this be a poor and bizarre sherlock holmes movie . it poor because the story have very little to do with the original conan doyle story . heck and they even include a bunch of character that weren not in this tale . it bizarre because reginald owen seem a very odd choice for the lead seem much more suited to the role of watson than holmes . much of this be just tradition actor famous for play this same role repeatedly be william gillette and arthur wontner and basil rathbone and jeremy brett be all thin guy and bore some similarity to each other . owen just look nothing like them and this take some get use to . this isn not a bad thing just an odd thing . also and i be really confuse by the film because although it bear almost no similarity to a study in scarlet and the film be very similar to agatha christie and then there be none ( a. k. a. the 10 little indian and another title which i can not use because i doubt if imdb would allow me to use the original title due to political correctness ) . however and christie novel do not appear until the late 1930s and so it appear that perhaps she lift the plot from this 1933 film or at least be strongly inspire by it . i be really surprised there wasn not a lot of uproar about the similarity . if you ignore all these aspect and you still have a poor film because the film have such poor production value . there be no incidental music and lousy dialog and the acting be often very poor and the whole thing simply have no energy . a a result and instead of be engage and the whole thing be mind numbingly dull and i can not recommend you see it .