in the country. They would be most suitable for any comic Holmes where all the other costumes are very adequate, I must say. The idea of the police being of the opinion that Holmes has no right to investigate, as uttered by Inspector Cooper in the beginning is utter nonsense to anyone who has ever read the cannon. And last but not least - the time! The time warp has already been done in the Universal Series with Rathbone/Bruce and I do not like it there either. But here it is most silly. Watson is said to be driving a car in 1918 where Holes is supposed to be close on sixty! Lee does not look that old, does he. Still a very nice and old fashioned Sherlock Holmes movie. 7 out of 10.
8 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Nowhere Near Deplorable!
JohnHowardReid10 May 2009
Available on a superb DVD (although not in wide-screen format, alas), "Sherlock Holmes and the Deadly Necklace" is actually quite watchable and far from the "badly edited, deplorable hodge-podge of nonsense" decried by Christopher Lee, despite the fact that his own performance was "one of the best things I've ever done!" Actually, Lee is by no means the saving grace of this Sherlockian entry. That honor belongs equally to the lovely Senta Berger (and she looks especially enticing here in her form-hugging Vera Mugge costumes) and that delightful oaf of a villain, Leon Askin. Hans Sohnker's dapper Moriarty also has the edge on Lee, who admittedly is robbed of his voice (as is Thorley Walters as a conventional, bumbling Dr Watson). Although I noticed a tip of the hat in the credits to "The Valley of Fear", the script bears not the slightest relationship to that novel at all, but the play holds the interest and is actually quite ably staged and expensively set.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Lee IS Holmes
Fritz Langlois6 August 2000
In this movie, Christopher Lee delights us with a very convincing impersonation of the greatest detective of them all (he would later have another go at playing Sherlock Holmes in two made-for-television movies from the late 1980s.) Thorley Walters is also perfect as his friend and associate Dr Watson. The film has not much in common with director Fisher's previous stab at the myth THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLE (also featuring Christopher Lee, not as Holmes), and is not as successful. The picture is reminiscent of the silent films made in the first decades of cinema, a fitting atmosphere for a Sherlock Holmes adventure. The original version is supposed to be a complete mess as far as the sound is concerned (according to Lee in his autobiography), but the French dubbed version is pretty well done. Accompanied by a surprisingly jazzy score, here's an enjoyable enough movie, in an old-fashioned kind of way.
8 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Elementary inferior, my dear Watson…
Coventry22 September 2008
It was always obvious, even before watching it, that this Sherlock Holmes movie wouldn't be as terrific and compelling as "The Hound of the Baskervillers" (the other Holmes movie directed by Terence Fisher and starring Christopher Lee – although not in the titular role), but I honestly didn't expect it to be *this* disappointing. The most major problems are noticeable on the surface already: an international co-production with two directors, a lesser interesting plot outline (at least in comparison with most of Doyle's stories), issues during the post-production phase and English-speaking actors whose voices are dubbed… in English! Yup, especially if you're a fan of the aforementioned Hammer film or – like myself – swear by the brilliant old Sherlock Holmes movie series starring Basil Rathbone, you might consider skipping this one or least lower your expectations drastically. Still, "S.H. and the Deadly Necklace" isn't entirely without merit, neither. Surely a lot of fans desperately crave to see the almighty Christopher Lee depict the greatest and most intelligent fictional detective who ever lived? Even though he doesn't sound like himself, Lee's charisma and impressive posture is exactly right for the character. With his inborn aura of superiority and stern grimaces, Lee is like a natural born Sherlock Holmes and it's regrettable that he was only offered to play the role once and in such lackluster conditions. Lee also receives excellent support from Thorley Walters (well cast as Dr. Watson) as well as a couple of lesser known performers. The film definitely also benefices from the masterful art direction and enchanting black-and-white cinematography, respectively courtesy of Paul Markwitz and Richard Angst. Last but not least there are some memorable moments to enjoy, including Watson's uncomfortable encounter with a prostitute and the multiple disguises of Sherlock Holmes. Sadly these aspects are merely just footnotes in an overall tedious, suspense-free and incoherent mystery/thriller.
7 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Sherlock Holmes and the Deadly Necklace
Scarecrow-8822 April 2009
Warning: Spoilers
Professor Moriarty will do just about anything to acquire the diamond necklace once wore by Cleopatra including murder( using other hoods to do his dirty work, of course)but he'll have to contend with his arch nemesis, the Baker Street detective, Sherlock Holmes and his associate Dr. Watson.

