Thrice Told Tales: The Hound of the Baskervilles

Sherlock Holmes holds the record for the fictional literary human character portrayed most on screen (film and television. As of 2012 he has 254 portrayals total. Dracula had 272 portrayals, but he’s not really human, is he? Abraham Lincoln has over 300 portrayals, but he’s not fictional.

Some rather noted actors have played Holmes: Henry Cavill, Will Ferrell, Ian McKellen, Robert Downey Jr., Christopher Plummer, Nicol Williamson, Christopher Lee, Raymond Massey, John Barrymore… and I haven’t even mentioned the actors in the films we’re looking at today.

In this round of Thrice Told Tales, we’re looking at adaptations of Arthur Conan Doyle’s most famous Sherlock Holmes novel, 1902’s The Hound of the Baskervilles. (The other three Holmes novels, A Study in Scarlet, The Sign of Four, and The Valley of Fear, are not so famous.)

By my Wikipedia count, there are seventeen adaptations of The Hound of the Baskervilles. So the challenge starts with choosing which three make the cut. Fortunately, we can rule out a few of the films. We’ll only use talkies, ruling out the 1921 and 1929 silent versions. We'll also rule out the films where Holmes doesn’t speak English.

That means no Indian, Russian, or German versions (sorry, no Der Hund von Baskervilles). Let’s toss the made-for-TV versions out, too. Even television adaptations. We’re also eliminating the Australian animated version.

This leaves us with four theatrically released English-language adaptations of the classic mystery: the 1932, 1939, 1959, and 1978 adaptations. My local library had DVD versions of the most recent three, so that settles that.

The Hound of the Baskervilles (1939)

You can argue in the comments, but Basil Rathbone is the platonic ideal of Sherlock Holmes. This was the first of the 14 feature films that featured Rathbone as Holmes (he also did a cameo as Holmes in Crazy House and a vocal cameo as Holmes in The Great Mouse Detective). Nonetheless, 20th Century Fox was not so sure about public interest in Holmes when the film was released. Rathbone didn’t even get top billing, which instead went to Richard Greene as Henry Baskerville.

This version of Holmes did something none of the previous 50 or so versions had done. It’s a period film, set in the Victorian Era of the novels. (To be fair, the first Holmes films, such as 1905’s The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes or Held for Ransom, were made while Sir Arthur was still writing the novels.) Rathbone would soon update Holmes as well. The 1942 Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon would face Moriarty working with the Nazis. Of the fourteen films with Rathbone as Holmes, only this and his second film, The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes, were set in the era of horses and buggies.

The story of The Hound of the Baskervilles is as close to Gothic horror as it is to a traditional mystery.

Baskerville family legend claims a Hell Hound has pursued members of the family for generations. The legend started with Hugo Baskerville, a degenerate who abused women and was killed by a killer canine. Since then, things have not gone well for the patriarchs of the Baskerville line. They all have weak hearts and tend to get lost in the swampy moors that surround Baskerville Hall. The last of the family line, Henry Baskerville, must come from Canada to England, where he is threatened. He needs the help of England’s (really, the world’s) greatest detective, Sherlock Holmes.

Holmes and his assistant Dr. John Watson are visited in their Baker Street office by Dr. James Mortimer, the local doctor of Devonshire, where Baskerville Hall is situated. Mortimer is concerned about the safety of Henry Baskerville, sole heir to the Baskerville name. The doctor tells Holmes and Watson the legend of the Baskervilles and his fears for Henry.

Holmes expresses some interest in the case, but claims he can’t leave London at the time, so he agrees to send Watson to Devonshire in his place.

Watson encounters several suspicious characters and circumstances. The most worrisome is word of an escaped convict who may be wandering the moors. Of course all is not as it seems, including the supposed disinterest of Holmes in the case.

The novel's horror elements are downplayed a bit. As written, the hound’s teeth glow in the dark. (This is explained in the most Scooby-Doo way possible: the villain used phosphorus paint on the canine’s canines, which would actually be toxic.) The glowing teeth are not portrayed in any of the films I viewed, but this film does have a deadly dog that kills a man and nearly kills Henry Baskerville. And the moors have deadly quicksand beside the paths and roads. This movie also includes a séance that was absent in the novel. However, it makes this a film appropriate for October's Halloween decor. The moors provide a truly spooky setting, and in the Halloween spirit, Holmes pulls off an excellent disguise as an old beggar.

