The best Sherlock Holmes

Brothers of Briar

Help Support Brothers of Briar:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Rathbone was a good actor but, as others pointed out, Nigel Bruce's portrayal was not reflective of John Watson's character. Watson does not have Holmes's intellect but he is no idiot, either. Then, there is the fact that the stories were either so watered down/edited as to be almost unrecognizable from the original, or either they were stories of their own having no link to Doyle's work. I have watched less than half of the movies featuring Rathbone and Bruce and had enough. I did, however, like The Hound of the Baskervilles even if modified.

Brett interpreted the detective brilliantly. I think he fairly understood the essence of Holmes and was able to act it. Burke, then Hardwicke, were excellent matches and balances to the character's extremes. Also, Jeremy read the canon several times throughout the years in order to perfect his interpretation of the detective. I have purchased the Granada's complete series and watch them over and over again on a regular basis. I find Brett and Burke/Hardwicke to be extremely convincing.

As though not based on the canon, I did enjoy Downing Jr.'s incarnation; as well as Law's. It was refreshing and I found the plot around Lord Blackwood's, then Moriarty's respective megalomaniacal attempts for world domination entertaining. Jared Harris's portrayal of Moriarty was a tour de force as he was very easy to immediately detest on the spot.
 
docwatson said:
I'm an old buzzard LOL so IMHO Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce were the best of the best in this series hands down. I'm sure others have a different opinion and you're welcome to it. :D :D :D
Doc
Click to expand...
Basil and Bruce were activists
Davy said:
Rathbone was a good actor but, as others pointed out, Nigel Bruce's portrayal was not reflective of John Watson's character. Watson does not have Holmes's intellect but he is no idiot, either. Then, there is the fact that the stories were either so watered down/edited as to be almost unrecognizable from the original, or either they were stories of their own having no link to Doyle's work. I have watched less than half of the movies featuring Rathbone and Bruce and had enough. I did, however, like The Hound of the Baskervilles even if modified.

Brett interpreted the detective brilliantly. I think he fairly understood the essence of Holmes and was able to act it. Burke, then Hardwicke, were excellent matches and balances to the character's extremes. Also, Jeremy read the canon several times throughout the years in order to perfect his interpretation of the detective. I have purchased the Granada's complete series and watch them over and over again on a regular basis. I find Brett and Burke/Hardwicke to be extremely convincing.

As though not based on the canon, I did enjoy Downing Jr.'s incarnation; as well as Law's. It was refreshing and I found the plot around Lord Blackwood's, then Moriarty's respective megalomaniacal attempts for world domination entertaining. Jared Harris's portrayal of Moriarty was a tour de force as he was very easy to immediately detest on the spot.
Click to expand...
All others were actors, you remember the stories when you watch them. Jeremy Brett was Sherlock Holmes, when you read the book you see Jeremy. Period.
 
DrT999 said:
When I reread Holmes, it's about 75% Brett and 25% Rathbone in my head, YMMV. Still, the Holmes of many of the stories was much younger than either actor
Click to expand...
A keen and relevant observation. You are absolutely correct. If I remember well, Holmes was around his mid twenties when they met?
 
Davy said:
Rathbone was a good actor but, as others pointed out, Nigel Bruce's portrayal was not reflective of John Watson's character. Watson does not have Holmes's intellect but he is no idiot, either. Then, there is the fact that the stories were either so watered down/edited as to be almost unrecognizable from the original, or either they were stories of their own having no link to Doyle's work. I have watched less than half of the movies featuring Rathbone and Bruce and had enough. I did, however, like The Hound of the Baskervilles even if modified.

Brett interpreted the detective brilliantly. I think he fairly understood the essence of Holmes and was able to act it. Burke, then Hardwicke, were excellent matches and balances to the character's extremes. Also, Jeremy read the canon several times throughout the years in order to perfect his interpretation of the detective. I have purchased the Granada's complete series and watch them over and over again on a regular basis. I find Brett and Burke/Hardwicke to be extremely convincing.

