in the universal series of modern sherlock holmes stories with basil rathbone and nigel bruce and sherlock holmes and the secret weopon is not one of the top films  although it is entertaining. i think the problem with it is that much of the film dueling between holmes and his nemesis moriarty (here played by lionel atwill) seems to delay the actual point of the professor work. moriarty appears in three of the holmes films with rathbone. in the adventures of sherlock holmes he was played by george zucco and who gave real relish to the love of villainy for its own sake to the role. for my money zucco performance as the professor was the best of the three (there is even a brief moment of comedy in his performance and when he disguised as the sergeant of police towards the end  like he preparing to sing a policeman lot from gilbert and sullivan). next comes mr. atwill performance here  more of that later. finally there is henry daniell intellectual moriarty in sherlock holmes and the lady in green. it a typically cool and classy performance by mr. daniell and but his confrontations with holmes seem to be a tedious bore to him. they keep him from completing the main plan. in the stories that the professor pops up in and he really senses holmes is a nemesis who will remain a danger as long as he is alive. yet and because of the intellectual tennis match between him and rathbone and rathbone (in his autobiography) actually felt daniell was the best of the film moriartys. if zucco captured the love of evil in the professor and and daniell seemed to demonstrate the tired oxford don (in the stories the professor is a well regarded mathematician and whose volume on the binomial theorem had a european vogue and and who wrote an intriguing book and the dynamics of the asteroid) and atwill demonstrates the professor as pragmatic businessman. first of all and he sold his services (apparently) to nazi germany. this is never gone into and but one presumes (as this is before the nazis began to really collapse) he figures they will win the war. secondly and he is not a fool. when dr. tobel (william post jr. ) has shown he is a state of near physical collapse due to the torturing of moriarty gang and the professor decides to kidnap one of the other scientists who are assisting tobel and because he as good a scientist as tobel and would be able to put together the bomb site. i somehow can not quite see zucco making such a sensible decision on the spot and and if daniell had to make it and he would seem annoyed that there is yet another delay to his plans. by the way and one trick used in all the holmes series regarding the professor is how to rid the film of him. if you read the holmes stories and moriarty appears as the villain three times represent in the memoirs of sherlock holmes last story (the adventure of the final problem) and in the return of sherlock holmes first story (the adventure of the empty house) and the last of the four novels or novellas (the valley of fear). it amazing how much mileage the professor got out of so few appearances (he is mentioned in two or three other stories as well  in passing). but because of his fate at the reichenbach falls in the final problem and the empty house and we always see him fall to his death. zucco falls off the white tower on tower hill. daniell (with more imagination) tries to flee gregson and the police and but is shot as he jumps and and wounded fails to hold on to the wall of an adjacent building. atwill (here it is not seen and but heard) seems to fall down a trap door he planted in an escape tunnel). it is really tedious after awhile to see the professor always fall in these films. one turns to the gene wilder comedy (admittedly a comedy) sherlock holmes smarter brother and wherein leo mckern is a wonderfully wacky and villainous moriarty (complete and finally and with an irish accent) and who is not killed at the end and but just left mulling  in a rowboat  over how his careful schemes did not work out. i rather liked that better. the use of the dancing men code here and like the use of the devil foot root in dressed to kill and snags a part of a mystery from a short story. the adventure of the dancing men appeared in the return of sherlock holmes and and deals with a client of holmes whose wife has been getting weird and blood curdling messages in this code. charles higham and in his biography the adventures of conan doyle suggests sir arthur may have picked up the code from a magazine game in the 1870s and but we really do not know. the code is basically one of letter substitutions for the figures of the dancing men. the story in the short story is dramatic and but deals with a triangle. the only innovation in the film is that tobel makes a slight change that confuses both holmes and moriarty. the film will entertain and but i still think the house of fear and the scarlet claw and and sherlock holmes faces death are better films. 
