Trying to cope with Brett in The World of Sherlock Holmes Forum

Forum Jump

Trying to cope with Brett

Author	Comment
Richard		#81	[-]
Feb 15 09 4:15 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	It's a shame the producers didn't start with concise and condensed adaptations of A Study In Scarlet and The Valley of Fear. Brett didn't get to do these seminal stories. Condensed in terms of back story. An hour is plenty of time to tell those stories. Of course, the feature-length The Sign of Four is perfect and probably the best-realized Sherlock Holmes ever made. The only episodes to disappoint me were the feature-length The Master Blackmailer, The Eligible Bachelor, and The Last Vampyre. They are too drawn out and would be more effective as hour-long episodes, although they each have their good points, I suppose. The Hound of the Baskervilles doesn't generate much suspense; not because it's over-familiar, but because it isn't written, or structured, for suspense. Instead of planting suggestions in our mind, it explains things away as it trudges along. The last six episodes are not disappointing, exactly, just difficult to watch because Brett is obviously a frail, sick and heavily medicated man. Richard "... little by little the look of the country changes because of the people we admire." dialog in HUD (1963) Last Edited By: Richard Feb 15 09 4:19 PM. Edited 2 times.
	Remove this ad
Bill Warren		#82	[-]
Feb 17 09 4:59 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	We watched "The Greek Interpreter" last night, and were amused by Nicholas Field's performance as chief villain Latimer--he's doing an impression of Peter Lorre as Joel Cairo from THE MALTESE FALCON (he even examines his walking-stick as Lorre does). It's a very good impression, and works well in this context, but it's almost distractingly amusing.
sirharryflashman		#83	[-]
Feb 17 09 9:21 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Bill Warren wrote: We watched "The Greek Interpreter" last night, and were amused by Nicholas Field's performance as chief villain Latimer--he's doing an impression of Peter Lorre as Joel Cairo from THE MALTESE FALCON (he even examines his walking-stick as Lorre does). It's a very good impression, and works well in this context, but it's almost distractingly amusing. "The Greek Interpreter" rates as one of my favorite canonical stories and I love the Granada adaptation even more. Wonderfully gothic tone...Melas taken by closed cab to an undisclosed location...the appearance of Paul Kratides covered in sticking plasters...just everything about it evokes a gothic nightmare. Of course the biggest selling point of the story, for me at any rate, is the introduction of Mycroft Holmes. The brotherly rivalry in deducing the nature of the old soldier seen from the window of the Diogenes Club sparkles. Happily, Brett and Gray make the most of it in the adaptation. While Charles Gray doesn't quite fit the canonical description of Mycroft (Robert Morley is about the only actor I've seen in the role who does) he's just so wonderfully endearing. This was, I think, the first Granada episode to noticeably depart from the source material but I actually prefer the Granada finish to the original. More satisfying ending and Mycroft gets some wonderful business on the train. I have to admit that the first time I saw the episode 20 years ago, that Lorre impression yanked me right out of the story. That changed pretty quickly and I've come to appreciate it a great deal over the years and now consider it to be an almost inspired performance. Certainly adds to the overall charm. Sorry to correct you Bill, but I'm afraid that you've got the actor and character wrong, it is George Costigan as Wilson Kemp doing the Lorre bit, not Nick Fields as Latimer. This episode is, for me, a definite highlight in the Granada adaptations for me! Cheers, Charles Prepolec Gaslight Grimoire Blog: News, Interviews and Updates Sherlock Holmes News: Sherlock Holmes in Films, Books and Media
Bill Warren		#84	[-]
Feb 18 09 3:20 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	That's okay. I was wrong about what Lorre toyed with: it was a furled umbrella, not a walking stick/cane.
