Great Film overall

It's not great by any means, but it's a pretty good movie that didn't leave me filled with regret for investing time in it.

It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

I saw this movie before reading any reviews, and I thought it was very funny. I was very surprised to see the overwhelmingly negative reviews this film received from critics.

I have admit I am with others on Reginald Owen's Sherlock Holmes... his acting is fine but he does not "fit" Holmes at all. He does not look or act like the Sherlock Holmes we have all come to know. It's not a horrible portrayal of Sherlock but it's not all that great either. This is simply not Reginald's style of character - he cannot capture Sherlock's personality.The story of A Study in Scarlet is a good one! I realize it's not like the book but viewing the film as simply Hollywood entertainment then it's a pretty good story. I like this movie just not as well as other Sherlock Holmes films and it's mainly because of Reginald Owen is Sherlock - that might be shallow but it's just my personal taste in Sherlock Holmes.7/10

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.

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.

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.