Am a huge fan of Sherlock Holmes and get a lot of enjoyment out of Arthur Conan Doyle's stories. Also love Basil Rathbone's and especially Jeremy Brett's interpretations to death. So would naturally see any Sherlock Holmes adaptation that comes my way, regardless of its reception.The third film in the generally negatively received (though not unwatchable) four films starring Matt Frewer, 'The Royal Scandal' fares better than 'The Hound of the Baskervilles' and 'The Sign of Four'. It at least doesn't have the dubious distinction of butchering classic stories, 'The Sign of Four' was particularly disappointing. There are far better Sherlock Holmes adaptations though, even the worst Jeremy Brett adaptations are superior than any of Frewer's films. Not terrible, but should have been much better.Again, Kenneth Welsh is the best thing about 'The Royal Scandal' and the only good actor in the film. He is an excellent Watson and more the faithful interpretation of a loyal and intelligent Watson and not the bumbling buffoon for comic relief purposes. Found some of the locations suitably atmospheric, if perhaps not authentic, and the adaptation shot competently enough.However, my negative feelings on Frewer's Holmes remains unchanged. He is far too manic and eccentric, with too much of an over-emphasis on hammy humour in places, and his rapport with Watson too abrasive and borderline bullying. The supporting cast range from bland (Irene Adler) to pantomimic (the villains, which are basically barely developed caricatures).Moreover, 'The Royal Scandal' has a lack of tension and suspense and is pretty dull. It further suffers from being somewhat over-stuffed, too many various and different ideas cobbled together and it just feels muddled and disjointed. The costumes are not particularly appealing to look at and some of the dialogue, apart from some thought-provoking moments, is ham-fisted. Having too much emphasis on Holmes taking on the case on a more personal level didn't feel right either.Overall, lacklustre while not being unwatchable. 4/10 Bethany Cox

It is not awful - just not for the purist.I suspect that Johnny Lee Miller adapted his Sherlock after watching this film.Watson is excellent as are the villains.I have a complete collection of the original Strand magazines and am well aware of how many versions of Holmes do vary as do many of the plot lines. However, I feel that a little artistic licence can be allowed otherwise it would be like watching the Shakespearian society reciting Othello as against watching Orson Well's superb adaption.One thing was missing though - Holmes' cocaine addiction, remembering that these drugs could be freely purchased in that era.Overall worth a watch.

Now, I just watched this movie and while it is still one of the better SH movies I have watched, I still give it only 9 out of 10 because (SPOILERS! SPOILERS!) firstly Mycroft Holmes was so terribly slim and good-looking (in contrary to the canon) and secondly Cadogan West was actually the criminal and thirdly they even dared to combine the SCANDAL IN BOHEMIA and BRUCE-PARTINGTON!! OK OK, I won't be too harsh. It's a great movie and showed SH with a genuinely human side. Without so much as saying it he actually fell in love with Irene Adler who was a criminal (which is also not according to the canon, I might add), but who would Sherlock Holmes be more likely to fall in love with anyway? Watson was very cool IMHO. He was miles and miles and miles away from Bruce's Watson and that's saying a lot (I never liked Bruce as Watson but Rathbone is the KING)! One of the smaller things that struck me was the incredibly fake looking "Baker Street" sign towards the end of the film.All in all it's a very cool SH movie (apart from Mycroft!). I simply loved Matt Frewer this time.

When Sherlock Holmes faces an old enemy in the beautiful form of Irene Adler, a woman with a keenly criminal mind, his wills become torn between sentimentality and justice. He has been commissioned by the Prince of Germany to recover a compromising photograph taken with Irene, but is soon swept into a world of political intrigue, unrest, scandal, and double intentions that could be his downfall.Filled with dark, fog-shrouded chases through London, heart-stopping instances of horror, and momentary glimpses into the mind of Sherlock Holmes, "The Royal Scandal" was meant to be a classic among film adaptations. Sadly, it falls far short. The film begins most appropriately with a disclaimer saying that it has not been endorsed by any member of Doyle's family. This in itself was a grand giveaway that the following hour and a half of whirlwind scandal, deception, romance and imperial intrigue was not exactly what good old Doyle intended when he penned "A Scandal in Bohemia," upon which the production is very loosely based.Given, the film is not an entire flop. It manages to follow closely the story in some areas and expand out in others. Borrowing the blueprint scam and political tensions from His Last Bow, it attempts to make for itself a winning mystery of charm and interest and could have carried itself off well were it not for the gaping holes in character development. Our first and most glaring flaw is found in Holmes himself... a distracted, romantically entangled Holmes. A Sherlock Holmes who finds himself blinded by beauty and seduction, who prides himself one moment on "being the one exception" in the male race who consistently gives in to Irene Adler's temptations; and the next finds himself compromised.Non-literary fans of Sherlock Holmes will even notice the flaws; that Homes would ever place personal interest before one of his cases is ridiculous; and his interest in Irene is played out on more a personal nature than a willingness to corner her for the government's sake. To Sherlock Holmes, this would be the ultimate humiliation. On the other end of the tables, the political intrigue that is played out is very enthralling as Irene and Holmes play out a delightful game of cat and mouse. London is at its most mysterious and sinister. We are also introduced to characters only alluded to in the novels... namely his political brother Mycroft, and the street-wise Wiggins.In conclusion, it is a film that wavers between being likable due to the nature of its intent and distasteful to true lovers of the Canon. If you are a died-in-the-wool Sherlockian like myself, you will find Holmes inability to control his feelings somewhat hard to swallow. But the rest of the production is just seductive enough to draw you into a world of lies, deceptions, and double agents that would please any mystery buff. Hallmark could have done better; maybe next time their writer would fare better in actually *reading* the Canon.