World Famous Comics: Sherlock Holmes - The Hound of the Baskervilles
Sherlock Holmes - The Hound of the Baskervilles
Starring: Ian Richardson, Donald Churchill, Denholm Elliott, Glynis Barber, Brian Blessed Directed By: Douglas Hickox Average Rating: Aspect Ratio: 1.33:1 Audience Rating: NR (Not Rated) Binding: DVD Format: Color, DVD-Video, NTSC Label: Image Entertainment Number of Items: 1 Picture Format: Academy Ratio Release Date: October 12, 1999 Running Time: 100 minutes Theatrical Release Date: November 03, 1983
Description: Sherlock Holmes (Ian Richardson) faces a supernatural mystery when a distinguished but absent-minded doctor (Denholm Elliott) hires the legendary detective to investigate the murder of Sir Charles Baskerville. The doctor recounts the legend of Baskerville Hall, cursed for 350 years since Hugo Baskerville traded his soul to the devil. All Hugo's ancestors have met with unexplained deaths on the hall's moor. With Charles's heir, Sir Henry, due to arrive from America, Holmes sends Dr. Watson (Donald Churchill) to Baskerville to watch for danger. "The game's afoot," Holmes declares, as he sets upon the trail of the Baskerville killer in the sleuth's most heralded and baffling case.
Amazon.com: Of all the Sherlock Holmes tales written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, The Hound of the Baskervilles (one of the four novels) remains the best-known. Adding a dash of the supernatural to the Great Detective's adventures, it is certainly one of the most dramatic--and an obvious target for screen interpretation. Prior to Jeremy Brett's indelibly making the role his own to modern TV audiences, Ian Richardson made for a suitably incisive and enthusiastic Holmes in this enjoyable 1983 adaptation. The much-filmed tale finds Holmes and Watson drawn in to the mysterious curse afflicting the well-heeled Baskerville dynasty. Is a monster stalking the heir to the Baskerville fortune, or is the culprit a far from demonic force? As Holmes, Richardson is blessed with the avian features that, like Basil Rathbone's or Peter Cushing's, effectively capture Sidney Paget's original likeness. Though Holmes's more antisocial facets are dispensed with, Richardson is engaging in such a well-explored role, recalling the razor-sharp wit and intelligence of Rathbone. Attracting a distinguished British cast (Brian Blessed, Denholm Elliot, Martin Shaw) and decent production values (though with a few Hammer Horror moments), this will not disappoint fans of Victorian literature's finest detective, nor those in search of a classic, chilling thriller. --Danny Graydon
A near-perfect rendition of Doyle's Opus Magnus Yes, this is clearly the finest 'Hound' available -- I've seen them all many times. I first viewed this movie on either HBO or Cinemax back in the early 80s and had searched for a copy ever since. I finally got my hands on the DVD last year and now I watch it over and over. Even my brother, a certified Rathbone purist who won't watch the late, great Jeremy Brett for a moment, loves this one.
For the uninitiated, the story is about an old family curse, originally perpetuated upon one very evil Sir Hugo Baskerville, who was ultimately slaughtered on the moor by a gigantic hound with glowing eyes. Subsequent to that day, the Baskervilles had always feared the moor where the legendary hound roamed at will, lusting for more Baskerville blood. When Sir Charles Baskerville, the most recent Laird of the Manor, appears to have died as a result of an encounter with the hound, Sherlock Holmes is called in by a family friend (Dr. Mortimer), in an effort to protect the young American heir to the estate, Sir Henry Baskerville.
After being shot at in London (saved by Holmes' quick action!) and otherwise warned to stay clear of the estate, Sir Henry boldly takes on the implied challenge and heads for the moor, but only Watson can go along to protect him because Holmes is otherwise occupied with another important case.
Watson and Sir Henry have some close calls and there is the secondary danger of an escaped heinous convict loosed upon the moor. A nasty, vengeful artist, a dour pair of domestic servants, and a decrepit old gypsy all serve to add to the the film's more suspenseful moments.
