I remember in 7th grade my English teacher talking about how nearly all novels have many unanswered questions in the end (in retrospect, I really don't know what that means because of course they do, but maybe he meant mystery novels). However, he said that The Hound of the Baskervilles has only one. This sent me straight to the book to find out what that was (this was probably better than assigning the book to read because I never really got into the habit of reading for my classes as I like to read for pleasure whereas reading for classes feels like a race against the clock). I still don't know what that remaining question is, though I'm certain I had more than one when I finished it. That also marks the last time I spent any time with The Hound of the Baskervilles... until now.
I feel as though it's hard to screw up a Sherlock Holmes story as long as one sticks fairly close to the source material. There's something far more satisfying to watching Holmes work as opposed to anyone on CSI or something like that. Perhaps it's the fact that Holmes doesn't have to use high tech machinery and crazy forensic analysis. He goes by his wits and his gut and we feel as though we can figure the mystery out if we pay close enough attention without having to wait for results to get back from the lab. And Hammer does a damn fine job here. Sadly, audiences weren't ready for non-monster Hammer films and the planned series of Peter Cushing starring Sherlock Holmes movies was abandoned.
Cushing strikes me as the perfect Holmes. He basically plays the know-it-all authority in every movie he's in for Hammer. He's a master of exposition only here the exposition is more interesting because it's how he solved a case instead of the history of Dracula (which he's given at least five times) or something similar. I particularly like portrayals of Holmes where he's a bit of a prickly pear. He doesn't have time for nonsense and doesn't put up with foolishness. Holmes is even a jerk to his host, Sir Henry Baskerville (Christopher Lee), when he knows it will benefit in the long run. It's very enjoyable and more than a little amusing. Cushing also does a masterful job of looking like he's always observing. His eyes wander and his head darts around to everything. One gets the sense that this is a man who can't help but obsess over minutiae.
I like to think that the Hammer Holmes series would have featured Cushing and Lee in every film with Lee playing a different character all the time. It's nice to watch a movie where he's not a bad guy and is actually normal. Due to his most famous role as Dracula, he always carries a sinister air about him, but he does a pretty good job a keeping it to a minimum. I can definitely see why he wanted to avoid being pigeonholed as Dracula.
There are a few red herrings floating around, but I don't think there's any real surprise as to who the guilty party is even if you haven't read the book. There's also some silliness with a Tarantula that is explained away fairly reasonably, but remains silly nonetheless. Sherlock is absent for most of the first act, as well, which is a little disappointing. But it's Sherlock Holmes! In color! By Hammer! Fun times are had by all.
Now, if I can just get someone to write a mash-up of The Hound of the Baskervilles and An American Werewolf in London. American Werewolf of the Baskervilles... I like that.
No comments:
Post a Comment