As for Rathbone as Holmes? It really is an iconic performance, capturing the balance between the detective’s intelligence and arrogance. Nigel Bruce is an excellent Watson. Some have complained that he plays the role a little too dumb, but I think he brings a lot of charm to the good doctor.

The Hound of the Baskervilles (1959)

This production is of Hammer Films – best known for their work with horror – and directed by Terence Fisher (Brides of Dracula, The Curse of the Werewolf, Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed). Here we do have the feel of horror. The opening telling of the legend of Hugo Baskerville’s death by the Hound of Hell would fit nicely into one of the studio’s films set in Transylvania.

The film features the studio’s two great horror stars, Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing. Cushing plays Holmes, and he does wonderful work with the role. He’s sharp and caustic; one believes his curiosity about the unknown. Lee would, of course, make a horrible Watson, since he would tower over Holmes. Instead, he plays Henry Baskerville and does so convincingly, though no one would mistake him for a Canadian. Andre Morell plays Dr. Watson, not at all memorably. It’s unfortunate, because the Holmes/Watson friendship should provide the heart of these tales.

The tone of the film is Gothic horror, though nothing proves to come from a supernatural source. Horror tropes are present, such as the tarantula that creeps up on Henry Baskerville. (The film, and the novel for that matter, do touch on the fact that tarantula bites are rarely fatal.) The hound is made a little more frightening by a mask placed on its muzzle.

This is a decent telling of the novel.

Something that can’t be said of the next film.

The Hound of the Baskervilles (1978)

You may be familiar with the 1967 adaptation of Ian Fleming’s Casino Royale. The property escaped the grasp of producer Albert Broccoli, the man behind the successful James Bond films of that era. The new producers didn’t feel they could compete with Sean Connery, so they decided to make a spoof out of the material. Instead they only succeeded in making a mess.

And that’s what the comedy team of Peter Cook and Dudley Moore did with this rendition. I’m sure they were hoping to replicate the success the Monty Python troupe had mocking the tales of King Arthur in Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

They didn’t pull it off.

The film opens with Dudley Moore playing a piano in a theater screening this version of The Hound of the Baskervilles. We watch the credits, which promise “A Fleeting Appearance by Spike Mulligan.”

We see Holmes (Peter Cook) handling a case for nuns seeking a lost relic. Holmes really doesn’t want to be bothered and is even more annoyed when Dr. Mortimer comes to him with the case of Henry Baskerville. He says that he really can’t take on another case and will leave Watson to handle it instead.

The film is packed with various unfunny "comic" episodes, such as Dudley Moore playing Holmes’ mother (who is in this adaptation very disappointed in her son). Moore also plays another character, Mr. Spiggot, a one-legged man who applies for the job of a message runner in the moors — a scene which did elicit a mild chuckle. Denholm Elliot plays Jack Stapleton, the true villain of the novel, who owns a Chihuahua that ceaselessly urinates (usually on Watson or in Watson’s food).

There is a bizarre scene where Beryl Stapleton (a love interest for Henry Baskerville in the 1939 version, but here played by a middle-aged Joan Greenwood) claims to have been ravished by the Hound on the moors. She then proceeds to go through demonic transformations, reminiscent of Linda Blair in The Exorcist, before trying to seduce Watson.

Besides these episodes, the film stays relatively — sort of — close to the outlines of the 1902 novel. But in the end we find that the Hound of Hell is actually a friendly Irish Wolfhound that had been owned by the late Charles Baskerville, who intended to leave his entire estate to his dog. The film ends back in the movie theater with Dudley Moore still playing the piano over the closing credits. The audience in the theater throws rotten vegetables at Moore. I would have liked to join in on that activity.

I’m not opposed to spoofing the Holmes legend. I’m very fond of 1988’s Without a Clue, with Michael Caine as a drunken, idiot Holmes and Ben Kingsley as Dr. Watson, the true genius of the duo. That movie is very funny. This one isn't.

Cook and Moore don’t bear sole responsibility for this travesty. Justice requires that blame be shared by co-writer and director Paul Morrissey. Morrissey had a long association with Andy Warhol and his Factory. He was the writer and director of anti-art cult films such as Flesh (1968), Trash (1970), and Flesh for Frankenstein (1973).

If you decide you’d like to see three versions of The Hound of the Baskervilles, I’d advise that you watch the ones with Rathbone and Cushing, along with one of the TV adaptations. Skip this mess.

So, I ask all of the Baker Street Irregulars at Ricochet: Who are your favorite incarnations of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. John Watson? What are your favorite Holmes or Holmes-inspired movies and/or TV shows?