If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

I really enjoyed this film in spite of any historical inaccuracies. If you watch the film as simply a Hollywood drama instead of "historical truth" then the movie is quite enjoyable to watch.Basil Rathbone & Boris Karloff are in what might be their most wicked and vile roles ever! Rathbone plays Richard - Duke of Gloucester while Karloff plays the chief gaolor of the Tower & executioner Mord.The movie is not considered to be a horror film yet it feels much like watching a historical horror-drama similar to watching the unrelated film "Tower of London (1962)" which also stars Vincent Price. ToL '62 is a completely different story than this Rathbone, Karloff and Price classic from '39."Tower of London (1939)" is worth watching for the fans of horror, historical dramas, Rathbone, Karloff and/or Price.9/10

Shakespeare -- Universal Pictures style! Basil Rathbone plays Richard III, who rises to power with the help of his club-footed executioner Mord, played by Boris Karloff ("crookback and dragfoot"). Excellent historical suspenser from Universal. Not a horror movie, despite the cast and studio. Although Karloff's Mord would be right at home lurking around Castle Frankenstein. In addition to Karloff and Rathbone, the cast includes Vincent Price, Leo G. Carroll, Ian Hunter, and lovely Nan Grey. Great sets, costumes, and direction by Rowland V. Lee. Rathbone is having lots of fun being evil and Karloff is always a treat to watch. I really like this one!

Director Rowland J. Lee takes a few pages from English history to tell the story of Richard the III. A sick, misshaped, ambitious and evil man who would stop at nothing to usurp the Throne of England. As Richard of Gloucester (Basil Rathbone) designs an ambitious and dastardly plan by which he will seek to destroy all who would stand in his way to be king of England. With his equally sinister henchman (Boris Karloff) he creates a tiny miniature stage on which all who must die are systematically remove. This includes the rightful sons of Queen Elizabeth (Barbara O'Neil) together with Edward IV (Ian Hunter) and the Duke of Clarence (Vincent Price). The superb cast included Leo G. Carroll as Lord Hastings. Like the black pages of a Gothic novel, the selected cast prove a fitting tribute to those who lent their talents to create this film Classic for the entertainment of audiences everywhere. Recommended for all who enjoy English drama at it's best. ****

The exterior scenes of London are convincing and the claustrophobic, incestuous halls of the tower seem an ideal setting for a drama about greed, betrayal and murder. The horror aspect is somewhat over played by Universal's marketing. It seems unlikely that any audience, even those in the 30's, would not have been more thrilled than horrified by the medieval power struggles depicted in the film.The scenery and lighting enhance a dark and ominous tone that reinforces the typical atmosphere of a horror genre film. So too does the presence of Boris Karloff, playing a sadistic club-footed executioner named Mord. This Igor-like caricature is hardly scary, and even adds a humorous element when viewed by modern audiences. Basil Rathbone plays the truly ruthless Duke of Gloucester, as both villain and protagonist. The plot revolves around his desire to usurp his brother's throne, killing those who stand in his way. Vincent Price also makes an appearance, a weak portrayal of the Duke's alcoholic half-brother, Clarence, who is dispatched by being drowned in wine. Oh the irony! Rathbone's intense stare and slimy charm as the Duke make for a compelling depiction, although somewhat overacted. His intensity is complimented by the comic relief provided by Ian Hunter as Edward IV. The film has been compared to Shakespeare's Richard III, but to compare this disposable pseudo-history to the work of the Bard is both unfair and pointless. This film is certainly historical and also theatrical, but it is not a history lesson nor is it truly Shakespearean. The film is as raunchy and violent as was allowed in the 30's, which by today's standards means hardly at all. The performances carry the somewhat tedious plot along, combined with the intrigue provided by its historical significance and the striking cinematography.The demonification of historical figures as depicted in The Tower of London may not correspond with the facts, but can be very entertaining. If a certain auteur has not applied fantasy to history, there would be no Count Dracula as we know him. This film is ideal for anyone with an interest in the War of the Roses, the mysteries of the Tower of London or the camp and theatrical horror of the black and white era. Those seeking an alternative depiction of Shakespeare's Richard III should keep looking.