A pity

Any adaptation of a Sherlock Holmes story forces winevitable comparisons with the versions filmed in the 1980s and 1990s with Jeremy Brett playing the Victorian detective. So I can't help but compare this latest adaptation of 'The Hound of the Baskervilles' with the earlier movie.

On the positive side, I like Richard Roxburgh in the role of Holmes. Despite being Australian, he comes off very well in his role. Ian hart as Watson and Matt Day as Sir Henry do well in their roles as well. The good news mostly ends here, I'm afraid. The screenwriters take many liberties with the other characters and not with success. The character of Jack Stapleton is especially over the top while Dr Mortimer's character has been decimated.

Any adaptation of a well loved book that doesn't scrupulously stick to the story inevitably comes under scrutiny and so is the case here. The screenwriters make several changes to the narrative, the prime one being that the narrator is no longer Watson. This is not to the movies deterrent and brings a freshness to the story. However, the other changes aren't always successful. Despite being nearly a hundred minutes long, the movie misses out crucial details of the plot while inserting several new scenes and elements, especially in the last 30 mins or so. As I mentioned before, too many liberties were taken with the characters as well. For this reason, while I enjoyed the first hour of running, my opinion of it went rapidly downhill after that point.

I'm going to file this under "failed adaptations" which is a shame since Roxburgh made a good Holmes and the beginning had real promise. It just goes to show again that there are limits to how much you can tinker with a classic story.

5/10