|
THE
HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES
REVIEWED
BY CHARITY BISHOP
Our
rating: 4 out of 5 Because
of: thematic elements, violence
Rated:
With
a thunderous crash the window of Baskerville Hall
breaks and a figure is flung into the moat beneath.
The servant comes up gasping for air and with riotous
laughter Sir Hugo commands that he be brought inside
again and properly attended to. The quarrel involves
the servant's beautiful daughter, whom Sir Hugo has
kidnapped for his own pleasure. On going upstairs to
fetch her with the intention of showing her off to his
lustful friends, Sir Hugo discovers the window open
and the girl gone across the moor. Infuriated with
this humiliation, he sets the dogs loose upon her,
despite the pleading of his companions. Mounting his
horse, he follows the unfortunate girl across the
moor. The dogs soon turn back, afraid of something
that looms in the darkness.
Paying
it no heed, Hugo wrestles the girl to the ground and
kills her. He is then set upon by a gigantic hound
from the darkness, who tears out his throat and is
believed to stalk the Baskerville family for centuries
to come. Sherlock Holmes (Peter Cushing) takes very
little interest in the sordid tale brought to him by
Dr. Mortimer (Frances De Wolff) until it is mentioned
that one of the two final remaining Baskervilles has
died in unexpected circumstances. Sir Charles was
found in the very spot where Hugo met his misfortune,
his face contorted in utter terror, dead of a massive
heart attack. His successor Sir Henry (Christopher
Lee) is set to come to England from abroad and reclaim
the inheritance. Fearing for Sir Henry's life,
Mortimer pleads with Holmes for intervention. Agreeing
to take the case but sadly unable to leave London at
least until the end of the week, Holmes sends Watson
in his place to Dartmoor.
An
expanse of barren wasteland and mires, the surrounding
countryside is frequented with many strange characters
and unusual noises. The Hall is situated not more than
six miles from Dartmoor Prison, where one of the
convicts has recently escaped. There are the
Barrymores (John Le Mesurier, Helen Goss), servants
who have kept the Hall for the Baskerville family for
many generations. There's the good-natured,
absent-minded local Bishop (Miles Malleson), who likes
his sherry as much as scripture and collects deadly
spiders. Then there is Stapleton (Ewen Solon), a local
farmer whose daughter Cecile (Marla Landi) has a
strange adversity to strangers. Watson has more than
enough suspects and when you add ghostly howls on the
moor, a figure in the darkness, a candle glowing from
a shut up room in the Hall, and local quarrels, it
unfolds in an intriguing take on the famous story by
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.
Initially
I was surprised how much of the story had changed but
by the conclusion, I wanted to applaud the
scriptwriters for their unique perspective on a story
that has been filmed numerous times. It's not wholly
authentic to the book but the liberties taken don't
appear to injure the plot, instead contributing to a
bit more suspense on the part of the viewer, who isn't
entirely certain that the villain will turn out to be
who we expect. Most stories under-use Franklin, the
nosy neighbor with a golden telescope. In this version
he becomes the local clergy, which leads to some charming
humor on his part, particularly when Holmes helps him
fix his telescope. I was the most surprised by the
alteration of Beryl's character from the book. Here
she is a foreigner with a thick accent and riotous
temper. The film takes a little getting used to but by
the midway point you're hooked. Peter Cushing at first
doesn't appear right for Holmes but he comes into the
role with confidence. I think what I liked the most
was the eccentric nature of Holmes that's brought out
in his lodgings at Baker Street. Keen viewers with a
good knowledge of the books will notice clever little
nods to the canon, not the least of which being a
bunch of papers "affixed to the mantelpiece with
a jackknife."
There
are less content concerns in this version than many
others, primarily because for once it avoids the
supernatural element of a séance that various
adaptations include. There are several mild
profanities and it's uncertain whether in the opening
scene Hugo calls the peasant girl a "b*tch"
or a "witch." He wrestles her to the ground
and knifes her to death (unseen). Two people fall in a
bog; one is pulled to safety and the other presumably
drowns (we hear screams from a distance). A man is
shot and turned on by a dog, who worries at his
throat. Sir Henry is attacked by a giant dog, which is
then killed. They find a body attacked by the hound,
then discover later that it's been used in some
terrible pagan rite (they describe it as being
mutilated but viewers never see it). There is a mild
sensual element involved. Cecile and Sir Henry kiss
passionately after having known each other a few days
and go to the ruins together. It's implied that Cecile
believes he intended to take advantage of her there.
She alludes to the fact that Sir Charles once
attempted the same thing. Hugo's crimes against the peasant
girl were of course in the nature of intended rape but
the subject is never more than cleverly alluded to.
One
of the best adaptations I've seen in the sense that it
equally balances a smart sense of humor and equally
engaging plot, this film did badly at the box office
because Hammer produced it. Known for their murderous
monsters and walking dead, audiences went in expecting
a horror film and came out having seen a reasonably
sane murder mystery. It's a pity the film was so
misunderstood because it really is an enjoyable watch.
|