| Product: |
Sherlock Holmes - The Definitive Collection (Digitally Remastered) (DVD) |
| Date: |
25.03.07 (201 review reads) |
| Rating: |
 |
Advantages: Beautifully restored versions of the greatest Holmes and Watson of all time
Disadvantages: None
The Definitive collection of arguably the best Holmes and Watson: Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce can only be greeted with joy, which is just how it was treated by me when it arrived in the post. Containing all fourteen films in the series that began in 1939 with The Hound of the Baskervilles and culminating with the rather melodramatically titled Dressed to Kill in 1946.
For those not conversant with the Rathbone/Bruce Sherlock Holmes films, they began as almost A-movies for Twentieth Century Fox first in Hound and then The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes. At this point Fox decided not to film any further adventures but Universal, ever desiring to put together B-movie series, which might draw in audiences, negotiated with Conan Doyle's estate to gain the rights. Successfully so, they brought back Rathbone, as an angular, slightly eagle-like and sometimes supercilious Holmes and Bruce, who plays Watson as something of a pompous buffoon, acting almost as comic relief (though this is something of an oversimplification). Together with Universal they made a further twelve films, as well as playing the pair on radio, until Rathbone grew tired of the role and decided not to make any further films, as will as quitting the radio version, seemingly to Bruce's considerable chagrin.
These Holmes films are to be honest guilty pleasures. Each running barely over an hour, they would today barely be considered worthy of the title "film." They are also deeply flawed, made on shoestring budgets and with shooting schedules of just over a fortnight, the Universal films anyway, were made on the fly. They shot between two and three films a year, mostly under the aegis of Producer and often Director, Roy William Neill. The two films at work were more polished productions, with more recognisable minor stars in supporting roles but the Universal films for the most part relied upon a stock company of actors, who would appear film after film in different roles, including, most importantly Dennis Hoey, as a rather dense and sceptical (not to mention curiously superior) Inspector Lestrade. Thus there is a curious continuity about the films, as the same faces appear in various guises.
Though The Hound of the Baskervilles and The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes remained faithful to Conan Doyle's late Victorian, fin-de-siecle, milieu, Universal decided to update Holmes and Watson to the present day, and as such the first few films, including Sherlock Holmes in Washington and Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon were patriotic flag-wavers, where Holmes was pitted against dastardly Nazis but it soon became clear to them that it was fog drenched London and/or countryside, with fiendish mystery and (supposed) chills that would draw in the audience and as such though the films remained set in the present day they felt more Victorian and were more atmosphere heavy, such as The Scarlet Claw (arguably the best film of the series), based in rural Canada (though as the audio commentary points out, it may as well be England, and even the police wear English policeman uniforms!) that never seems to see daylight and is so veiled by mist and fog as to suggest a town that has no possible warmth or possibly could ever be free from fear. This set the tone for lone houses, moors (similar to Hound), foggy London streets and back alleys, Holmes often clothed in fiendish (and often remarkably convincing) costumes to fool his enemies.
Thus, visually, the Universal films are often highly stylised, influenced by the skewed camera angles and chiaroscuro of German Expressionist cinema of the twenties. Sometimes the camera work is surprisingly fluid and graceful, considering the hurried filming (sometimes slightly fluffed lines and accidents had to be left in the finished films) and Roy William Neill actually is a rather skilled director. I believe he was originally meant to film The Lady Vanishes in the late thirties but left for America and, of course, it fell to Hitchcock who crafted it into possibly his best English film. Nevertheless, Neill's surprising visual aptitude often raises the style of the films and is able to create disconcerting and visually intriguing images. He is no mere hack.