Anne Sharp		#85	[-]
Feb 21 09 12:55 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	What's especially wonderful about Costigan's performance in "The Greek Interpreter" is that he's not just doing a Peter Lorre impression, which would have been tacky. He's playing the role in the style of Peter Lorre playing Joel Cairo, which is great. Though the character he's playing is more like Abbott in "The Man Who Knew Too Much." Joel Cairo was not exactly a criminal mastermind.
Bill Warren		#86	[-]
Feb 21 09 2:43 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Anne Sharp wrote: What's especially wonderful about Costigan's performance in "The Greek Interpreter" is that he's not just doing a Peter Lorre impression, which would have been tacky. He's playing the role in the style of Peter Lorre playing Joel Cairo, which is great. Well, like I said above: We watched "The Greek Interpreter" last night, and were amused by Nicholas Field's performance as chief villain Latimer--he's doing an impression of Peter Lorre as Joel Cairo from THE MALTESE FALCON (he even examines his walking-stick as Lorre does). It's a very good impression, and works well in this context, but it's almost distractingly amusing.
GothChick1313		#87	[-]
Feb 28 09 9:34 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	The only episodes to disappoint me were the feature-length The Master Blackmailer, The Eligible Bachelor, and The Last Vampyre. Especially Vampyre. I've never understood why, when those three were made, it was felt a feature-length approach was needed for any of the short stories. Sign of the Four was perfect and (in theory) Hound of the Baskervilles should have been one of the best versions ever, given how strong most of the Brett adventures were. (Unfortunately, Hound is one of the weaker outings in the Brett series.) Having recently reread it, I don't think A Study in Scarlet is one of the best-structured of the Doyle tales, but in the hands of a good screenwriter could make for a good film. Even if they had decided to film Scarlet late in the Brett series and simply leave out references from the tale surrounding Holmes & Waston's first meeting, I think it would have been a better choice than The Last Vampyre for feature-length treatment.
Wich2		#88	[-]
Feb 28 09 11:12 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Agreed, Goth. Or even, VALLEY OF FEAR.
Richard		#89	[-]
Feb 28 09 4:15 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	The first meeting between Holmes and Watson is part of the charm of A Study In Scarlet. If you cut it there's not much left besides backstory. I think the backstories to A Study In Scarlet and The Valley of Fear involving the American west and India locations are so involved and expensive to do properly that it was impossible for the Granada series to undertake. Which is why I would have condensed them down to a Cliff notes version and put all the emphasis on the Holmes / Watson aspect which is all audiences are really interested in. The Sign of Four with Brett doesn't get enough credit. Could it be not enough people have seen it? I don't know why fans aren't raving about how brilliant it is. Not just because of Brett, but because of the script, directing, how it's produced. It's the best realized Holmes film. It has the strongest of all the sin-in-India-catching-up-with-you backstories that Doyle relied upon for several of his Holmes adventures. It has the most striking Holmes-as-detective business of all the episodes. Plus it has a budding romance for Dr. Watson. It's good enough to be a theatrical feature. To be fair, the 1932 version of The Sign of Four has little to do with the story Doyle wrote. The 1983 version with Ian Richardson is a superior Holmes production that tells Doyle's story for the first time. But the Brett version from 1987 surpasses it and every Holmes film that came before. Richard "... little by little the look of the country changes because of the people we admire." dialog in HUD (1963)
Wich2		#90	[-]
Feb 28 09 4:18 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	"surpasses it and every Holmes film that came before" Steady on there, Richard!
