Richard Bailey
We are drowning in adaptations of the Hound of the Baskervilles, some are better then others, but only one I would class as outstanding, and that is this one. It's all about Jeremy Brett, he was to Sherlock Holmes what David Suchet was to Poirot, he was the defining characterization, he made Holmes real and relevant, and during this particular production I would say he was at the height of his mastery. Supported wonderfully by Edward Hardwicke, who seems to get more screen time then Holmes, he is wonderfully solid. Neil Duncan is great too, good strong scenes between him and Brett when they discuss his skull. In many of the adaptations the hound is the problem, in some it looks like a model, and in others it looks like Scooby Doo, they got it right this time round in this excellent TV movie.
agni0504
I think I was ten when I first read this novel. It was fascinating, brilliant and exciting,it became one of my favourites from Conan Doyle.I really liked the Granada version of it and the Granada Holmes series too.The studio fulfilled a hard task by remaining faithful to the original stories, and the result is:many-many fans of the series all over the world. But the success mostly depended on the wonderful cast. For me Jeremy Brett and Edward Hardwicke were not playing Holmes and Watson, they simply identified themselves with the characters.They share a unique, noble friendship which you cannot find in today's movies.Though Holmes is sometimes rude and impatient with Watson, you can always sense this deep sympathy between them.Brett's Holmes is a cool, elegant and eccentric detective, master of some martial arts, who has all-embracing knowledge.He calls his method deduction: he examines everything thoroughly and completes the puzzle.It is really sad that Jeremy Brett died and the series had to be ended. I liked his Holmes very much. I read many interviews with him and these show a charming, friendly man with a great sense of humor (and he was handsome too!). Thank you very much, Granada Studios. And above all: thank you, Mr. Brett.
ftgplus4
I used to enjoy watching these adaptations of the Sherlock Holmes stories; in fact, these are what got me reading the original stories in the first place. The best thing about them were the portrayals of Holmes (Brett) and Watson (Burke/Hardwicke). The worst thing was usually the liberties taken with the stories by the writers.Their "Hound" is a fairly faithful adaptation. Where liberties are taken, it's usually for the sake of compressing the story. I haven't seen this for a while, but two things stuck out to me as being particularly off with it: (1) The actress playing Beryl seemed really wrong for the part. (2) Charles Baskerville's terrifying death was described wonderfully in the book ("...He was running, Watson - running desperately, running for his life, running until he burst his heart..."). But in this adaptation Charles' fleeing is handled so casually as to almost give the impression nothing important is happening. It could have been done so much better!
murdoch1111
"The Hound of the Baskervilles" is not my favorite Sherlock Holmes film: There are problems with the hound no matter how it is portrayed, and the violence in the film is disturbing. "The Hound" has perhaps suffered from overexposure; it is by all odds the most famous of the Sherlock Holmes tales. It lacks the substance of other full-length Holmes films, such as "The Sign of Four" and "The Master Blackmailer." And it lacks the horror of "The Last Vampire," which Conan Doyle wrote as a tribute to his friend Bram Stoker, the celebrated author of "Dracula."The acting in the Sherlock Holmes films is consistently good. For me as for many other people, Jeremy Brett was the quintessential Holmes. It is a pity he is no longer around to play the part, and an even greater pity that the Holmes films are being remade in what promises to be a greatly inferior version.
AD
