The Hound of the Baskervilles

Despite the naysayers Tom Baker does an excellent and more than possible portrayal of Sherlock Holmes. In a bit of an overused story he brought a freshness to it. If you get a chance watch this and you'll see what I mean. Pity it wasn't hailed as one of the better Sherlock Holmes outings.

Although I enjoyed Tom Baker as Dr. Who, watching him play the same character and renaming it Sherlock Holmes was a bit of a yawn. This film is pretty much unwatchable, especially after seeing the Jeremy Brett version. The only casting of Holmes that is worse was Roger Moore

Tom Baker's performance as Holmes displays mannerisms that could only be called idiosyncratic, and, for me at least, were displeasing. The basic story is well covered, though, and collectors of Holmesiana might like to have a view or a tape if it should come available. The Basil Rathbone film is miles ahead so far as Holmes atmosphere is concerned.

We love Tom Baker, but the quality of the direction and supporting cast makes a mockery of the very concept of dramatic performance. As a lifelong Sherlock Holmes fan, born in the cradle of Dartmoor's misty tors, this production betrays both its fictional and historical roots, and is merely a hollow imitation of its source, which was served far more ably by the incomparable Jeremy Brett. Baker mistakes adult fiction for a serious performance and would have been better served by allowing the eccentricity of the 'doctor' to come to the fore. What this production badly needed was for someone, either in front or behind the camera, to take control and allow the multi-faceted nature of Holmes' character to drive events. A wasted opportunity that contributes nothing to the genre. It only contributed to putting the final nails in Baker's career.

Big bag o' thrash.

I've had this production tucked away for over a decade and never seen it, until now. As a die hard Tom Baker fan (Doctor Who) I have struggled on occasion to get to grips with him in other roles, but as always he totally came up trumps. My initial thoughts of him being miscast were unfair and wrong, he gave a very strong, down to Earth, honest performance, adding character and presence, not dramatics as I had expected. Terence Rigby made for a very good Watson too, finally not made to be a bumbling buffoon, he was a worthy sidekick to the great detective.

I was very impressed by the production values and the closeness of the original text, it didn't seem like they'd tinkered about with the script a great deal. The costumes and set designs look spot on, that quality you always expect from the BBC.

My only negative would be the casting of Nicholas Woodeson, and his character, a fine actor, but I found the character lacking in any warmth, unsympathetic almost, I picture Henry Baskerville as handsome and lacking harshness. If our Henry here had been dog food, I'd not have lost a huge amount of sleep.

It's an excellent production, it's well worth obtaining.

8/10.