Holmes has to depend on Watson to keep him abreast of the situation with daily letters in order to solve the case of the elusive and dangerous hound. Inspector Japp of Scotland Yard is also on the scene, but his job is mainly to capture the convict and he's loath to have run across Watson, (a competitor for crime-solving glory), and potentially also into The Great Detective himself, in this isolated spot of moor-country.
There is additionally the love-at-first-sight sub-plot between Sir Henry and the reticent, but beautiful, sister of the local naturalist, the latter being an enigmatic character who collects butterflies and who lords over his adult sister, all with equal zeal.
Now, for a critique of the film, Holmes and Watson are spot-on, very convincing. This is about the only Sherlock Holmes flick where the great detective is not portrayed as a borderline nutcase. Earlier and subsequent producers-directors have seemed to focus heavily upon Holmes' eccentricities and anti-social tendencies, but not here. He's very straightforward and we're even surprised by his moments of genius, (that we somehow knew was there all the time), a nice caveat. The cast of principals is all British, of course, (young Sir Henry appears to be an American, but this is simply more superb acting), so there are no gaffs in that realm. All the suspect-characters are as notably ominous as is this great version of the Grimpen Mire itself.
That leads me into the issue of the cinematography which is the very best feature of this film -- it will knock you out. It's superb! The color saturation is outstanding and the camera angles are just incredible. The sets are joyfully reminiscent of the great 60s color Cushing-Lee Hammer Films, only much better.
The atmosphere generated in this movie cannot be matched elsewhere and is effectively boosted by a subtle but appropriate filmscore, which is very nice but does not at all distract the viewer from the film itself. The character action keeps one on his or her toes and there's no drag to this film, a fact which cannot be stated in regard to certain other 'Hound' versions.
Yes, the story-line deviates slightly from Doyle's original manuscript but what movie director does not utilize this artistic license? Certainly, other 'Hound' versions have done so, many much moreso than this one. I feel certain that Doyle himself would have highly approved of this brilliant manifestation of his classic tale.
Some concern has been expressed about the brief rape scene (Sir Hugo catches up with his wench on the moor but, there, encounters The Hound which promptly squares the evil deed), but I feel that it was as tastefully conveyed as a rape scene can be portrayed. After all, Sir Hugo's evil has to be nailed down in a hurry so that The Curse can be legitimized to the viewers. In the end, this scene contributes notably to the credibility of the film but does, in fact, limit the viewing audience, at least for that brief segment.
In summary, if you could only afford one copy of 'The Hound of the Baskervilles', this would clearly be the version to acquire.
See my Listmania lists for other recommendations.
Changes to the story of HOUND but cinematically they are all very good I think of all the HOUNDS I own, this one is cinematically the best. Of course it is not really fair to compare a film made in 1939 (Rathbone) with one made 40+ years later. So this film must be evaluated on its own merits.
Richardson is a terrific Holmes and it is disappointing that he only made one other film from Doyle's "canon".
To purists of Doyle, be warned that the script introduces a few character not found in the original but they only add to the story-line.
And yes, Dr Watson is not played as sharp as say, Hardwicke's characterization (in the Granada series) but overall he is entertaining.
The highest marks for this film go for production values, direction, and cinematography. All are superb.
Recommended for collectors of Holmes films
A great plot, a more humane Sherlock Holmes, and Grimpen Mire never looked worse The tale of The Hound of the Baskervilles has such sturdy bones that it's probably the most filmed of the Great Detective's cases. Let's see...I've watched at one time or another Richard Roxburgh, Peter Cushing, Basil Rathbone, Jeremy Brett, Peter Cook, Matt Frewer and Ian Richardson play Holmes as he pursues the solution to this monstrous plot. One or two I've enjoyed less than the others. One was really grim; an attempt at comedy that had many things but humor, unless you find uproarious a chihuahua with the bladder the size of a bull mastiff's urinating on a person's foot.
With this version, Ian Richardson plays Holmes, Donald Churchill plays Watson, Martin Shaw plays Sir Henry Baskerville and Denholm Elliot plays Dr. Mortimer. Grimpen Mire continues to play Grimpen Mire, and that dark, fog-swept Dartmoor bog is not a place you'd want to venture into, even if a slavering hound weren't bounding after you.
