Save your money for something good and enjoyable

It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

A decade before this film, the exotically beautiful Gale Sondergaard had won an Oscar for being the not quite noble servant Faith in "Anthony Adverse", and followed this up with a decade of equally sinister characters. Her role as the villain in a Sherlock Holmes film was her most silky smooth spider woman to date, so Universal followed that up, giving her real spiders as co-stars as well as the deformed Rondo Hatton who speaks not a word but presents a gentle demeanor underneath his imposing figure.The lovely heroine in danger at their hands as the newly hired secretary/companion to the allegedly blind Sondergaard who has a mysterious and evil agenda concerning each of her secretaries, becoming wonderfully evil in the scene where she reveals her plans. You can't take these B movies as anything but fun camp, and Sondergaard gives it her all. No matter her distaste for the story or quality considering her talent, she never lets it show. At only an hour, this is harmless, wonderful watchable fun, a perfect addition to any double bill.

In name only sequel to the film Sherlock Holmes movie Sherlock Holmes and the Spider Woman. The plot here has a young woman staying at a house with a strange woman named Zenobia (played by Gale Sondergaard from the Holmes film)as a house keeper/companion. Unknown to the young woman is the fact that Zenobia is draining her of some blood every night to feed to her plants. Standard but somewhat awkward thriller isn't bad, but isn't anything special. The film feels like a program horror film where they just sort of threw elements together and hoped that they stuck. Is it a horror film or a pseudo-Holmes film? Its never really clear and the film suffers for it. The producers even went so far as to put another connection to the Holmes series by having Rondo Hatton as a mute Handyman, but he isn't given much to do other then look menacing.. Its good but nothing special.

Spider Woman Strikes Back, The (1946) ** (out of 4) Rare and forgotten Universal horror film has a nurse going to a creepy house to take care of a blind woman. The blind woman actually has her sight and is poisoning cows so that she can run the farmers off. Sound dumb? It's actually very dumb and the title is quite misleading, although I guess they were trying to cash in on the Sherlock Holmes film. This is the type of film where you keep waiting for something to happen but it never does. The performances are all rather dry as is the direction but it does move at a nice pace making the 57-minutes go by very fast. Jack Pierce is credited as the makeup artist yet there's no makeup in the film!

This movie promises to be a sequel to the Sherlock Holmes movie, "The Spider Woman". It isn't. True, Gale Sondergard is the villainess and "Spider Woman" is in the title, but that's where any similarity ends. It's not a horrible film, but it's disappointing to tease the viewer with the promise of something that isn't there.Rondo Hatton plays a mute, deformed servant. Too bad that he was so exploited.I do wish Universal had made this a true sequel to the Holmes film. It would have been more interesting.