Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

General

Sherlock Holmes on the Screen

Of all fictional characters in film and literature, perhaps the one that has endured the longest is that of Arthur Conan Doyle’s famed supersleuth, Sherlock Holmes – “the world’s only consulting detective.”

The screen versions of the Sherlock Holmes character date back to 1900, and have included some of the best-loved mystery film series of all time, from the Basil Rathbone-Nigel Bruce films to the Jeremy Brett series on the small screen.

Each of the new incarnations of the Holmes stories features interesting variations on the character, some of it involving updates to contemporary settings, such as the recent BBC series. and others adding different elements that have since become trademarks of the character.

A stage adaptation of “Sherlock Holmes” opened in 1899, and starred the legendary American actor William Gillette in the title role (its London tour would include a young Charlie Chaplin in the cast). Gillette introduced two of the character’s trademark traits with his performance: the deerstalker cap, and the pipe. Gillette wrote the adaptation for the play with Doyle himself, and with Gillette in the role, it had a successful run on Broadway. It was filmed in 1916, with Gillette, but this version is lost; it also formed the basis for the 1922 film version starring John Barrymore.

The first screen Holmes film was not actually a mystery, but rather a trick film in the style of Georges Melies. Produced by the American Mutoscope and Biograph company, this extremely bizarre subject depicts a Holmes quite unlike the one envisioned by Arthur Conan Doyle. Rather than using his wits and brilliant sense of deduction, this Holmes is easily baffled by an intruder, whom he catches in the process of stealing some silverware from the drawing room. But the film only gets stranger: the intruder disappears and re-appears right before Holmes’ very eyes, with Holmes stopping briefly to smoke an exploding cigar (!) and in the end the crook escapes with the silverware, eluding the great detective. Even leaving aside the virtual absence of plot, there are numerous liberties taken with the character as well, and the film seems to use Holmes strictly for the name value (it was an unauthorized adaptation).

A more fitting film came in 1905, produced by the Vitagraph company in Brooklyn and starring Maurice Costello in the title role. Other adaptations would follow during the silent era.

With the arrival of sound film in the late 1920s and early 30s, the Sherlock Holmes stories were natural for adaptation to the new medium. The use of recorded dialog made it much more effective to capture the characters and dialog of Doyle’s stories. THE SPECKLED BAND was made in England in 1931 and starred Raymond Massey as Holmes. It was a fairly typical early talkie – with static cinematography and fairly stiff delivery.

An American film, SHERLOCK HOLMES, followed in 1932, this one starring Clive Brook as Holmes and silent screen character actor Ernest Torrence as his arch-nemesis, Moriarty. Another Hollywood film, A STUDY IN SCARLET, was adapted by and starred Reginald Owen, and manages to achieve a good deal of atmosphere despite being produced on a low budget by a Poverty Row studio.

By far the best of the early screen Holmes was Arthur Wontner. Between 1931 and 1937, he starred in five Holmes films made in England (one of them, THE MISSING REMBRANDT, is lost). Unlike the other Holmes adaptations of the early sound period, Wontner excelled at capturing the essence of Doyle’s character, and the films, while still fairly typical of the early talkie period, still hold up as entertainment.

Wontner’s Holmes also introduced the now-famous expression, “Elementary, my dear Watson”, which would become a trademark of the character in future interpretations. Because they have fallen into the public domain, the Wonter Holmes are easily accessible for viewing, but the tradeoff is that they are often presented in transfers made from battered prints.

In 1939, 20th Century-Fox would release the film that would forever transform Sherlock Holmes as a film franchise. THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES was the first Holmes film to star Basil Rathbone in his signature role, with Nigel Bruce as his bumbling but loyal associate, Dr. Watson.

With an expertly-written script, atmospheric cinematography, elaborate production design and an all-star cast, THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES is classical Hollywood filmmaking at its finest. Particularly effective are the scenes taking place on the Yorkshire Moors at night.

With their performances in this film, Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce would become the actors best known for portraying the roles of Holmes and Watson. Rathbone perfectly embodies Doyle’s character.