	Remove this ad
sirharryflashman		#91	[-]
Feb 28 09 9:07 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Richard wrote: The Sign of Four with Brett doesn't get enough credit. Could it be not enough people have seen it? I don't know why fans aren't raving about how brilliant it is. Not just because of Brett, but because of the script, directing, how it's produced. It's the best realized Holmes film. It has the strongest of all the sin-in-India-catching-up-with-you backstories that Doyle relied upon for several of his Holmes adventures. It has the most striking Holmes-as-detective business of all the episodes. Plus it has a budding romance for Dr. Watson. It's good enough to be a theatrical feature. To be fair, the 1932 version of The Sign of Four has little to do with the story Doyle wrote. The 1983 version with Ian Richardson is a superior Holmes production that tells Doyle's story for the first time. But the Brett version from 1987 surpasses it and every Holmes film that came before. Strong words, Richard, but I am, to some degree, largely inclined to agree with them. To my mind, and while I love the Richardson film and like large swathes of the Wontner film, the Granada SIGN is as close to being a near perfect adaptation of a canonical tale as we've seen to date (including both the Rathbone HOUND and the Cushing BBC version of HOUND, both of which are favorites of mine). At the very least it perfectly captures the tone, atmosphere and structure of ACD's Victorian romance novel. Now, don't get me wrong, it is flawed on a number of levels (Brett and Hardwicke are too old, Watson doesn't get the girl, the watch scene is absent, and most notably the basic structure, at least for a film or television movie, is severely compromised by following the novel form too closely with its energy draining denoument) but it really does, to my mind at least, warts and all, stand as the best transfer of Sherlock Holmes from the written word to any other medium. Period. Full stop. While Hardwicke, aside from the procurring of Toby sequence, is mostly relegated to the role of wallpaper, Brett gives one of his very best performances and is simply amazing during the Pondicherry Lodge investigation of Bartholomew Sholto's death. The casting, sets and locations are flawless. SIGN is, for my money, the jewel in the crown of the Granada series. Cheers, Charles Prepolec Gaslight Grimoire Blog: News, Interviews and Updates Sherlock Holmes News: Sherlock Holmes in Films, Books and Media
Richard	red-headed Victorian villains	#92	[-]
Feb 28 09 10:55 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	sirharryflashman wrote: Strong words, Richard, but I am, to some degree, largely inclined to agree with them. To my mind, and while I love the Richardson film and like large swathes of the Wontner film, the Granada SIGN is as close to being a near perfect adaptation of a canonical tale as we've seen to date (including both the Rathbone HOUND and the Cushing BBC version of HOUND, both of which are favorites of mine). They're favorites of mine as well, although the Hammer version, for all its divergences and pared-down simplicity, remains my personal favorite. The wonderful thing is that we have so many good versions of Hound of the Baskevilles to enjoy. That story is not without flaws but it remains my personal favorite of the canonical novels. The Sign of Four, on the other hand, gets carried away with its backstory and never interested me much until I saw what Brett and Hardwicke make out of it. The Holmes-to-backstory ratio must be 1 in 10 in the novel, but it's evened up and balanced out in these two adaptations. sirharryflashman wrote: At the very least it perfectly captures the tone, atmosphere and structure of ACD's Victorian romance novel. Now, don't get me wrong, it is flawed on a number of levels (Brett and Hardwicke are too old, Watson doesn't get the girl, the watch scene is absent, and most notably the basic structure, at least for a film or television movie, is severely compromised by following the novel form too closely with its energy draining denoument) but it really does, to my mind at least, warts and all, stand as the best transfer of Sherlock Holmes from the written word to any other medium. Period. Full stop. Fair enough. I appreciate the specificity of your criticism and I agree with it. You know, I forgot all about the watch business. It never occurred to me that Brett and Hardwicke are too old; Hardwicke, perhaps. It's okay with me that Watson doesn't get the girl. The inference that he has won Mary Marston's interest is sufficient for me. Platonic stories promise more romance to come. The faithfulness of the denouement is precisely what I like about it; especially that shot of Holmes perched bird-like on the edge of the skiff as it rushes down the Thames. If there is a flaw it is in the casting of Ronald Lacey in the duel role of the Sholto brothers. His prissiness and fussiness grates on my nerves, as does his bald scalp and long red hair. I like composition and depth of field and coverage within a master shot but any director who racks focus in the middle of a shot needs to be slapped upside the head, and any director who persistently plants Lacey's bald scalp and long red hair into the foreground and then repeatedly racks focus on it has a fetish problem and needs to see a shrink. Aside from "The Red-Headed League," didn't Doyle write a famous paper on the propensity of Victorian