Jon Corelis In The Woman in Green, London is being terrorized by a series of murders of young women which have only one thing in common: each victim's index finger is neatly cut off. Scotland Yard, as usual, is baffled, and, as usual, turns in desperation to Sherlock Holmes.Though a rather late entry in a series which many feel lapsed in quality through time, The Woman in Green is actually one of the better movies in the Rathbone/Bruce Sherlock Holmes series. Though Holmes's usual police liaison Lestrade is here replaced by the slightly less bumbling Gregson, all of the other expected elements are firmly in place. As with most of the series (except for the initial two, The Hound of the Baskervilles and The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes), this film is set in a sort of combination dream period which is half Victorian and half mid-20th century. The flat at 221B Baker Street is particularly atmospheric and Victorian, perhaps in deliberate contrast to the chic modern flat of femme fatale Lydia Marlowe (Hilary Brooke,) where much of the action takes place.Several things make this film stand out in the series. The puzzle of the murders connected only by a gruesome detail, while so far as I can remember not drawn from any actual Holmes story, has a genuinely Holmesian feel. Bruce's Watson is particularly endearing in his fumbling assistance, and though this is not one of Rathbone's best portrayals of Holmes -- one gets the feeling he's starting to go through the motions this late in the game -- his characterization benefits greatly by for once having a really effective feminine foil: Hilary Brooke as the evil, sophisticated blonde mesmerist proves a credible enemy. Henry Daniell is also very good as a particularly reptilian Moriarty.The photography is also noteworthy here. The spookiness of the film's theme of hypnotism is reflected in dark lighting and tilted camera angles which almost make The Woman in Green into an expressionist noir film.In a nutshell: if you like this series, you are sure to enjoy this film for its combination of elements which you expect in this series with surprising and effective innovations.

Paul Evans An original story I guess which drew a little from The Final Problem. For my humble opinion, the story itself is excellent, it's very dark, and would almost work today, fitting the bill for today's demand for the dark and grizzly. The aspects of it I enjoyed, as I say I liked the story, I loved the hypnotism theme, that was cleverly done, the knitting needle etc. The scene showing the young lady going to her room at the beginning was genuinely terrifying. On the downside it's one of the very few entries in the series I find extremely dull, it feels quite slow, it plods along, lacking a little pace and imagination. The usual female villain has become a little bit of a cliché, she's beautiful, sinister and able to seduce him (seemingly.) Henry Daniell was not my favourite Moriarty by any stretch, I found him to be very wooden, although Hillary Brooke was great as Lydia. It's worth watching, but unlike Spider woman and The scarlet Claw it's not easily one to watch regularly. 6/10

Eric Stevenson I can understand why it was hard to tell what a true sequel to anything was back in the 1940's. The title "Part II" wasn't used until "The Godfather: Part II"! Anyway, this movie was quite satisfying, although I admit that it did get weaker in the second half. It's still worth looking at. It was nice to see Professor Moriarty here. I'm not even really a "Sherlock Holmes" fan, but the character is so popular I would know about the other elements in the series. Basil Rathbone was the most prolific Sherlock actor and in the longest running series of movies. It's weird to reference a "Woman In Green" when everything's in black and white! It gets interesting when they start talking about hypnotism. Sherlock Holmes was created to promote skepticism and I believe they get it pretty scientifically accurate here. These films were short films. What I mean is that they weren't short films. They were feature length films that were short by those standards. I guess it can get pretty confusing to classify the difference. The performances are fine and it's all quite authentic. ***.

Theo Robertson Women across London are being found murdered and Sherlock Holmes is invited to solve the crimes which have a strange quality in that the victims have their forefinger cut off This is another of the films featuring Basil Rathbone as Sherlock Holmes and Nigel Bruce as Doctor Watson . Being in the latter end of the franchise the action is set in the present day but doesn't involve itself in a propaganda exercise against Nazism and just concentrates on Holmes solving a series of murdersFor a film lasting little over an hour it is very streamlined and thankfully there's not a lot of padding . There are a few noticeable things such as Holmes referring to the Jack The Ripper murders and stating those murders involved women working in the same profession and being very careful not to state what that profession was . Also his know all attitude does become slightly over bearing to the point of annoyance . As a contrast Watson refers to hypnotists as being " charlatans fooling morons and buffoons " as soon as this is mentioned you know hat's coming next It's an entertaining enough thriller and one can understand why Rathbone and Bruce became cinematic legends after starring in this franchise and I remember enjoying these films as a child when they were shown on BBC2 in late 1970s . One can however get the feeling that this formula would be a bit too formulaic to a modern day audience and you can get too much of a good thing . And at the risk of heresy I can't help thinking Jeremy Brett gave the definitive performance of Holmes where he portrayed him as a cocaine addict . On a similar point did I hear the word " cannabis " being mentioned in this movie ?