The Hound of the Baskervilles

[Miss Chicken]

Last week I received a copy of the series which starred Jeremy Brett as Sherlock Holmes (41 episodes) and I have been viewing episodes every evening and I am up to The Hound of the Baskervilles.

Today I received the second series of Sherlock (Benedict Cumberbatch as Holmes). I have just looked at the first episode, A Scandal in Belgravia, and next episodes is The Hounds of Baskerville.

Without giving away spoilers will people suggest which of these two I should look at first. I did see the Peter Cushing version of The Hound of the Baskervilles but I don't think I remember how it ends.

 

[auntiehill]

Watch the Jeremy Brett one first; it will make you appreciate the Cumberbatch "version" a bit more. They are not much alike, but the similarities will be amusing. You might even recognize some of the locations.

 

[Greg Cox]

The old Basil Rathbone version is good, too.

 

[nvek86]

Definitely watch the Brett version first. Cumberbatch's version is only inspired by the story and it will be more fun if you see which parts they kept or modified for modern times.

 

[Skellington]

Without giving away spoilers will people suggest which of these two I should look at first. I did see the Peter Cushing version of The Hound of the Baskervilles but I don't think I remember how it ends.

For my money, you should watch Sherlock in order as there's something of a developing storyline. Also, A Scandal In Belgravia is way too good to put off.

(Edit: If you mean which of Brett and Cumberbatch, I don't think it matters. I only recently acquired the Brett version too and have watched just the first episode (which was great). Also, Sherlock has great rewatchability; so I can imagine that a person might come back to it again after seeing Brett and then discover new nods to the mythology.)

 

[MacLeod]

I'd go with the definitive Holmes, Brett's version.

 

[Christopher]

Read the original books/stories first. They're definitive.

 

[MacLeod]

True, But the ITV adaptations starring Brett are reasonable close.

 

[Christopher]

They're great adaptations, but you can appreciate any adaptation more if you're familiar with the original work that it's adapting. And just in general, people should read more instead of assuming that watching TV and movies is sufficient for cultural literacy.

 

[Miss Chicken]

I looked at the Brett version last night. I thought it was very good, but rather familiar, possibly I saw it long ago or else I recognised similarities between it and the Cushing version.

As far as other Sherlock Holmes DVDs. I have

Three movies with Basil Rathbone as Sherlock. They are

Sherlock Holmes and the Woman in Green
Dress to Kill
Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon

I have 10 episodes with Ronald Howard as Sherlock

They are

The Case of the Eiffel Tower
The Case of the Jolly Hangman
The Case of the Cunningham Inheritance
The Case of the Diamond Tooth
The Case of the Neurotic Detective
The Case of the Red-Headed League
The Case of the Vanished Detective
The Night Train Riddle
The Case of the Pennsylvania Gun
The Case of the Bachelor Street Bachelors

I remember reading a couple of Sherlock Holmes books when I was a teenager but that was a loooooooong time ago. I have just downloaded The Complete Sherlock Holmes to my Kindle.

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

^I have the complete series with all 39 episodes of the Ronald Howard series. So far, I'm up to "The Careless Suffragette." (Not a very PC episode. It makes all of the suffragettes look stupid. Like, Nigel Bruce's Dr. Watson stupid.)

Overall, of the older, pre-Downey/Cumberbatch Sherlock Holmes adaptations, I'd say the Ronald Howard series is my favorite. I think it does the best job of capturing the odd couple nature of the Holmes/Watson relationship. (But they never did a "Hound of the Baskervilles" adaptation.)

Basil Rathbone does a good job of capturing the more sedate Holmes of the later Arthur Conan Doyle stories. However, I have a difficult time tolerating his movies because Nigel Bruce plays Dr. Watson as a complete buffoon. Only recently has Jude Law's portrayal in the Robert Downey Jr. movies begun to rehabilitate Dr. Watson's image with the general public.

I don't really care for Jeremy Brett. His Holmes always struck me as a bit too forced. And his adaptations are usually way too long, stretching out short stories into hour-long episodes.

I would agree that the best way to experience Sherlock Holmes is through the original ACD stories. But if you have to go with adaptations, I think Benedict Cumberbatch & Robert Downey Jr. are the best.

And for gods' sake, avoid Matt Frewer at all costs!

 

[Miss Chicken]

I have just order the box set with Peter Cushing as Sherlock. I was a bit disappointed to see that only 5 of Cushing's 16 episodes have survived. I believe that Cushing was properly my first introduction to Sherlock while I was a child in the 1960s. My mother loved detective stories and I would have watched them with her.

After that I might buy the complete Ronald Howard series.

Along with the Sherlock set I also ordered series four of The Murdoch Mysteries.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

True, But the ITV adaptations starring Brett are reasonable close.

More so at the beginning than at the end. The Last Vampyre goes far afield from "The Sussex Vampire," and then we have those episodes with Mycroft(!) actually doing things.

As for Brett's Hound, Brett himself was not a fan of it and hoped that it could be redone.

It's a bit lurid, but I absolutely love the Hammer Hound with Peter Cushing as Holmes and Christopher Lee as Sir Henry Baskerville. The scene where Sir Henry is being menaced by a tarantula is awesome!

I like the Canadian Hound of a decade ago with Matt Frewer and Kenneth Walsh as Holmes and Watson.

 

[Mysterion]

The old Basil Rathbone version is good, too.

They're okay, but I never really liked the way Nigel Bruce portrayed Watson as kind of dim-bulb who was more or less there to only point out just how brilliant Holmes was.

For my money, Jeremy Brett is the definitive screen version of Holmes.

 

[MacLeod]

I feel we need a poll to decide on the best potryal of Holmes. Though have to limit to a few choices with Other as an option. After all I believe Holmes is the character to have most different actors to potray him.

 

[Greg Cox]

Three movies with Basil Rathbone as Sherlock. They are

Sherlock Holmes and the Woman in Green
Dress to Kill
Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon.

The best of the Rathbone films is probably The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes, with George Zucco as Moriarity, plotting the steal the Crown Jewels!

 

[MacLeod]

Of course there is this comedy version of Holmes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Without_a_Clue

 

[Kirkman1987]

I think Rathbone's version of Hound is the most exciting, if not most accurate adaptation. In general, The Brett Series is the best adaptation, although I have almost equal respect for the Soviet produced "Adventures of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson Series". It had great music and Livanov is fantastic as Holmes.

 

[Greg Cox]

Other memorable Holmes films:

A Study in Terror (Holmes vs. Jack the Ripper!)
Murder by Decree (Holmes vs. the Ripper . . . again!)
The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes (with Christopher Lee as Mycroft!)
Sherlock Holmes in New York (with Roger Moore as Holmes and John Huston as Moriarity).

 

[Christopher]

Sherlock Holmes in New York (with Roger Moore as Holmes and John Huston as Moriarity).

Can't say I cared for that one. Roger Moore is the most bizarrely wrong casting choice for Holmes I've ever seen, and that's including Matt Frewer (who at least vaguely looks the part). And I've never cared for the interpretation of Holmes's interest in Irene Adler as a romance, something that Dr. Watson's narration in "A Scandal in Bohemia" emphatically explained was not the case. (I'm okay with the way the 2009 movie handled it, since Irene was clearly the aggressor there.)