criminals to be red-headed? Maybe the director was only trying to be faithful to Doyle. The 1983 and 1987 versions come so close together it's fun to compare their approaches -- how they play scene, what they leave in, what they omit, and what they add. I may compare them in the next day or so. The 1983 version has the advantage of 35mm film, Thorley Walters doing a non-comedic turn as Major Sholto, and Cherie Lunghi, the beauty from Excalibur, playing Mary Marston. While Hardwicke, aside from the procurring of Toby sequence, is mostly relegated to the role of wallpaper, Brett gives one of his very best performances and is simply amazing during the Pondicherry Lodge investigation of Bartholomew Sholto's death. Well, Watson's role is essentially to exude empathy and to play straight man to Holmes' eccentricities, and this Hardwicke does exceedingly well. He adds more than his share of personal touches here and there. It's a busy story. I also like the way Brett manipulates Emrys James as the confrontational Inspector Athelney Jones into thinking that he, Jones, is conducting this investigation when he's doing nothing of the kind. The casting, sets and locations are flawless. SIGN is, for my money, the jewel in the crown of the Granada series. Right. Now let us compare it to the Ian Richardson film and report back here. Richard "... little by little the look of the country changes because of the people we admire." dialog in HUD (1963) Last Edited By: Richard Feb 28 09 11:00 PM. Edited 1 times.
Richard		#93	[-]
Mar 1 09 12:22 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	As an aside, for those who have not read the books, A Study In Scarlet, The Sign of Four, and The Valley of Fear have backstories the length of an entire novel. Holmes and Watson appear at the beginning and at the end of each novel, listening to the backstory in-between, so their section is only of short-story length. How to cut the novel-length backstories down to size to focus on Holmes and Watson solving the case must have presented the script writers of the Granada series with no end of options and problems. I disapprove of flashbacks as a rule, but overall I think they did a good job with The Sign of Four, and they managed to incorporate some of A Study In Scarlet and The Valley of Fear into other episodes. Richard "... little by little the look of the country changes because of the people we admire." dialog in HUD (1963)
sirharryflashman		#94	[-]
Mar 1 09 11:30 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Richard, for your amusement, I would draw your attention to the 2008 Baker Street Journal Christmas Annual http://www.bakerstreetjou...christmasannual2008.html as it contains an assessment of 7 different adaptations of SIGN. It is a witty and insightful booklet written by my friend, and colleague, David F. Morrill, BSI. One word of warning, David is not a Jeremy Brett fan Cheers, Charles Prepolec Gaslight Grimoire Blog: News, Interviews and Updates Sherlock Holmes News: Sherlock Holmes in Films, Books and Media
BijouBob8mm		#95	[-]
Mar 17 09 4:18 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Jeremy Brett's COPPER BEECHES co-star, Natasha Richardson, was involved in a serious ski accident. Hope she pulls through: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29733775/
professor liebstrum		#96	[-]
Mar 18 09 3:30 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	That was the first programme I thought of when I heard about Ms Richardson's accident. A fine episode, and she looked very attractive. Here's wishing her a speedy recovery
Bill Warren	The Master Blackmailer	#97	[-]
Jun 12 09 3:19 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	We just watched THE MASTER BLACKMAILER, which is usually counted as an episode (albeit a long one) of the series "The Case-Book of Sherlock Holmes." However, there is no mention in the opening and closing credits of that designation. I think it's a stand-alone feature that was aired in the midst of the Case-Book episodes. It seems to me to be a separate feature-length film, and not really part of the Case-Book series. It's really not very good. It has great cinematography and amazing, rococo, hyper-Victorian art direction, but Peter Hammond, who did well with some of the normal-length episodes, here shows himself to be a hambone director when he's given his head. He grotesquely over- and mis-uses extreme closeups, which normally should be used only for intense punctuation. Standard closeups, like where you can see the figure's shoulders, should have been used--and not all that many of those. The source is a rather short Holmes story. The ideas about expanding it aren't bad, but the basic story is still rather slight--and even though Holmes and Watson are fairly active throughout, Holmes doesn't seem to actually accomplish very much. Also, the Holmes-Watson relationship seems askew here. AFTER Holmes tells Watson he intends to break into Charles Augustus Milverton's palatial home and Watson has gone through a series of "how dare you, Holmes" reactions, Holmes adds that he's arranged for Milverton to be away at a party. THEN Watson is even more outraged. Huh? There's a strange scene when Holmes, in disguise as a lower-class plumber, is semi-romancing a maid in Milverton's home; she wants to, well, make out, but Holmes withdraws almost shamefully, saying he doesn't know how. Again, huh? I can't buy Holmes dropping out of his characterization like that.
