Average Rating: 
Rating:  - Basil Rathwho????
Apparently when writing his review laddie5 is unaware of Jeremy Brett's heart condition that affected his performance slightly in his later performances as the world's greatest "unofficial" Detective. Quite honestly, I think Jeremy Brett's later performances as Holmes were among his best. Even up to the end. Everybody considers Basil Rathbone to be the definitive Holmes, which I think is utter nonsense. Most of the later movies with Rathbone as Holmes don't even take place in Victorian England but have Holmes in current settings (well current in 1940) which I think is because they couldn't afford the Victorian backdrops and all that. Jeremy Brett not only looks the way Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wrote the character, but performs the part with all of Holmes's quirks and short comings. Such as his cocaine and morphine addictions (that's right, Holmes was an addict).This version of "The Hound of the Baskerville" follows Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's version very closely and is among the best productions of his the author's most famous stories. Watson takes center stage in this story as he tries to uncover the Baskerville curse of a demonic hound that haunts the moors. Edward Hardwicke is probably one of the best screen Watson's to date. Much like his predecessor in the Granada series David Burke (who did a great job as Watson), he plays Watson as the intelligent man of medicine that Conan Doyle wrote in his books and not the hamfisted bungler that has smeared the character since Nigel Bruce played the character. Hopefully, future productions of Holmes will continue this tradition with Watson's character. The production itself is very well done and atmospheric. A really fine cast (those of you who can remember will recognize the actor from "The Bounder")and a brilliant performance by Jeremy Brett which does not lack in the least bit. If you are to buy any copy of "The Hound of the Baskervilles" make this your first. The definitive production starring the definitive Sherlock Holmes
Rating: - The ONLY Hound of the Baskervilles to watch!
I have now seen several productions of 'The Hound of the Baskervilles', including the Basil Rathbone and Hammer versions, but of all that I have seen this is the definitive production.I agree that the Hound doesn't look very 'spooky' or 'Ghostly', but let's face it, it is just a dog and not a ghost (obviously! ) so it would have been a bit silly to fall into the trap of making it look like a ghost (like so many other films have), only for Holmes to reveal at the end that it wasn't. In fact I think that this just goes to improve the 'realism' of the story, and along with the usually excellent performance from Jeremy Brett as Holmes, this video is an absolute must.
Rating:  - A faithful, if not too suspenseful, adaptation of the story.
I wish to add one remark to that of "Great Expectations": Holmes is in a fedora in HOUND because that is the way Sidney Paget drew him in the STRAND MAGAZINE. The Granada series was the first time anyone portrayed Holmes as he was written and illustrated. The art direction, music, and photography in this HOUND are up to the usual high standards of this series. Unfortunately, little else is. I can't believe how little suspense there is--in a story that is chock full of it. The editing is at best leisurely and the special effects can only be described as very weak. The Hound is obviously papier mache. They did better in THE COPPER BEECHES--why didn't they try harder here? Poor Jeremy Brett is obviously ill, though not as ill as he appeared in some later episodes. His appearance suffers and this is distracting; but I was still able to appreciate the fine scene at the beginning with the coffee pot. In short, this is a faithful, if plodding, HOUND. But not a very scary one.
|