As though not based on the canon, I did enjoy Downing Jr.'s incarnation; as well as Law's. It was refreshing and I found the plot around Lord Blackwood's, then Moriarty's respective megalomaniacal attempts for world domination entertaining. Jared Harris's portrayal of Moriarty was a tour de force as he was very easy to immediately detest on the spot.
Click to expand...
I agree, lets not be too critical of all of Holmes's characterizations, although Bruce's portrayal seemed more comic relief and never did Waston's character justice. I also enjoyed Downing Jr."s portrayal along with Law"s. I also enjoyed Benjamin Cumberbatch's character and series. As with all iconic characters, they will always be subjected to personal interpretation or maybe not?🧐
 
DrT999 said:
Yes, Sherlock would have been at most around 25, Watson a bit older, in 'A Study in Scarlet'
Click to expand...
Considering his medical studies (medicine being much more advanced in Europe than in North America at that period), some private practice upon graduating, then joining the military and serving in India, most likely, Watson would have been in his early 30s, I reckon.
 
Davy said:
Considering his medical studies (medicine being much more advanced in Europe than in North America at that period), some private practice upon graduating, then joining the military and serving in India, most likely, Watson would have been in his early 30s, I reckon.
Click to expand...
Remember, back then there weren't pre-med requirements, it was an undergraduate degree in our terms
 
Jeremy Brett is #1. I have all the episodes he played in on DVD. His Dr Watson's were good also. Burke then Hardwicke but really not much difference.

I like Basil Rathbone as a kid.....the reruns on Saturday afternoon are what got me into reading them. I would still watch him now if I was scrolling Britbox or another streaming service. However I now hate the portrayal of Dr Watson as a bumbling idiot.

Regarding anything made post 2001. Robert Downey Jr brought a different take to the character. I appreciated it but it's not really how I viewed Holmes. It's much like how Kevin Costner played Robin Hood. I did like Jude Law as Dr Watson. It's a shame they killed off Irene Adler/McAdams. First movie was better than #2. Much more in the spirit or the originals.

The modern BBC version with Benedict Cummerbund and Bilbo was good but I don't like the modern take on it. Although both were very good.

That crap on network TV where Holmes was in NY? Pure crap.

My take on this is worth what you paid. :ROFLMAO:
 
Well spoken fireman. Rathbone did well hiding how much he eventually hated playing Holmes. He is ever acceptable. With Brett it’s just pure magic.

PS: I have a 10-year-old pug. His name is Watson. He is truly the ever present assistant and smarter than that of Rathbone’s Watson. Mr. Bruce could only be as smart as the screen writers wrote him, mores the pity.

Have you ever enjoyed any of the splendid “Beekeeper’s Apprentice” series by Laurie R King?
 
fireman11 said:
Jeremy Brett is #1. I have all the episodes he played in on DVD. His Dr Watson's were good also. Burke then Hardwicke but really not much difference.

I like Basil Rathbone as a kid.....the reruns on Saturday afternoon are what got me into reading them. I would still watch him now if I was scrolling Britbox or another streaming service. However I now hate the portrayal of Dr Watson as a bumbling idiot.

Regarding anything made post 2001. Robert Downey Jr brought a different take to the character. I appreciated it but it's not really how I viewed Holmes. It's much like how Kevin Costner played Robin Hood. I did like Jude Law as Dr Watson. It's a shame they killed off Irene Adler/McAdams. First movie was better than #2. Much more in the spirit or the originals.

The modern BBC version with Benedict Cummerbund and Bilbo was good but I don't like the modern take on it. Although both were very good.

That crap on network TV where Holmes was in NY? Pure crap.

My take on this is worth what you paid. :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
I would like a real British actor to play a Sherlock in a newer movie thar keeps the traditional story in play
 
fireman11 said:
Jeremy Brett is #1. I have all the episodes he played in on DVD. His Dr Watson's were good also. Burke then Hardwicke but really not much difference.

