A Study in Terror (1965)
Directed by James Hill

Film Review

The idea of pitting Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's celebrated fictional detective against the most notorious real-life murder of the Victorian Era is such an obvious conceit that you wonder why no one thought of it before this low budget horror schlock came along in the mid-1960s.  Whilst A Study in Terror tries desperately hard to be something more than an exploitation slasher flick, this is essentially all it is, although it does at least have a thin veneer of respectability with its lavish production design and distinguished cast.  The needlessly convoluted plot is guaranteed to induce headaches if you make too serious an attempt to unravel it - the film was after all intended not to stimulate the cerebellum but to arouse the goose bumps.  Murder by Decree (1978) offers a far more satisfying encounter between Sherlock Holmes and Jack the Ripper, sparing us the Hammer horror-style excursions into Grand Guignol and Barbara Windsor looking as if she has accidentally strayed onto the set from a Carry On film. Hammer's subsequent Hands of the Ripper (1971) bears some striking similarities with this film but takes itself somewhat more seriously.

Whilst they may not be the most memorable of cinema's Holmes and Watson pairings, John Neville and Donald Houston bring a relish to their performance which adds to the camp playfulness of the film.  It isn't clear whether this was ever intended to be a serious horror-thriller or a spoof - the scenes with Babs Windsor and Robert Morley have an obvious comedic undertone, which works quite well to offset the film's darker elements.  The remarkably detailed sets may be instantly evocative of Victorian England, but in every other respect the film shrieks mid-1960s at the top of its voice, John Scott's score doing its utmost to decimate the aura of menace and mystery that director James Hill is working so hard to sustain.  A Study in Terror takes itself too seriously to be effective as a comedy, and not seriously enough to make a decent mystery thriller.  It is however a moderately entertaining piece of 60s kitsch, made palatable by the juicy tongue-in-cheek contributions from the likes of Frank Finlay, Judi Dench and Adrienne Corri. After this, James Hill directed one of the best-loved British films of the 1960s, Born Free (1966) and several episodes of the popular television series The Avengers (1965-68). His main claim to fame, however, is that he directed most of the epsiodes of the original TV series Worzel Gummidge (1979-81) and its Australian spin-off.

Film Synopsis

In late Victorian England, terror stalks the streets of Whitechapel in the East End of London.  Several young women, all prostitutes, have been mercilessly slain, stabbed to death, by an unknown killer who has become known as Jack the Ripper.  Shortly after he begins his investigation into these crimes, Sherlock Holmes receives a box of medical instruments through the post.  A surgical scalpel is missing from the box.  Holmes discovers that the tools belonged to a former medical student named Michael Osborne, who was disowned by his father, the Duke of Shires.  It so happens that the Duke's other son, Lord Carfax, is giving up his time to help the poor of East London with a philanthropic surgeon, Dr Murray.  Holmes soon realises that the key to the mystery is the woman Michael Osborne married before he left England to begin his studies in Paris.  Can it be a coincidence that she too was a prostitute...?