As a horror buff, this was a dream come true to see such great names associated with Sherlock Holmes. Terrence Fisher as co-director, Christopher Lee as Holmes(..his only time as the sleuth which in itself is noteworthy), and scribe Curt Siodmak(The Wolf Man;I Walked With a Zombie)as the scenarist all contribute to SHERLOCK HOLMES AND THE DEADLY NECKLACE. While I recognize that others didn't find this movie very good(..or found it rather lackluster/mediocre), I thought it was fun, particularly enjoying the psychological duel between Holmes and Moriarty(..who, at one point, attempted to kill Holmes with a mechanism in his cane's handle which fires a blade). This may be the only film with Sherlock Holmes which might figure into the Krimi genre as it is mostly produced by a West German company. One major disappointment was not having Lee's authoritative voice dubbed for his Holmes character, which is quite a shame(..and a missed opportunity for us who love the idea of seeing Lee as the character, portrayed with his voice, matching his mannerisms and performance). It would be ill-advised for me to leave out a wonderful performance from Thorley Walters, a Hammer veteran, as the clumsy, often naive Watson, who must be fed knowledge of Holmes' activities because he's unable to often add 2 & 2 together on his own. But, Watson, of course, often lends a hand(..even playing Holmes' chauffeur when the sleuth goes undercover, in disguise, to infiltrate Moriarty's home and gang in order to keep the necklace out of the diabolical and dangerous archeologist's hands)when Holmes so needs him in order to combat Moriarty's plot to steal the necklace by any means necessary. It's a delightful game of cat-n-mouse(..or it was to me) and we are participants. Often, Holmes has to use rather illegal methods in order to retrieve the necklace, stooping to his enemy's level of theft, but it's not officially Mortiarty's property anyway, adding intrigue to their battle over such a desired object of great worth. I think Hans Söhnker is Lee's equal as Moriarty, portraying confidence and arrogance, believing he will accomplish his scheme, using loathsome criminals to carry his orders out, with an ability to manipulate important public figures, even The Queen of England('s mentioned at the beginning, when Holmes is scolded by Scotland Yard's lead detective, Inspector Cooper, played by Hans Nielsen, that Moriarty is to be knighted). It was really cool seeing Lee as such a treasured character, conveying a believable wisdom, always expressing, effectively, Holmes' abilities to outsmart his adversaries, remaining one step ahead of not only Moriarty, but Scotland Yard as well.

I especially loved one sequence where Holmes attempts to stop a planned assassination by Moriarty, outside London where a thief is holding onto the necklace, fearful of his safety, and happening upon the crime scene of a failed murder attempt where Inspector Cooper must be assisted by the sleuth in discovering all the facts, coming across concealed truths only through our beloved detective's guidance. It's a masterfully staged scenario I enjoyed immensely.
5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
worth a view...
winner559 November 2008
very difficult to watch German Holmes film.

Christopher Lee is excellent in a role he wanted to play throughout his life (returning to it late in a couple mini-series) - this despite the fact that his voice was unnecessarily dubbed by someone else. He plays the great detective as an intense young crime-fighter with wit and chutzpa.

The problems are the script and direction. The story is too convoluted, in a manner familiar to anyone who has suffered through other German mysteries of the same period, such as the Dr. Mabuse films. This was a Germany still dealing with the fact that they had a murderously criminal government only two decades previous - consequently there is considerable suspicion of the police in these films, evil seems omnipresent, the moral center is hard to find. A similar atmosphere, for completely different reasons, crept into British popular culture only in the 1970s, appearing in a British Sherlock Holmes film only in "Murder by Decree."

