How sad is this?

A lot of fun.

It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties.

Worth seeing just to witness how winsome it is.

Producer: Roy William Neill. Copyright 5 May 1944 by Universal Pictures Co., Inc. New York opening at the Rialto: 18 May 1944. U.S. release: 26 May 1944. Australian release: 8 June 1944. 6,785 feet. 75 minutes. Alternative title: SHERLOCK HOLMES AND THE SCARLET CLAW.SYNOPSIS: About forty miles from Quebec lies a small village in Canada, morbidly named La Mort Rouge {The Red Death}. Despite opposition from Lord Penrose, the local landowner, Holmes and Watson investigate a series of ghastly murders, supposedly committed by a legendary phantom.NOTES: Number 8 in the Rathbone-Bruce series, and number six of the twelve Universal entries.COMMENT: Although not based directly on anything Doyle himself wrote, this is one of the best of the Universal series. Its terrific atmosphere is achieved in large measure through George Robinson's attractively low-key lighting. Marvellous sets and inventive direction also help bolster the script's intriguing plot, deft dialogue and fascinating character studies. The players, led by a stand-out performance from Gerald Hamer (etching the most memorable portrait of his life right here), are uniformly excellent. Some contemporary critics presumed to downgrade Rathbone's portrayal, but he is as suavely skilful as ever. No, The Scarlet Claw has only one strike against it; - a ludicrously patriotic plug for Canada which is tacked on to the end. This could easily be eliminated (and in fact it was from many television prints). For some reason, whether to shorten the running time to allow for more commercials or simply to eliminate a rather frightening sequence or perhaps simply to make the plot easier to follow by removing one of the characters, the TV print also clumsily excised one of the most thrillingly staged and atmospheric of the action scenes. The fine professionals at UCLA have now restored the film to its original length in their current DVD offering.

Roy William Neil continued to direct this series, and this is one of the best. Story is not adapted by a Sir Arthur Conan Doyle tale, but instead tells an original one. Holmes & Watson are in Quebec Canada to attend a conference when they are called upon to investigate a murder of Lady Penrose, who had in fact already contacted Holmes, but was too late to save her. Locals believe it to be a supernatural creature at work, but Sherlock knows better. Atmospheric and exciting entry seems inspired by earlier "The Hound Of The Baskervilles", but is better handled here. The series was at its peak now, and in the next two entries as well.

I put The Scarlet Claw together with The House of Fear in the Rathbone/Bruce Holmes series. The pair of films both bring Holmes and Watson into the 20th Century, yet isolate them in a setting that may as well have been Victorian England. Neither film is burdened with the war propaganda plots that mar later entries in the series. And like The House of Fear, Bruce's Watson is rarely played as a fool in this entry.The Scarlet Claw does steal a basic plot element, 'the monster' from The Hound of the Baskervilles, which is odd, considering The Hound had been made only five years earlier. But then again, I'm sure that viewers in the movie theatres of 1944 weren't thinking back to The Hound when they watched this film.Another interesting connection with The House of Fear is the almost total absence of women in this film. Hollywood loved to squeeze a love interest in every movie they could, but it doesn't arise here. And the humor is kept to a minimum - again, rare, considering the regular inclusion of a comic relief character in the Charlie Chan series, for instance. Nigel Bruce does have one such scene, but it plays well within the story.I consider this film every bit as good as The Hound of the Baskervilles. Perhaps that's because the movie failed the book in many ways. The Scarlet Claw certainly isn't great movie-making, but the story unfolds nicely from start to finish.

Whilst attending a conference in Canada, Sherlock Holmes investigates some murders in the village of La Mort Rouge, which the superstitious locals attribute to a ghostly curse. Are they the work of a phantom, or a flesh and blood killer ?This, the eighth in the series of Rathbone-Bruce movies, sees Neill's horror film influence come to the fore (it was the only one he directly had a hand in writing), with various ghastly goings on, a creepy setting, and even a scene where Holmes is attacked by the legendary glowing monster, courtesy of some nice special effects by John P. Fulton. Of course, as with The Hound Of The Baskervilles, it turns out that the killer is merely using folklore as a cover for his deadly actions, but Neill creates a terrific atmosphere of dread and even manages to make two sly references to Edgar Allan Poe; the village's name comes from The Masque Of The Red Death, and the innkeeper's daughter, Marie Journet, is a nod to The Mystery Of Marie Rogêt. Everybody acquits themselves well, especially Hamer (who also appears in four of the other films) in the plum multiple role of the spurned actor turned maniac, and there is a pub full of village bumpkins to rival The Slaughtered Lamb from An American Werewolf In London. This is not the very best of the series but as ever, Neill's focused direction, Rathbone's forthright playing and a cleverly constructed whodunnit combine into a solid spooky thriller.