BijouBob8mm		#98	[-]
Jun 12 09 3:43 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	It seems to me to be a separate feature-length film, and not really part of the Case-Book series. It, ELIGIBLE BACHELOR and THE LAST VAMPYRE are all linked under "Case Book" on the IMDB, but I don't recall their broadcasts actually bearing that banner. (Nor do the DVDs, if I remember correctly.) Did SIGN OF THE FOUR or HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES have the "Return of Sherlock Holmes" series titles on them?
Bill Warren		#99	[-]
Jun 12 09 9:00 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	BijouBob8mm wrote: It seems to me to be a separate feature-length film, and not really part of the Case-Book series. It, ELIGIBLE BACHELOR and THE LAST VAMPYRE are all linked under "Case Book" on the IMDB, but I don't recall their broadcasts actually bearing that banner. (Nor do the DVDs, if I remember correctly.) Did SIGN OF THE FOUR or HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES have the "Return of Sherlock Holmes" series titles on them? The movie is on a disc with two legit Case-Book entries, but there's nothing about the packaging that suggests MASTER BLACKMAILER is another one. Not only does "Case-Book" not appear at the beginning of the credits for MASTER BLACKMAILER, but it lacks the usual Baker Street opening. I'm referring to the one-big-box set of remastered Holmes episodes, not the initial DVDs. Not sure what they say.
sirharryflashman		#100	[-]
Jun 12 09 9:57 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	THE MASTER BLACKMAILER is not technically part of the CASEBOOK series, as it falls between that series and the following MEMOIRS series. It was the first of three telefilms (THE MASTER BLACKMAILER, THE LAST VAMPYRE and THE ELIGIBLE BACHELOR) that were produced by Granada to try and slot Holmes into the movie-length timeslot that was all the rage on UK television in the early 1990s. As adaptations of Conan Doyle stories the experiment was something of a major failure since these are, like much of the series, based on short stories that would be hard pressed to fill a 45 minute timeslot, much less 90 minutes. The result was some major padding from the writers, which took the stories too far from their roots to be particularly effective, although THE MASTER BLACKMAILER is easily the best of this bunch as the basic storyline remains entirely intact and it mostly (Bill's close-ups aside) just suffers from bloat...as does Brett. Robert Hardy is simply excellent as Milverton. He captures the slippery loathsomeness of the character perfectly. Brett's performance in the guise of Escott the plumber is pretty bloody awful, particularly during the cringe inducing kiss-with-Aggie sequence. From what I've been able to gather, that particular approach to the sequence is entirely down to Brett's take on Holmes...and it was an utter and total misfire. The rest of the film, while definitely bloated, works quite well, particularly when compared to THE LAST VAMPYRE and THE ELIGIBLE BACHELOR, the latter of which is so bad that it's hard to sit through in its entirety. Cheers, Charles Prepolec Gaslight Grimoire Blog: News, Interviews and Updates Sherlock Holmes News: Sherlock Holmes in Films, Books and Media
	Remove this ad

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Yuku free message boards

Trying to cope with Brett