But the German film also suffers from the evident fact that the director can't decide whether he wants to make a Sherlock Holmes film or a Sherlock Holmes parody - there are all sorts of misfired jokes and bits poking fun at a "Sherlock Holmes superhero" image that doesn't really exist - a problem for other directors who have tried spoofing the detective, including the great Billy Wilder. The fact is, Doyle was careful NOT to make his hero an 'Uebermensch,' just a closet Nietzschean - a common romantic British type of the day.

Finally, all existing prints I know of are in shoddy condition.

Worth a view, especially for Holmes fans, but sub-par for this sub-genre of mystery film.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Fisher in Recess
"Sherlock Holmes and the Deadly Necklace" is, among the twenty- something films by Terence Fisher that I have seen, one of his less accomplished works. A bit better than the boring "Night of the Big Heat", this is a production with motivations I don't fully understand: for a start I do not know why they decided to make a Sherlock Holmes movie starring Christophe Lee in German (although there is an English language version, the official version is in German, which is the one I opted to watch), with Lee's real voice absent in all versions. Then I cannot reason why in 1962, with moneys coming from German, French and Italian production companies, they decided to shoot an adventure movie in black and white. The decision seems even more uninspired given the uneven quality of Richard Angst's cinematography, ranging from attractive expressionistic images (as the scene where Holmes saves his life using a police whistle) to flat compositions (as the Baker Street apartment). Maybe the budget was low, but they had several names in the cast that were not highly expensive, but neither cheap to hire. And thirdly there is not a well-defined concept of what they wanted to do: producers, composer, writer and director seem to point into different directions. The German producers probably assumed it as one of the many cheap detective movies they were making by the dozen, composer Martin Slavin opted for a playful score, writer Curt Siodmak kept loyal to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's three main creations (Holmes, his nemesis Moriarty and his mate Dr. Watson) and Fisher… well, he had to keep everything going. However it would be unfair to deny that there are a few hints that suggest the intention of making some kind of photo-novel or a black-ink-on-cheap-white-paper comic book, and that would explain why the filmmakers could not care less what language characters spoke, the anachronisms (the more obvious being ladies' hair styles), Slavin's jingling-jangling cues, extensive use of maquettes, and a few disheveled art direction and wardrobe decisions, starting with the key prop, a very ugly and cheap looking necklace that supposedly once adorned Queen Cleopatra's neck. I am also sure that Lee never wore an uglier costume in his entire long career than the horrendous checkered suit he wears in the countryside sequence. The actor does his best as Doyle's creation (obviously not imagining the estrangement that dubbing would produce, resulting in an involuntary Brechtian effect of rejection to his participation in the movie), so we tend to go for the villains, played with gusto by Hans Söhnker as Moriarty and Leon Askin as his chauffeur-assistant Charles. But what we see is what we get, so we better not complain. We are warned very early into the film that we are going to watch a rather sloppy product, when the same shot of a longshoreman working on dock is repeated twice within minutes. Compared to this, Fisher's next project starring Pat Boone is a masterpiece.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Not the best presentations of not the best Holmes films.
catuus20 November 2006
The fact that a film is on DVD doesn't guarantee that its quality is very good. The fact that a film's quality is threadbare doesn't mean you shouldn't buy it. Although "The Deadly Necklace" is available separately, it's also available on a DVD with a second film. This review applies to both.

The plots of these films are of little consequence. They are of interest only to people who collect Holmes films … anybody who merely wants a few of the better offerings would do well to purchase some of those made by Jeremy Brett … or, in a pinch, Basil Rathbone. There are a few other very good Holmes films featuring good actors on a one-shot basis – such as "Seven Per Cent Solution" or "Private Life of Sherlock Holmes". In any event, these films are considerably less estimable.

Here we have a pair of films featuring some of the best actors to do Holmes, even if the results tend toward disappointing. This appears to be the only disc with these films on it (although "Deadly Necklace") appears by itself in the same version on other discs.

"(Sherlock Holmes and) the Deadly Necklace" dates from 1962, although it neither looks it nor sounds it. Some who have seen this may be surprised to learn that it was produce by Hammer Studios. Not that Hammer hasn't turned out some really schlock stuff, but where Christopher Lee was concerned, they usually did a better job. The print a direct transfer from a rather worn 1:1.33 copy in black-and white. The quality of the color suggests the original may have been in color, and the snipped ends of the film's aspect suggest it may originally have been 1:1.66 or more.

