Arthur Wotner was an excellent Holmes. Clearly his portrail is where the non-Conan Doyle Holmes quotation entered the lexicon: "Elementary, My Dear Watson." While it appears no where in the cannon, Wotner's Holmes says it, at least once, in each film. Dated, yes, but Wotner plays the character much as Conan Doyle would have wanted it. And he looks exactly like Paget drew Holmes.

I like this, despite the fact it was so old it was hard to see or hear what they were saying sometimes. I frankly prefer the older idea's of Sherlock to the New one's. I especially dislike them using a American actor to play him, and then having him act totally different from the way most people know him as acting. Like Robert Downey Jr, way of playing him is one of the worst, Sherlock was always a gentlemen, who was always well dress, and respectful, but in the new one, he has stubble on his face, and chases woman around like a some jerk of today. I know the books had Sherlock doing Opium and so the old movies and shows are not really like the books, but I prefer the lie to the truth, I hate that Hollywood thinks they have to do everything by the book all of sudden, when there are a heck of a lot of real stories of real people of our history which Hollywood in the old days chose to show as great hero's, that we now know were far from it, that Hollywood still has yet to change. Why can't Hollywood leave the fake hero's be and stick with making movies that show our real hero's as the fakes they are.I prefer the British versions of Sherlock even if it isn't like the books, as long as its like the old movies. The fact is they should have had Jude Law playing Sherlock instead, but of course they figure they would sale more tickets with Downey Jr, but its not that i dislike Downey Jr, its that he doesn't fit as Sherlock. I wish the Brit's would make their own version with one of their actors playing Sherlock, and Watson, and follow in the old way of making them. The one thing I like about most of the British actors is they still act in the same style as the older actors did, both their and here in Hollywood, of course here in Hollywood most have forgot how, or don't care. Now everything is about sex, violence, and just being nasty all way around. and the few who don't act that way or the few movie makers who don't have their actors act that way, never get the respect they deserve for choosing to do things like that old ways. Its a real shame. Sorry for the long review, but I just spent two days what allot of the older movies on Hulu, and thinking how I wish they still made movies more like them, or at least had actors who could act without being nasty, or rude.But at least we do have Hulu who lets us see the older movies again, and for free at that. Keep it up Hulu, I know some people complain about all the old movies, but even though I grew up in the 1970s and 80's, I do love the old movies of the 30s, 40 and 50s.And I'm sure am not the only one.

If I would have seen this film --when it first came out--I probably would have given it a four or perhaps even a five star rating. But it is so dated and lacking in most of the sophisticated film techniques of contemporary times--that it was a stretch for me to give it three stars. Still I enjoyed seeing the clothing styles,the acting methods and the scenes from this somewhat fascinating interpretation of Sherlock Holmes. Now I am looking forward to seeing the latest interpretation of Holmes--which will be coming out around Xmas time. Undoubtedly Sherlock Holmes will still be around when Harry Potter,Indiana Jones,Superman,Rocky,Spiderman et.al. are long forgotten.

This has Arthur Wontner as Holmes and Ian Hunter as Watson (sans sunglasses). The digital transfer is adequate, but could be improved.

This is a very very old interpretation of Sherlock Holmes. If you have read Conan Doyle or seen the BBC movies and shows with Jeremy Brett this will be a disappointment or at best a pleasant time waster. If you are into modern TV and cinema this will seem strangely antiquated. I enjoyed it most from the perspective of an antiquity and an example of how story telling was done in the 1930s. There's historical value and it's interesting to see how this great story was told to audiences of the time. But if you really want to see a great interpretation of the story Sign of Four check out the BBC and Jeremy Brett. I really hope hulu can get access to those BBC productions - they are really wonderful with remarkable acting. The acting in this... wooden.