Purists have quarreled over Bruce’s performance as Watson in these films, as he perhaps too frequently comes across as buffoonish or comical, but his interpretation of the character has many endearing qualities that has allowed the Rathbone-Bruce series to remain a favorite of fans for many decades.

The follow-up to HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES came the same year with THE ADVENTURES OF SHERLOCK HOLMES, which was adapted from the William Gillette play. This version saw character actor George Zucco as Moriarty, and while it was less satisfying overall than HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES, was another strong entry in the series from 20th Century-Fox.

A dozen more films followed in the Rathbone-Bruce series, produced not by Fox but by Universal. Oddly, Universal made the decision to update the stories to a contemporary setting. Like the current “Sherlock” series on the BBC, the update works because it is intelligently written, and retains the character and tone of the Doyle stories without relying on gimmickry.

Only in a few films does the contemporary setting feel forced, such as SHERLOCK HOLMES AND THE VOICE OF TERROR (1942), which has the sleuth battling the Nazis. While such topical elements certainly made the films more relevant for 1940s audiences, they also serve to date the film somewhat for current viewers (whereas the first two in the series, produced by Fox, are timeless). After the final Rathbone-Bruce film in 1946, they continued to portray the characters on radio.

Although other actors would portray Sherlock Holmes over the following decades (most notably Peter Cushing, whose performance in the 1958 Hammer film of HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES remains a classic; and Robert Stephens, in Billy Wilder’s ambitious but ill-fated THE PRIVATE LIFE OF SHERLOCK HOLMES [1970]), it would be almost another 40 years before an actor came along who matched Rathbone in terms of perfectly embodying all of the aspects of Arthur Conan Doyle’s detective.

Made for British television between 1985 and 1994, the Jeremy Brett “Holmes” series returned the character to the Victorian London setting of the original stories, and with sumptuous production values, created a vibrant period atmosphere that remains unmatched. Though made for the small screen, the Jeremy Brett Holmes series compares favorably with any film adaptation.  But what made this series a masterpiece was Jeremy Brett’s performance as Holmes. Brett gave the performance of a lifetime in this series, and brilliantly conveyed every nuance of the character.

Certainly, the famed fictional supersleuth created by Arthur Conan Doyle continues to endure, most recently with the well-written and thoughtful BBC series “Sherlock”, which – like the Rathbone-Bruce films – brings the characters and stories up to date with a contemporary setting.

Using 21st century technologies such as cell phones and computers, the Holmes played by Benedict Cumberbatch is presented as introverted, awkward, a social outcast – driven almost entirely by his need for intellectual stimulation in the form of crime solving. Martin Freeman’s Dr. Watson is more in keeping with the Watson of the original stories – patient, dedicated, and a loyal friend – and serves as a nice counterpart to Holmes’ intense pursuits at deduction.

Adaptations of “Sherlock Holmes” will probably continue well into the 22nd century, in whatever media happens to be available then, and probably updating the stories to incorporate new technologies and topical aspects that will be relevant to audiences of the future. But the timelessness of Doyle’s detective remains in the stories themselves – the emphasis on character, on cleverly-constructed mysteries and brilliant twists and turns that keep audiences coming back to them again and again.

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

DISCLAIMER

Forces of Geek is protected from liability under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and “Safe Harbor” provisions.

All posts are submitted by volunteer contributors who have agreed to our Code of Conduct.

FOG! will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement.

Please contact us for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content.

SOCIAL INFLUENCER POLICY

In many cases free copies of media and merchandise were provided in exchange for an unbiased and honest review. The opinions shared on Forces of Geek are those of the individual author.

You May Also Like

Movies

Despite the convenience of digital and streaming, any truly hardcore cinegeek knows the importance of physical media and having a personal collection of not...

Movies

As most horror fans will attest to, quality horrors in mainstream English language cinema can be few and far between, and any gore hound...

Movies

To many, 1984’s Ghostbusters was lightning in a bottle, and to some, it became a cornerstone of a lifelong dedication to the franchise that...

Movies

Religious and occult horror has always fascinated audiences, and this horror sub-genre has indeed delivered many classics such as Rosemary’s Baby, The Omen and...