The film is set in the early 20th Century – not improbable, since Holmes was still working then (and didn't actually die until 1957). However, the script is not adapted from any actual Doyle story. It involves an Egyptian necklace, and Professor Moriarty shows up as a world-famous archaeologist as well as the Prince of Crime. The plot is melodramatic and banal.

The biggest defect of this film is that – for whatever unfathomable reason – Hammer filmed it in Germany. It was nonetheless filmed in English. It was then dubbed in German and then re-dubbed in English. So what you hear isn't Lee nor any of the other original actors, but a bunch of unknowns – not that, outside of Lee, I doubt anyone would know any of the other actors. This is too bad, since Lee (see his "Hound of the Baskervilles") makes a quite decent Holmes. As it is, his voice double is condescending and plain as bread pudding with no raisins nor cinnamon.

The music for this film is primarily jazzy, in a possible attempt to be "period". Too bad nobody thought of ragtime. As it is, the music doesn't relate to what's happening on the screen, and often is at odds with the action.

The other film is "(Sherlock Holmes and) the Speckled Band" from 1931, starring a young Raymond Massey. The quality of the picture and sound is fully up to that of the 1962 effort, and in fact a bit better. Massey makes a quite respectable Holmes, although he certainly doesn't own the rôle in the way Rathbone did and Brett does. The other thespians who take part in this production are unlikely to be of interest to modern readers. The acting – as is true of many films of this period – owes a lot to the post-Victorian stage and to silent films.

There is very little else to be said of this film. The settings seem to be an odd combination of the 1890s (horse-drawn carriages) and the 1920s (electronic devices such as a primitive dictaphone). Taken altogether, it's an interesting curio and a sufficient inducement to buy the DVD with the pairing rather than a DVD with "Deadly Necklace" only.
4 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
"Knowing and proving something are two very different matters Watson..."
classicsoncall17 October 2004
Warning: Spoilers
An informant with a blade in his back leads Sherlock Holmes (Christopher Lee) and aide Doctor Watson (Thorley Walters) to the Hare and Eagle Pub, and on to the trail of the "Deadly Necklace", once belonging to Cleopatra, and now in the possession of Holmes' arch-enemy Professor Moriarty (Hans Sohnker). Along the way, Holmes is admonished by Inspector Cooper (Hans Nielsen) of Scotland Yard not to get involved in official business of the agency.

I found this to be a rather tedious film, even with the neat diversions of Christopher Lee in various disguises in his portrayal of the Holmes character. He eventually rescues the Cleopatra necklace from a glass encased mummy's coffin guarded by a snake, and delivers it just in time to an auction house, much to the chagrin of Moriarty. There's a bit of the "Italian Job" flavor to the film in a sequence where Watson bumps into the car of Moriarty's chauffeur.

It's a difficult film to follow, with a dead body or two along the way. Repeat viewings are probably in order, but I found the first take to be somewhat laborious, and not interesting enough to indulge in once again. View it if you're a serious Sherlock Holmes fan, otherwise you can let this one pass.
2 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
To call this movie bad is an insult to bad things
zorbear27 December 2009
First off, I am a big Holmes fan, and have been for over half a century. I grew up reading the canon, and I saw the TV series in the 50's as well as the more recent one with Mr. Brett. I've seen almost every Holmes movie ever made. My only regret is not having seen the stage production with William Gillette performed around the turn of the century (the 19th), although I have seen the silent movie made from the play in 1920.

Based on all that, I think I have a pretty good tolerance for the vastly differing styles that Sherlock Holmes can come in. I enjoyed the humorous takes that have been filmed ("Sherlock Holmes' Smarter Brother", "Without a Clue", and "The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes"). I even managed to watch "The Seven-per-cent Solution" twice. However, I was bored out of my skull by this movie. I actually had to get up and walk around to stay awake, just to be able to say I watched it all. Now I wished I hadn't.
2 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A fair to middling version of Sherlock Holmes.
MartinHafer20 May 2012
Warning: Spoilers
From the onset, this film is at a huge disadvantage with viewers like me. Like many foreign films from this era, it was dubbed into English for export and lacks subtitles (film snobs like me LOVE subtitles). In addition, hearing strange voices coming out of some of the characters is jarring. For example, Christopher Lee acted as Holmes--but it was NOT his voice in this movie. And folks my age will probably recognize Leon Askin (from "Hogan's Heroes") but not his strange voice! While the quality of the dubbing isn't bad, it is regrettable that they didn't use the original actors who spoke English to do their own dubbing.

