SHERLOCK HOLMES AND THE SECRET WEAPON (1943). Director: Roy William Neill. "The needle to the last, eh, Holmes?"
This is the second of the "modern-day" Universal Sherlock Holmes films [and the fourth film in which Basil Rathbone played Holmes], following Sherlock Holmes and the Voice of Terror. It is very, very loosely based on Doyle's story The Adventure of the Dancing Men, which refers to a code (which is used in the film). Frankly, Holmes really didn't fit into the WW2 milieu, and the only "modern" SH films which work are ones that more or less ignore the war and don't feature references to Nazis. The basic plot has to do with a scientist, Dr. Tobel (William Post Jr.) whose new weapon is coveted by the Germans. Frankly, the film doesn't really get interesting until we learn that the dreaded Professor Moriarty (Lionel Atwill) is involved in the plot. Rathbone is, as usual, excellent (although the odd comb-over he sports is a bit disconcerting) and his sparring with the equally great Atwill provides the film's highlights. The quoted line above comes about when Holmes suggests that an imaginative means of death would be to drain every drop of blood from a person's body.
Verdict: If only there had been more of Moriarty and less of Dr. Tobel. **1/2.
3 comments:
I had this complete film in super-8 (the first I ever purchased), and it's too bad it was one of the lesser Universals, because I had a hard time getting anyone to watch it more than once. I sure watched it to death, though. Owning a complete film was a decided thrill, but the end result is that I can barely stand to sit through this now. It really is one of the least of the Rathbone films, and is unusually plodding. I also thought Holmes portrayal as a tough thug was unconvincing and it was no wonder Moriarty got the drop on him. The scene where Holmes nearly had his last drop of blood drained was pretty grim, but Moriarty falling for Holmes' suggestion to do it seemed unlikely. Aside from that, Atwill was a fairly creepy Moriarty, but IMO he couldn't compare to George Zucco's intense portrayal. Gee, I seem to have nothing but negative things to say about this--but it actually didn't seem THAT bad back then. If only I could've gotten my hands on HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES or THE ADVENTURES OF SHERLOCK HOLMES--but at the time, my options were limited. I tried for years to sell the film at conventions, but had no luck. I think it's still sitting buried in the back of a closet.
--Mark
I never knew there were complete movies on super-8! This would not have been one I would have chosen! It's not completely terrible by any means, just a weaker entry in the series. I liked Atwill, but you're probably right that he was a notch below Zucco.
You could try selling this on ebay but I doubt if anybody has a super-8 projector any more!
Ha! Yeah, I think it's a lost cause. As for the movie, there wasn't much variety in full-length features offered in super 8 in...1970(I think). I recall the only others I seriously considered were a Monogram CHARLIE CHAN and the original THE LOST WORLD, but it was silent, and I was determined to get a sound film. It cost about $100 including shipping --a BIG amount for me at the time.
--Mark
Post a Comment