Blu-ray Review The Hound of the Baskervilles (1959) Blu-ray Review (1 Viewer)

[Matt Hough]

matt-hough has published a new article.

The Hound of the Baskervilles (1959) Blu-ray Review

The 1959 Hammer version of The Hound of the Baskervilles brings all of the novel’s mystery and suspense to the screen intact in a colorful and excellently acted and directed adaptation of one of the premiere novels of detective fiction.

[review]
Continue reading the original article.

 

[dpippel]

Thanks for the review Matt. This is really a great release.

 

[Matt Hough]

I couldn't be happier to turn that much viewed if pitiful DVD release of the movie over to a friend who doesn't yet own this classic.

 

[Mark-W]

I couldn't be happier to turn that much viewed if pitiful DVD release of the movie over to a friend who doesn't yet own this classic.

Matt,

You just sold me on this Blu-ray release with your review and then subsequent comment about getting rid of the sub-par DVD.

My wallet hates you, but my eyes and ears love you.

 

[Matt Hough]

If you love the movie as much as I do, this release by Twilight Time is a real gift.

 

[Steve...O]

If you love the movie as much as I do, this release by Twilight Time is a real gift.

I included this in my most recent order. Looking forward to seeing it for the first time to compare and contrast to the 1939 version.

 

[JeffT.]

This noteworthy Hammer Films retelling of THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES (1959) has certain advantages-improvements over the 1939 original.

It was produced in colour and widescreen. Its attractive production values are superior to the limited B-film ambience of the Universal Pictures 1940s SHERLOCK HOLMES series.

It has some impressively attractive outdoor locale shooting of its more realistically realized moors scenes and James Bernard's dynamically vibrant orchestrations certainly enhances the lightening fast-paced events depicted in the riveting suspense-charged story. By comparison the tamer 1939 Fox version negligently has no music scoring to speak of.

The truly vile David Oxley certainly makes for a superior and far more memorable a villainous Sir Hugo Baskerville than Ralph Forbes was in the 1939 original.

As has been noted that for the first time we are presented a respectably intelligent and sensibly serious Dr. John H. Watson more in keeping with the novels in the distinguished personage of Andre Morell.

Peter Cushing while not exactly correct in towering physical stature as the great Basil Rathbone was is skilled enough an actor to successfully convince us that he is the master detective and far better at it than either would-be imitator Roger Moore or Robert Downey, Jr. ever were.

An excellent (and highly recommended) acquisition in the blu-ray medium.

Jeff T.

 

[Matt Hough]

I included this in my most recent order. Looking forward to seeing it for the first time to compare and contrast to the 1939 version.

I hope you'll share your opinions with us after you've watched it.

 

[Jack P]

I have to call attention to an error made on the Lee Pfeiffer commentary track when one of the participants tries to recall details on the 1972 ABC-TV movie version of "Hound Of The Baskervilles" where he thinks that Watson in that film was played by Patrick Macnee. Bernard Fox played Watson in that production, whereas Macnee played Watson in the 1976 TV-movie "Sherlock Holmes In New York" which starred Roger Moore (that production also had William Shatner as Stapleton).

The quality of the transfer is outstanding and sent my ancient MGM DVD into the garbage. Well worth getting!

 

[Steve...O]

I included this in my most recent order. Looking forward to seeing it for the first time to compare and contrast to the 1939 version.

I hope you'll share your opinions with us after you've watched it.

I decided to re-watch the 1939 version after watching the Hammer version to better compare the two.

Production wise, I much prefer the Rathbone film. It's more atmospheric and the characters are fleshed out better. In all fairness, Fox had the budget that Hammer didn't. Having said that, the Hammer version deserves credit for making enough changes so that this wouldn't be seen as a carbon copy and is quite entertaining in its own right. The only thing I didn't really care for is changing the dynamic of the Stapletons (siblings to father/daughter). That just didn't work for me and the Hammer actress playing the daughter did nothing for me and whatever "thing" she and Chris Lee were supposed to have didn't ring true. Wendie Barrie and Richard Greene were a much more likable couple.

Presentation wise, the Hammer version is miles ahead of the unrestored Fox version on the MPI BD. White speckles aside it looks and sounds great and is visual treat. The Fox version looks weak by today's BD standards. Lots of print damage and occasional soft imagery. TT also has worthwhile extras whereas MPI only offered a David Stuart Davies commentary. He may be a Holmes scholar but he's not well versed on the Rathbone series. At one point he claims that Richard Greene is playing Hugo. Really? Did he not even look at the cast credits on the film?

The Hammer film is a worthwhile purchase and one I'll be revisiting in the future. Congrats to TT on a stellar release! On a related note, I know that MPI somehow got the video rights to the two Fox films, but does anyone know if Fox still holds the original negatives or any first generation material on Hound or Adventures? Both films badly need fresh scans and some Schawn Belston TLC applied. They could (and should) look spectacular and I would love TT to be given the opportunity to present these films on BD in a manner befitting their status.

 

[Mark-W]

If you love the movie as much as I do, this release by Twilight Time is a real gift.

I got around to watching this today and am very glad that I purchased it based on your recommendation. Thanks Matt!

 

[Dick]

I concur that David Oxley is a truly heinous bastard in this film for the short time he occupies it during that marvelous prelude; but I personally and respectfully disagree with one poster who feels this version is not as atmospheric as the '39 with Rathbone. I saw the Hammer version at a Saturday matinee back in the days when truly scary movies were being peddled to young children, and it terrified me (gleefully, of course, as I loved movies like this). I can actually recall, at the age of 9 or 10, clutching my arm rests as Andre Morrell, candle in hand and looking out a window of Baskerville Hall in the middle of the night, hears that totally creepy baying somewhere in the night. There is just no scene for me in the Rathbone version that evokes that palpable sense of sheer terror. I am ambivalent about the James Bernard music, though, as it borrows so heavily from his work on (THE HORROR OF) DRACULA. But taken apart from the latter, the score an effective background to a very memorable boyhood/adult favorite. One of Hammer's half-dozen or so best films.

 

[Randy Korstick]

I concur that David Oxley is a truly heinous bastard in this film for the short time he occupies it during that marvelous prelude; but I personally and respectfully disagree with one poster who feels this version is not as atmospheric as the '39 with Rathbone. I saw the Hammer version at a Saturday matinee back in the days when truly scary movies were being peddled to young children, and it terrified me (gleefully, of course, as I loved movies like this). I can actually recall, at the age of 9 or 10, clutching my arm rests as Andre Morrell, candle in hand and looking out a window of Baskerville Hall in the middle of the night, hears that totally creepy baying somewhere in the night. There is just no scene for me in the Rathbone version that evokes that palpable sense of sheer terror. I am ambivalent about the James Bernard music, though, as it borrow so heavily from his work on (THE HORROR OF) DRACULA. But taken apart from the latter, the score an effective background to a very memorable boyhood/adult favorite. One of Hammer's half-dozen or so best films.

I agree with your assessment. Hammers strength in their movies was atmosphere so not surprisingly I find their version infinitely more atmospheric than the Rathbone version. Although I love both versions the Hammer version wins easily for me. I sometimes doze off in the Rathbone version that never happens in the Hammer version.