Just to restate the plot: Sherlock Holmes and his friend Dr. John Watson are visited in their rooms at 221B Baker street by Dr. Mortimer. Mortimer tells Holmes the story of the Baskervilles and the curse that was laid upon them. Mortimer's best friend, Sir Charles Baskerville, has died under suspicious circumstances. Now the heir, Henry Baskerville, is arriving from Canada. Mortimer believes Sir Henry is at risk and pleads for Holmes to intervene. Holmes says he cannot leave London for a few days, but agrees to meet Sir Henry. Homes then agrees there are unusual aspects to the case and has Watson accompany Sir Henry to Baskerville Hall. Watson is to report back by mail until Holmes can arrive. And now we enter the world of swirling fog, of nights without moonlight, of swamps that can suck an unwary man under, of servants who seem too silent, and of neighbors...a brother and sister who live near by. Then there is the unnerving howling of a great beast to be heard late at night.
Richardson gives us a Holmes who smiles a little more than we're used to. He's just as analytic and perceptive, but seems more understanding of human foibles that, say, Rathbone's or Brett's versions. Because the story is so inherently dramatic, however, as long as the actors are accomplished the issue of who's a better Holmes isn't all that important. It's not a zero-sum game, where if you prefer Rathbone, for instance, then automatically Brett must be diminished. While I might prefer one over the other, I think Richardson, Brett, Rathbone and Cushing all give satisfying performances and I enjoy each of them.
This version, like the others, has first-rate production values and solid acting. The one thing that bothers me is that Donald Churchill as Watson comes perilously close to the Nigel Bruce School of Acting. Churchill doesn't make Watson the elderly buffoon that Bruce turned Watson into, but he makes Watson far more obtuse than necessary to help the story.
Since there was a rapacious Baskerville ancestor, since there were suspicious deaths, since there was a great hound, and since there was an unscrupulous murderer, I don't think I'm giving anything away by quoting Dr. Watson's last line in the movie. "The curse of the Baskervilles," he says to Holmes, with a shake of his head, "...a figment of the imagination." Or Holmes' last line. "Without the imagination," he says with a smile to Watson, "there would be no horror."
The DVD looks fine. There are no extras.
warning I made the mistake of watching this with my kids and family after church one Sunday. I had no idea there would be a rape scene! For kids stick with the Halmark version with Matt Frewer.
Probably the best With the exception of the cheesy merry-go-round dog attack at the beginning of this TV movie, this version of "The Hound of the Baskervilles" is superb. Ian Richardson plays Holmes with a flair that matches the great Jeremy Brett. It's a shame that Richardson's Holmes is only captured in one other occasion on film. ("The Sign of Four")
In contrast, it's also a shame that "Hound" is probably the most screen adapted literary work ever (there are at least 10 films) but there is no perfect definitive version. This is probably as close as we're going to get. This film, made in 1983, far outshines the 2000 BBC version with its horrid CGI dog and a Watson who is likely computer generated as well. Fans of the Jeremy Brett film may be surprised at the stellar cast of this one, featuring Denholm Elliott ("Raiders of the Lost Ark"), Eleanor Bron ("The House of Mirth"), Connie Booth ("Monty Python"), and noted actor Brian Blessed (you'll know him when you see him if you don't already). The film also features Ronald Lacey as probably the best Inspector Lestrade ever. (Lacey was also in "Raiders" and the Jeremy Brett version of "The Sign of Four".) Martin Shaw's spin as the Texan Sir Henry Baskerville surprisingly turns out to be more pleasant than not.
At times the film is on the gritty side. The scene with Sir Hugo chasing his servant's daughter for that evening's recreational rape is darker than one would expect, but precisely where it needs to be cinematically. When you consider realism, this "Hound" is unequalled.
Fans of Ian Richardson should also check him out in "Murder Rooms", a BBC series where he plays Dr. Joseph Bell - a real Victorian doctor universally recognized as Arthur Conan Doyle's inspiration for the Sherlock Holmes character.
Anything Goes Trivia
Megaton Man
Tony's Online Tips
Trevor
