Self-important, over-dramatic, uninspired.

It is a performances centric movie

Not sure how, but this is easily one of the best movies all summer. Multiple levels of funny, never takes itself seriously, super colorful, and creative.

Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

This is generally an 'in the middle' murder mystery and detective story, but considering it's mid-Thirties release it's got a few things going for it. What sells it is the banter between private detective Oliver Keith (Reginald Denny) and his attractive younger secretary Ella (Patricia Farr). It would have been more believable if the story kept any semblance of a relationship between the two out of it, as Denny was twice as old as his co-star in real life. But for the most part it worked, especially at the end when they smooched it up to allay viewer fears that Denny's character might have been a bit too abusive.For all intents and purposes, this could have been virtually any movie detective's show of the era - think Charlie Chan, Mister Wong, Bulldog Drummond, or the favorite on this board, Nick Charles. The story plants a number of red herrings surrounding the murder of antique dealer Albert Sayre (John T. Murray), the most obvious being his wife Julia (Dorothy Revier), and business associate Dyker (Jack Adair). The mystery is solved using your typical 'gather all the suspects in one room' approach, as the detective hero successfully conveys the solution of the case by eliminating the suspects one by one.The bigger mystery once the film is over is how they came up with the title. The term 'Lady in Scarlet' was mentioned early on in reference to a play Albert and Julia Sayre were discussing, she having favored one called 'The Frolic of '32'. However none of the principal female characters had any connection to the title by virtue of their attire. Be that as it may, it made me think of a similarly named Sherlock Holmes flick from a decade later called "The Woman in Green". In either case, who could tell when the picture's in black and white.

"The Lady In Scarlet" is a good murder mystery with a good plot and a good star turn by Reginald Denny as the detective/ hero. As expected, it is a bit dated but engrossing nonetheless. It was written better than interpreted by the actors and it suffers from several lapses into amateur acting. Apparently the budget was so tight that second takes were in short supply, and it needed a few.Enjoyed the interplay between Denny and his secretary, Patricia Farr. As several contributors have noted, it bears a strong resemblance to that of Nick and Nora Charles, only not as witty. Special mention should be made of Jack Adair, who plays a crooked art dealer. I have awarded him the Hand-Painted Mustache Cup for the Worst Performance By A Supporting Actor In A Poverty Row Movie. It has to be seen to be believed - breathtakingly bad by any measure, and ruins every scene he is in.Good story, and in only 65 minutes. It will keep you guessing right up to the end. It makes you think a bigger studio could have done wonders with material such as this. And hired some better actors.

Universal was the only major Hollywood studio to have regular dealings with Poverty Row, so it comes as something of a surprise to see a 20th Century-Fox package wrapped up in the mantle of Chesterfield producer, George R. Batcheller. Admittedly, by Mr Batcheller's extremely sparse expenditure norms, the budget for this one is somewhat superior, but nonetheless the witty script by Fox's ace writing team of Robert Ellis and Helen Logan is not all that well served by plodding Reginald Denny (at least he plays the role straight) as the egomaniac detective and most of the second-string support players. Thomas, Bush, Murray and Kelly are especially dull in key roles, but fortunately the girls are okay. In fact, Patricia Farr (part of the Fox package) is quite winning as the put-upon secretary (even though she is forced to wear the same drab outfit throughout the entire movie). As for the solution of the mystery, this is a bit of a let-down, although it will come as no surprise to most fans. The real killer is Charles Lamont's scrupulously unexciting direction.

Pretty decent presentation of a man who sets up his daughter for failure and poverty because he doesn't like her choice in men. Unfortunately, he meets his demise and that launches most of the plot. A couple of Nick and Nora type detectives get into the act at the behest of the young wife of the man. It turns out she really loves the old jerk and wants to see justice done. Many are dragged into the fray, but, of course, the facts will set you free. This is a fun movie because of the byplay between the two private detectives. There are lots of conflicting clues and some surprises. I have seen many of these types of films and have to admit that this one isn't half bad. It has a little bit of sexual tension which works pretty well.