But what is the appeal of the Rathbone/Bruce Sherlock Holmes films? It rests, ultimately on Rathbone and Bruce, who were both talented actors and brought conviction to their roles. Though some of the stock company of actors were at time wooden (though noticeable exceptions such as Henry Daniell and Gale Sondegaard add richness) Rathbone and Bruce exude quality and assurance. They both convince because they entirely occupy their roles, they are sure of their characters, even though they do not entirely confirm to how they were written by Conan Doyle. Rathbone is perhaps the closest to Conan Doyle's image of Holmes. He is perceptive, distrustful of woman, superior, uninvolved emotionally, willing to both patronise Watson and ignore his considerable human feelings. Rathbone captures Holmes' lethargy and energy both, his sense of boredom and need for stimulation, his selfishness and yet his devotion to mystery. Bruce's Watson is less serious, at least in the Universal films, in Hound, for instance, Bruce plays it straighter. He is often the comic foil, by turns pompous and bumbling, though ever devoted to Holmes. When, in The Spider Woman, Holmes fakes his own death unbeknownst to Watson, he is clearly very upset and is protective of Holmes remaining possessions. Rathbone and Bruce fit together beautifully, forming a single unit that triumph over the often flawed plots. As these are deeply flawed film, don't expect perfection, written so quickly and when based on Conan Doyle's original stories the end result will keep perhaps one or two elements of the original plot (such as the orange pips in The House of Fear) but little else. The body of the story is often completely new. Nevertheless, this doesn't detract from the films because it is the mystery and the interplay between Rathbone and Watson that drive the films, that lend them such class, for these are certainly superior B-movies.
What requires comment is that these films have been lovingly restored over a decade and as such the image quality is fantastic. Also, often the original titles, which were removed in subsequent prints, have been restored to the films, giving them a greater sense of time and place - and let's face it, there's something wonderful about some of the old studio intros. The huge Warner Brother's sign, RKO's telegraph tower, and Universal's translucent rotating globe, to which we are treated here. The image and sound quality are truly excellent, and I have watched bad VHS prints of these films, where there is little sharpness or contrast but no, here black is deep and fathomless, the contrast often razor sharp, which for such old films is really something. The fact that these films have been so lovingly restored I think bears witness to their quality, despite the occasional flaws of plot and supporting casts. There is a short feature explaining the restoration, about five minutes which gives some background on this and is quite interesting but hardly in-depth.
More in-depth are the audio commentaries supplied by David Stuart Davies and Richard Valley, both whom have written books on Holmes on film and biographies of Basil Rathbone. They clearly have a deep knowledge of these films, of Holmes but moreover they clearly love these films. They recognise their inconsistencies, their flaws but are able to see how they manage to triumph over their humble origins. These commentaries are then both interesting and passionate and so worthy of attention, unlike so many that contain nothing but pointless comments, such as: "that was my son's horse" (witness John Boorman discussing Zardoz). They both also provide background and context, as do the extensive production notes by Valley, which for once truly are extensive. Each is practically a short dissertation and filled with information and again is rare in that they are perceptive, packed with information and thoroughly readable. It's not pointless fluffing out of DVD extras. It is clear that real care and attention has been paid in their construction and their writing. This exemplifies the whole package, that is beautifully constructed and worthy of the films that they contain.
As you'll have no doubt guessed, I love these films. They are truly comfort cinema. There is something about watching them, whether over a lazy afternoon, or late at night to relax before dipping into bed that is sublime. Admittedly they may not be for everyone, some people have difficulty with black and white movies (though I'm never sure why) but these are not challenging but then they are hardly stupid. They are fast paced, entertaining, often witty, always atmospheric and there are real gems on show. The Scarlet Claw, especially, full to the gills with fog laden claustrophobia; The Woman in Green has some genuinely hypnotic moments. Such are these films that Rathbone and Bruce set the tone and the look for Holmes and Watson for years to come, and not until Jeremy Brett (the other contender for the greatest Holmes) and first David Burke then Edward Hardwicke, some forty years later would anyone come close to redefining the roles.
That, to me, says it all.
For those inclined towards lists, below are the titles in the series - though this is not the order of production, but the order they appear on the DVDs: two per disc:
1. The hound of the Baskervilles
2. The voice of terror
3. The adventures of Sherlock Holmes
4. The secret weapon
5. Sherlock Holmes in Washington
6. Sherlock Holmes faces death
7. The spider woman
8. The pearl of death
9. The scarlet claw
10. The house of fear
11. Pursuit to Algiers
12. The woman in green
13. Terror by night
14. Dressed to kill
Summary: Beautifully restored versions of the greatest Holmes and Watson of all time
|
|
