Granada Discussion Post: The Hound of the Baskervilles

[spacemutineer.livejournal.com]

Let's talk telly in the discussion post for Granada's movie-length adaptation of The Hound of the Baskervilles. If you haven't seen this episode yet, you can find it at YouTube, Netflix, Amazon Video, and DVD. Follow me behind the jump for some of my random thoughts and impressions. Please add your own in the comments!

Canon discussion is available in the canon discussion post.


I felt like writing this week's thoughts as a review, for a change:


It's hard for a film/tv adaptation to live up to the Arthur Conan Doyle's Hound of the Baskervilles. The original text is beloved for good reason But beyond that, there are additional problems.

Ostensibly the main character, Sherlock Holmes is sidelined for a large chunk of the story. The landscape and setting are crucial but are complex to shoot and tricky to portray properly. Think of the Hall, the moor, the mire. It's all about atmosphere, always challenging to translate from text to visuals.

Given these difficulties and the added ones of their lead's unstable health, Granada did their level best, and overall succeeded. This telling of HOUN gets too many things right to dismiss it over some lackluster elements and disappointing choices.

In a way, Granada was lucky HOUN was the story they were doing, because every scene spent with Watson was one they didn't need to show Jeremy Brett sleepwalking through. As genius as he can be as Holmes, he just seems exhausted here, mumbling his lines and staring into the window. He needed more rest.

The director certainly had an opportunity to give him a little more of that needed rest -- is there any reason we have to see so much (or any) of Holmes while Watson is on the case at Baskerville Hall before their meeting? It completely drains any possible suspense from the armed encounter between Holmes and Watson in the stone hut. We've known forever who was watching the doctor. We've just been waiting for him to catch up.

There are several incidences like that of squandered suspense or excitement, much in the way Granada's SIGN had. But this HOUN is far better in setting and atmosphere to help make up for it. There are some odd things about it, like Holmes' penchant for cradling his injured clients against his chest intimately despite a more common discomfort with physical closeness (see Granada's Abbey Grange later) and instead of, you know, letting the doctor standing next to him lend his expertise. But taken overall, Granada's take on HOUN is perfectly decent.

It's easy, however, to imagine a much better version they could have made if things had been different, with a vibrant and energetic Jeremy Brett at the helm as Holmes and a cleaner script to keep the suspense and drama up. Perhaps that realization of how much better this film could have been is why it carries a reputation for disappointment.

Comments

Sunday, 20 January 2013

[livejournal.livejournal.com]

User thisprettywren referenced to your post from Sunday, 20 January 2013 (http://holmesian-news.livejournal.com/262745.html) saying: [...] by (Lestrade | PG | ACD) + Misc Canon Discussion Post: The Hound of the Baskervilles [...]

[methylviolet10b]

I agree with you that there is much to love in this adaptation - but that there are many glaring issues, too. Poor Jeremy's ill-health is undoubtedly behind some of them, but the script-writers and directors also blew some of the best moments from the book, IMHO.

[spacemutineer.livejournal.com]

YES. That's really the whole problem. There are powerful moments in a rich story like this, and for the most part they just get crushed in this adaptation. Like: why is Mortimer there for the meeting on the moor? He serves no purpose in the scene, and only gives an awkward quality to the reunion. It's just a really odd choice, and one that could have been easily avoided.

[methylviolet10b]

Argh, yes - that moment in particular had me raging at the screen and wanting to beat the director with a STICK. Such an awkward choice!

[tripleransom.livejournal.com]

I agree that part of the problem with the Granada Hound is, Jeremy Brett's poor health. He is certainly not at his best in this film. Had he been in good form, he might have managed to rein in the worst departures from Canon with his battle cry of "do the Doyle!" A real pity, because although not all the stories translate directly to the screen, this one does - or rather, would have done.

There are more problems with this production that JB's poor health, however, and some can be put down to downright bad direction on the part of Brian Mills. How could ANY director with an eye for the dramatic have flubbed up THE iconic shot - the "Man on the Tor"? Instead all we get is a blurry glimpse of someone walking past the camera. C'mon!

I think the direction is also at fault for not giving us more of a sense of the Dartmoor location. I know much of it was shot on a sound stage, but so was the 1939 Hound with Basil Rathbone and they managed to managed to make it eerie enough! (I recently watched the version with Richard Roxburgh, which was shot mostly on the Isle of Man, where it apparently rains ALL the time. Lord knows, that one delivered on the atmosphere, although it had a lot of other problems - but I digress.)

Another odd choice is the omission of much of the drama of the legend of the Hound. We really don't get much sense of the backstory, which would have served to amp up the suspense.

I think Edward Hardwicke is absolutely superb, but no one else does much more than read their lines. The result is that the whole production falls flat.

Someone asked Jeremy Brett several years later if he had the chance go back and do anything over, what would he choose and he said "The Hound, of course." Too bad. Granada had a chance to make it the best production ever and they blew it big time.