I like Basil Rathbone as a kid.....the reruns on Saturday afternoon are what got me into reading them. I would still watch him now if I was scrolling Britbox or another streaming service. However I now hate the portrayal of Dr Watson as a bumbling idiot.

Regarding anything made post 2001. Robert Downey Jr brought a different take to the character. I appreciated it but it's not really how I viewed Holmes. It's much like how Kevin Costner played Robin Hood. I did like Jude Law as Dr Watson. It's a shame they killed off Irene Adler/McAdams. First movie was better than #2. Much more in the spirit or the originals.

The modern BBC version with Benedict Cummerbund and Bilbo was good but I don't like the modern take on it. Although both were very good.

That crap on network TV where Holmes was in NY? Pure crap.

My take on this is worth what you paid. :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
I belonged to a Sherlockian society when I lived in Rhode Island, The Cornish Horrors. Meetings were joyful and well attended.

I saw a portion of the New York version of Holmes. I don't remember any pipe smoking, and John H. Watson, MD was morphed into "Joan Watson," an Asian-American woman. After just a portion of one episode, I turned it off. Jeremy Brett is so perfect for the role that nobody tries to better him; so they come up with garbage like that.

I remember some years ago an American company gave a shot at portraying G. K. Chesterton's Father Brown as a New Yorker. Couldn't possibly work and didn't. By the way, Father Brown is a pipe smoker; but unlike Holmes, he is once shown cleaning his pipe.
 
Blackhorse said:
Well spoken fireman. Rathbone did well hiding how much he eventually hated playing Holmes. He is ever acceptable. With Brett it’s just pure magic.

PS: I have a 10-year-old pug. His name is Watson. He is truly the ever present assistant and smarter than that of Rathbone’s Watson. Mr. Bruce could only be as smart as the screen writers wrote him, mores the pity.

Have you ever enjoyed any of the splendid “Beekeeper’s Apprentice” series by Laurie R King?
Click to expand...
I'm not familiar with that. I just put it in my Amazon cart......I will be ordering it tonight. Thanks.

As a side note, that Enola Holmes was more hot garbage.
 
I still like the Rathbone-Bruce Holmes movies. The hero having a silly sidekick was a near constant, standard trope in B-movies ranging from detectives to cowboys. They followed the trend of the times. I would like to mention that the Adventures of Sherlock Holmes radio series with Rathbone and Bruce were not only better written than the movies, but the characterizations of Holmes and Watson were better, too. Bruce was not as buffoonish on radio as he was in the movies, and Rathbone was much less condescending to Watson. The villains were smarter, too, although every Holmes radio series I have heard (and I've heard them all) tended to use Professor Moriarty too often.

The Hobbs-Shelly Sherlock Holmes radio series was probably the closest to the original stories even though most of them were only thirty minutes long.
 
JimInks said:
I still like the Rathbone-Bruce Holmes movies. The hero having a silly sidekick was a near constant, standard trope in B-movies ranging from detectives to cowboys. They followed the trend of the times. I would like to mention that the Adventures of Sherlock Holmes radio series with Rathbone and Bruce were not only better written than the movies, but the characterizations of Holmes and Watson were better, too. Bruce was not as buffoonish on radio as he was in the movies, and Rathbone was much less condescending to Watson. The villains were smarter, too, although every Holmes radio series I have heard (and I've heard them all) tended to use Professor Moriarty too often.

The Hobbs-Shelly Sherlock Holmes radio series was probably the closest to the original stories even though most of them were only thirty minutes long.
Click to expand...
Jim, you know what would be really neat? If the old 1930s and 1940s radio shows would come back. Have a company make replica family room old fashioned radios and bring back the vintage style shows with the sound effects, the whole thing. It could be like a club! That would be so cool.
 
I remember driving around in High School and listening to serial radio programs. Friday or Saturday night....probably Saturday. I cannot be sure of what it was exactly. The Shadow? Some other mystery/adventure? My buddies did not like it as much but I was the driver so we listened while drinking 15 cent a can beer.
 
Top