in the universal series of modern sherlock holmes stories with basil rathbone and nigel bruce and sherlock holmes and the secret weopon is not one of the top films  although it is entertaining. i think the problem with it is that much of the film dueling between holmes and his nemesis moriarty (here played by lionel atwill) seems to delay the actual point of the professor work. moriarty appears in three of the holmes films with rathbone. in the adventures of sherlock holmes he was played by george zucco and who gave real relish to the love of villainy for its own sake to the role. for my money zucco performance as the professor was the best of the three (there is even a brief moment of comedy in his performance and when he disguised as the sergeant of police towards the end  like he preparing to sing a policeman lot from gilbert and sullivan). next comes mr. atwill performance here  more of that later. finally there is henry daniell intellectual moriarty in sherlock holmes and the lady in green. it a typically cool and classy performance by mr. daniell and but his confrontations with holmes seem to be a tedious bore to him. they keep him from completing the main plan. in the stories that the professor pops up in and he really senses holmes is a nemesis who will remain a danger as long as he is alive. yet and because of the intellectual tennis match between him and rathbone and rathbone (in his autobiography) actually felt daniell was the best of the film moriartys. if zucco captured the love of evil in the professor and and daniell seemed to demonstrate the tired oxford don (in the stories the professor is a well regarded mathematician and whose volume on the binomial theorem had a european vogue and and who wrote an intriguing book and the dynamics of the asteroid) and atwill demonstrates the professor as pragmatic businessman. first of all and he sold his services (apparently) to nazi germany. this is never gone into and but one presumes (as this is before the nazis began to really collapse) he figures they will win the war. secondly and he is not a fool. when dr. tobel (william post jr. ) has shown he is a state of near physical collapse due to the torturing of moriarty gang and the professor decides to kidnap one of the other scientists who are assisting tobel and because he as good a scientist as tobel and would be able to put together the bomb site. i somehow can not quite see zucco making such a sensible decision on the spot and and if daniell had to make it and he would seem annoyed that there is yet another delay to his plans. by the way and one trick used in all the holmes series regarding the professor is how to rid the film of him. if you read the holmes stories and moriarty appears as the villain three times represent in the memoirs of sherlock holmes last story (the adventure of the final problem) and in the return of sherlock holmes first story (the adventure of the empty house) and the last of the four novels or novellas (the valley of fear). it amazing how much mileage the professor got out of so few appearances (he is mentioned in two or three other stories as well  in passing). but because of his fate at the reichenbach falls in the final problem and the empty house and we always see him fall to his death. zucco falls off the white tower on tower hill. daniell (with more imagination) tries to flee gregson and the police and but is shot as he jumps and and wounded fails to hold on to the wall of an adjacent building. atwill (here it is not seen and but heard) seems to fall down a trap door he planted in an escape tunnel). it is really tedious after awhile to see the professor always fall in these films. one turns to the gene wilder comedy (admittedly a comedy) sherlock holmes smarter brother and wherein leo mckern is a wonderfully wacky and villainous moriarty (complete and finally and with an irish accent) and who is not killed at the end and but just left mulling  in a rowboat  over how his careful schemes did not work out. i rather liked that better. the use of the dancing men code here and like the use of the devil foot root in dressed to kill and snags a part of a mystery from a short story. the adventure of the dancing men appeared in the return of sherlock holmes and and deals with a client of holmes whose wife has been getting weird and blood curdling messages in this code. charles higham and in his biography the adventures of conan doyle suggests sir arthur may have picked up the code from a magazine game in the 1870s and but we really do not know. the code is basically one of letter substitutions for the figures of the dancing men. the story in the short story is dramatic and but deals with a triangle. the only innovation in the film is that tobel makes a slight change that confuses both holmes and moriarty. the film will entertain and but i still think the house of fear and the scarlet claw and and sherlock holmes faces death are better films. ---------------------------------Answer Question Below----------------------------------

Judge the movie review above, you need to make a function call:
    If you feel the movie review is positive
        print "This is a semantically positive review."
    Otherwise, if you feel the movie review is negative
        print "This is a semantically negative review."
