Robert Joyner The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Brendon Jones It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Guillelmina The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

Phillipa Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

coolantic Just watched this on TV and was astounded by the apparent level of ineptitude and overacting on display. The story involves the residents of a spooky London boarding house, each of whom seems to have a secret they wish to protect. There are mysterious goings-on a-plenty. Smugglings, terrorists, illicit romantic liaisons and suchlike. Not to mention murders. It seems that the writer has a fevered imagination and has tried to cram into the screenplay as many whodunnit cliches as possible. The whole thing is incredibly rushed, and plays like a frenetic game of Cluedo (Clue). The bumbling police are also on hand to draw the inevitable wrong conclusion. And the case is solved by one of the residents; a young writer. There, I've told you all you need to know in order to work out what is really going on! But do watch the film. It's what movies used to be about. Entertainment!

Leofwine_draca SHADOWS ON THE STAIRS is an acceptable and light murder mystery from the era which is worthy of Agatha Christie or one of her imitators. It's an American production masquerading as a British one, although I admit the accents had me fooled, but the extra budget means that the camera-work is better and the film is of a higher visual quality throughout than to be expected.The action is centred in and around a boarding house occupied by a number of guests, all of whom have their own motives and machinations. It's almost like the board game Cluedo put up on screen. After a time, one of the leading players is found murdered in his own bedroom, so the police investigate and learn one of the other inhabitants is responsible.There are some solid mystery elements included in the film, particularly my favourite moment with the spooky figure in the black shawl who goes creeping in and out of rooms. Unfortunately some of the acting - particularly on the part of the female cast members - is rather overdone and histrionic at times. But there's a solid denouement and good work from the likes of character actor Turhan Bey, which keep you glued to the screen.

csteidler Nearly everyone has something to hide in the London lodging house that is the setting of this enjoyable thriller. Even the young writer (Bruce Lester) who is a central character is not what he seems—posing as aspiring but not yet successful, he is in fact (we learn early on) an already popular playwright living incognito in a setting that he thinks will provide him with material for his next work….a thriller. The other lodgers are embroiled in various political intrigues, secret relationships, and hidden resentments and jealousies. Plot elements include a knife hidden inside a bedpost; a heavy box of something mysterious; figures coming and going at odd hours, including one whose face is hidden beneath a shawl; and a portable chess board and pieces. Also worth noting: the characters all seem familiar with the play "Charley's Aunt" when it is mentioned.The one character who has no secrets, no suspicions, is the young woman (Heather Angel) who naturally takes a special interest in the young writer; to her, the house is just a home and "A mouse in the pantry's the most exciting thing that's happened around here since I can remember." Mary Field is excellent as Phoebe St. John Snell, the chatty single lady who has a vivid imagination. Mystery purists may not like the cute ending scene; personally, I found it rather charming. Overall, it's a fun little picture—plenty of plot (but not too much) packed into 61 minutes.

classicsoncall I was surprised to see the Warner Brothers/First National name attached to this film; their many movies of the era often presented a social ill as a backdrop to a story headlined by one of their main contract players. "Shadows on the Stairs" seems to have been done with just entertainment value in mind, and it works, up to a point. Had the story finished as the mystery it set out to be I would have been much more satisfied. However the "twist" ending only insures that it never actually occurred, which leaves one feeling somehow cheated.With that off my chest, I'll agree that there were some interesting characters and a curious set up designed to keep the viewer off balance. The opening scene in particular had a Charlie Chan feel to it, complete with dark alleys and a dock scene involving some type of contraband. The denture challenged Miss Snell (Mary Field) and the comical constable (Charles Irwin) provided laughs both intentional and otherwise.The two questions viewers will ask themselves along the way are "What's in the box?" and "Who's under the shawl?". At film's end they are both a moot point of course, but that still leaves one question. Why would the key of any occupant at the Armitage boarding house be able to open all of the rooms?