A Study in Terror
When Watson reads from the newspaper there have been two similar murders near Whitechapel in a few days, Sherlock Holmes' sharp deductive is immediately stimulated to start its merciless method of elimination after observation of every apparently meaningless detail. He guesses right the victims must be street whores, and doesn't need long to work his way trough a pawn shop, an aristocratic family's stately home, a hospital and of course the potential suspects and (even unknowing) witnesses who are the cast of the gradually unraveled story of the murderer and his motive.
CinemaSerf@Geronimo1967
Now, in my humble opinion there will never be a better "Sherlock" than Basil Rathbone, nor can "Watson" be anyone other than Nigel Bruce. That's not to say that others ought not to try, though - and here John Neville and Donald Houston turn in OK performances as our sleuthing duo. This time, they are charged with solving the mother of all crime mysteries - the identity of "Jack the Ripper". A lot of attention to detail has been incorporated into the superior production, the film evokes well the sense of seedy Victorian Whitechapel with it's lively nightlife and ladies of "ill repute". It actually has just a shade of "Hammer" about it. I did think, though, that the extensive cast diluted the potency of the thing though. There are too many characters and aside from Anthony Quayle, they sort of served to clutter up the story. The writing isn't bad, it tries it's hand at a little humour now and again, but it is frequently wordy - a little too descriptive denying us much opportunity to do any investigation along with them, ourselves. It's a decent watch, an authentic postulation of what might have happened, but Neville just isn't "Holmes" material for me, sorry...