The film is a rather routine Sherlock Holmes story that suffers from the casting. While I love Christopher Lee and looked forward to his interpretation of the character, it's really weird that the writer (Curt Siodmak) never thought much about the 6'5" Lee when he wrote the screenplay. Having him going in disguise and fooling Dr. Watson and his landlady was laughable--as a basketball player-sized man cannot easily fool anyone!! Yet, oddly, later in the film Holmes also went in disguise! If they were going to use a disguise, perhaps they should have just had him dress up like a tree!! The story is a bit clichéd as well since it involved Moriarty--Holmes' arch nemesis. However, to Holmes fans, this is odd, as Moriarty is a FREQUENT foil in films--yet he rarely appeared in the actual Conan Doyle stories and Holmes rarely thought Moriarty was behind a particular crime. However, I assumed they used Moriarty simply because the public had come to EXPECT the man due to the many Holmes films.

The story involves several disparate crimes--murders that seem to have no connection. One of them, however, isn't at all hard to figure out and I could easily figure out that the dead man was NOT Blackburn--yet the dumb policeman and Watson just assumed it was him. I kept thinking how most people in the theaters must have figured this one out as well--making the mystery not at all mysterious.

As for the rest of the film, it's not bad. It's nothing like the MARVELOUS Jeremy Brett films (which are clearly the best) but is nearly as good as the Arthur Wontner and Basil Rathbone films. It's reasonably engaging and worth seeing but nothing more.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Holmes and Moriarty's connection to ancient Egypt
Warning: Spoilers
There are so so many Sherlock Holmes movies out there and back in the 1960s there were many of these with German participation as well. That's why the original title of this film is German and so is a big part of the cast (and the screenplay writer), even if the central character is played by Christopher Lee ("Scaramanga", "The Lord of the Rings","Star Wars"...) still alive and more popular than ever 53 years later. He is in his early 90s now. It's a black and white-film which is not a given for 1962 and the enemy is again Holmes' arch nemesis Moriarty. Also, one of the German actors featured herein is the very young Senta Berger, apparently a beauty queen back in the day although I have to say I am not entirely overwhelmed by her looks. The movie is directed by Terence Fisher who also worked with Lee on the Dracula films.

unfortunately I have to say I was never too thrilled by the story. No edge-of-seat stuff. Lee (much better than Cumberbatch) is the only one really memorable, but all the smaller characters are fairly uninteresting which is also why I was not too shocked by any of the killings. Going against Moriarty in an enemy, but still civilized, businessman-like manner is a nice subtle approach and I also liked the music used. Watson, however, was also fairly forgettable. He did not add really a lot apart from a smart comment here and there and otherwise constant admiring for and drooling over Holmes's genius. Oh and they seemed to love using the word "frankly". Frankly, my dear reader, I don't give a damn about this film. Not recommended.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
an excellent script,but rather badly acted
moriarty199317 March 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I really loved the screenplay and the plot of the story but the acting,especially on the part of Moriarty,wasn't very convincing.True,Christofer Lee as Holmes was very good(except for the deerstalker hat and cloak on the country side looked like the costume from the ballet "The Great Detective)and this is the film that truly captures the image of Watson:at first reculant to Holmes' theories(like the scene where he wants Watson to attack him with a dagger while he's armed with a new instalment of the Times)but soon realizes the absolute genius of it.Another thing,this story is completely cannon!!! *****SPOILER ALERT!!!!!!!********* Moriarty is not captured at the end which means this could be set after The Valley of Fear and before The Final Problem(even though in this,he says he has never heard of Moriarty but is completely aware of him in the Valley of Fear. ********************************** Again the rest of the cast was hammish and Moriarty was truly god awful but still a good film and a good subject for a remake.8/10
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews