DeuceWild_77 Well crafted mystery / thriller film, co-produced by the U.K. and Canada, which brings the literary world of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's most famous characters: Sherlock Holmes & Dr. Watson, plus the Inspector Lestrade of Scotland Yard and Mrs. Hudson, the landlady of the house 221B Baker Street, in which Holmes lives, to the real life case of the infamous serial- killer, Jack the Ripper who terrorized Whitechapel in 1888 (featuring the same premise, but ultimately, with way different results from the previous, 'Sherlock Holmes meets Jack the Ripper' film: "A Study in Terror", released in 1965)."Murder by Decree" is largely influenced by the book, "Jack the Ripper: The Final Solution" by Stephen Knight and "The Ripper File" by Elwyn Jones and John Lloyd, which connected the hideous murders to a Masonic plot involving the Royal British Family, especially the grandson of Queen Victoria, Prince Albert Victor, who secretly married a catholic girl from the working class, Annie Crook, and their newborn baby that could be a threat for the throne of Britain.Bob Clark's direction, filming the John Hopkins' imaginative screenplay, is way vivid (even if some scenes staged, had more of a look and feel from a "made for TV" film) and the production design is astonishing for the 5 millions budget: the invocation of the Victorian Era is top notch, kudos to the art direction, set decoration and costume design, especially in the exterior shots, which the camera captured it wonderfully, giving to this Gothic tale a sense of eeriness and grotesque.Christopher Plummer is a great actor and is always a pleasure to watch him and his portray of Sherlock Holmes here, it's one of the most human and sympathetic renditions of the character ever put on-screen. Not only he's less arrogant and picky, but also way more emotional and sensitive, with a social and political conscience, making him more charming and self aware. His laid-back sense of humor is notorious, too. James Mason is fantastic as his faithful partner, and probably the best (or maybe the 2nd best, only behind André Morell in the excellent "The Hound of Baskervilles", released by Hammer Films in '59) Dr. Watson from the last 5 decades. His rendition of Watson is more a valuable asset, au pair with the way the character was written in the original stories: more concerned, instinctive and sober and less buffoon (like Nigel Bruce played him in the early Sherlock Holmes' movie adaptations starring Basil Rathbone as the title character), but at the same time, maintaining the humorous & witty side of the old Watson. The supporting cast is full of veterans, from Anthony Quayle as the bad-tempered Sir Charles Warren, Frank Finlay as Lestrade (a role he had previously played in the similar, "A Study in Terror"), David Hemmings, Susan Clark, to Sir John Gielgud in a commanding cameo as the Prime Minister and head of the Freemasons, but the highlights in the performances goes to Donald Sutherland (still in "The Invasion of Body Snatchers" creepy mode) as the medium Robert Lees and to the underrated Canadian actress, Geneviève Bujold who offers a tragic / haunting performance as the ill-fated Annie Crook. Her only speaking scene with Christopher Plummer in the Mental Ward, showing her naivety and desperation, was probably the best acted scene in the whole movie and perhaps, where Meg Tilly got part of her inspiration to play her Oscar Nominated role in "Agnes of God" ('85).In short, "Murder by Decree" is a visually engaging film and a winner in terms of storytelling, a genuine product of inspired craftsmanship in every department and a good piece of entertainment cinema, which fully works as a mystery thrilling film without being too obtuse.Highly recommended !!

Leofwine_draca MURDER BY DECREE is a pretty good exploration of what might have happened had Sherlock Holmes encountered Jack the Ripper. The story had already been done previously in the 1965 film A STUDY IN TERROR, which I found to be this movie's superior, but MURDER BY DECREE still has a lot going for it. It's got a heady atmosphere and some truly sinister moments, like the close-up of the killer's black-iris eyeball, which come courtesy of Bob Clark, the famed director who made the creepy slasher film BLACK Christmas. The look and feel of Victorian London is spot on.It also boasts the finest Watson put on screen to date: James Mason. Mason is one of those impeccable English gentlemen – Peter Cushing was another – who has the ability to make us believe in any character, no matter what film he appears in. His Watson is humorous, kindly, but exceedingly tough, too, a real force to be reckoned with. Christopher Plummer's Sherlock Holmes is less successful. He's not likable, but the neither was the literary Holmes; Plummer is a fine actor, but I don't know. He just doesn't seem as painstaking as some of the actors who have portrayed Holmes on television. He's good, but not Rathbone.The story of the Jack the Ripper murders is very familiar. I've seen plenty of films about him, and most of those have a detective as the central character anyway, so the presence of Holmes doesn't really make much sense here. The main drawback with this film is the running time: it's far too long. When it's moving, with the scenes of detection, of carriages flying past, and the excellent, chase-focused climax, it's good fun; when it slows down, as in the drawn-out asylum sequence, it's a bore. The plot elements don't really go anywhere and the various elements of the mystery – Freemasons, the royal family, etc. – don't gel too much. So this is a film that gets by on atmosphere alone.There are other strengths, though. The supporting cast is fine, with David Hemmings and Anthony Quayle great as stuffy officials, and Frank Finlay splendid as Lestrade. There are some notable cameos from the likes of John Gielgud as the prime minister, Genevieve Bujold as a madwoman, and Donald Sutherland as an eccentric psychic. The comic interplay between Plummer and Mason is splendid, and for me the film's highlight is the small matter of a pea on Watson's plate! As a whole, though, the Johnny Depp-starrer FROM HELL was more to my liking, despite the flashiness and obvious attempts to appeal to the modern audience.

Spikeopath Murder by Decree is directed by Bob Clark and adapted to screenplay by John Hopkins from the novel The Ripper File written by Elwyn Jones and John Lloyd. It stars Christopher Plummer, James Mason, David Hemmings, Susan Clark, Frank Finlay, Anthony Quayle, Donald Sutherland, Geneviève Bujold & John Gielgud.Film pitches Sherlock Holmes (Plummer) and Dr. Watson (Mason) into the hunt for Jack the Ripper in Whitechapel, London 1888...I've been exploited old fellow, by the very people for whom we are searching.The greatest of detectives searching for Britain's most notorious serial killer, it's a killer pitch that had already had a film made in 1965 called A Study in Terror. That was a film that couldn't quite get it right, here, 14 years later, there's a bigger budget and "A" list gloss to help tell the tale. And boy does it work! In the cannon of Sherlock Holmes, Murder by Decree is to Holmes films what On Her Majesty's Secret Service is to the James Bond franchise. Appertaining to the great detective himself, it's the odd one out, a divisive picture, not because it's rubbish or technically shy, but because the main man protagonist dares to be human, a man of conscious; politically, socially and ethically. He's still the same charming, clever and complex character most have come to know and love, but Murder by Decree fronts him out as a human being, with Watson alongside him as a non buffoon bloke doing his bit for the case whilst remaining sensitive about the last pea on his plate! It's these characterisations, splendidly played by two actors of considerable talent, that are at the core of the film's success.If she dies and you come under my hand? Expect no mercy.Period production value is high, it has to be for a Jolly Jack based movie. Bring the dark, bring the smog and bring the Victorian costumes (Judy Moorcroft). Then play it out amongst shadowy lamp lighted cobbled streets and let the sets drip with slum London sweat and tears. All that is required then is to have a source story of compelling interest, of which Murder by Decree scores greatly as well. It's fanciful for sure, but the most spectacular of all Ripper theories. From a secret love child to the Freemasons, and up to Royalty itself, it's a potent notion put forward. That is of course conjecture as a solution, but the makers are to be applauded for taking that idea and successfully combining the Arthur Conan Doyle creations with historical reality, something that A Study in Terror fell considerably short on.Rest of the cast is filled out with some quality as well, where Hemmings, Quayle, Finlay, Gielgud and Bujold don't disappoint, the latter of which gets to really perform with substance in the pivotal scene set in an Asylum. Only real let down is Sutherland, or more like what the makers did (didn't do) with him. His psychic Robert Lees crops up for a couple of small scenes for what we expect will be a telling contribution to the plot, but they aren't. It seems like just an excuse to do Sutherland up like he had just awoken from the grave, and to give the picture some ethereal sheen moments. For the finale and the big reveal of the Ripper, Plummer is simply magnificent. He holds court in front of his peers, including the Prime Minister (Gielgud), and unfurls the explanation with impassioned fortitude, it's then that we realise this was always a Sherlock Holmes movie, and not a Jack the Ripper piece. With that, it's one of the best featuring the Deer Stalker wearing fellow. 9/10

mark.waltz When vicious murders begin occurring in the equivalent of London's red light district, who do concerned citizens turn to? Why Sherlock Holmes, of course! While the fictional detective wasn't actually around during London's gaslight era when these foggily lit murders took place, it makes fictional sense that eventually somebody would pit the notoriously named Jack the Ripper against London's most well loved detective prior to Miss Marple. If it couldn't be Basil Rathbone, then some other famous British thespian had to take over. In this case, it is Christopher Plummer, as far away from the Edelweiss of "The Sound of Music's" Salzburg as he could get.Plummer gives (in this reviewer's opinion), his best performance as the pipe smoking and argyle cap wearing detective. While I agree he is one of Britain's greatest gifts to the theatre and cinema, I often took pause with his slow moving speech and frequent stalls in reciting his lines. That is totally missing here, and he gives a relaxed and often humorous performance that isn't as hyper as Rathbone's but just as riveting. Just as outstanding is James Mason, taking over Nigel Bruce's role as Dr. Watson. While slightly bumbling, he isn't as eccentric as Bruce was, and as a result, is taken more seriously. In a nod to Mary Gordon (Mrs. Hudson in the Rathbone/Bruce films), the brief appearance of Holmes' landlady is hysterically amusing because of the bit actresses' resemblance to the wonderful Ms. Gordon.As the storyline unfolds, it is obvious that the writers are developing something more sinister than just the whims of a madman killing prostitutes. It is almost devilish in its innuendos as clues are dropped that give enough information to the viewers to guess what is going on, yet keep them intrigued as well. In smaller roles, Donald Sutherland, Anthony Quayle and Frank Finlay shine, while brief appearances by "Webster's" Susan Clark (whatever happened to her????) and Genevieve Bujold are extremely haunting.Why this film was overlooked at awards time is beyond me, especially for Plummer, Mason and its moody photography. Everything about this film is exquisite and with recent, more youthful looks at Holmes and Watson, this entry in the popular series is worth re-discovering.