View source for The Sleeping Cardinal (review 11 march 1931)

{{Cargo_Reviews_Articles
 |Date=1931-03-11
 |Book=The Sleeping Cardinal
 |BookAuthor=Leslie S. Hiscott
 |Reviewer=Lionel Collier
 |Topics=Movie
}}
This review was published in the article ''Plays'' written by [[Lionel Collier]] in [[The Bystander]] on 11 march 1931.


== Review ==
[[File:the-bystander-1931-03-11-p457-the-sleeping-cardinal.jpg|thumb|200px|right|[[The Bystander]] (11 march 1931, p. 457)]]

There is too much talk and not enough thrill in Leslie Hiscott's adaptation of two [[Sherlock Holmes]] stories under the generic title of "[[The Sleeping Cardinal]]." The fact is that, as a rule, [[Arthur Conan Doyle|Conan Doyle]] reads much better than he dramatises. It is a pleasure to see such a lifelike representation of [[Sherlock Holmes|Holmes]] as that given by [[Arthur Wontner]], and such a sinister figure as [[Norman McKinnell]] makes of Moriarty, but one would have liked to see a little more action. Deduction is interesting in a book, but when it is pictured it needs turning into action. I am afraid "[[The Sleeping Cardinal]] made me a little sleepy, too, in spite of the fact that I was interested in the development of the plot. There should be more action in "[[The Speckled Band (movie 1931)|The Speckled Band]]," which is shortly to be shown, and in "[[The Hound of the Baskervilles (movie 1932)|The Hound of the Baskervilles]]," which is still in pro-duction. I doubt, however, if a better [[Sherlock Holmes]] than [[Arthur Wontner]] will be found.

L. C. 








----
* [[Sir Arthur Conan Doyle:Complete Works|Back to Complete Works]]
* [[Sir Arthur Conan Doyle|Back to Conan Doyle]]
{{footer_review_articles}}