Terrible acting, screenplay and direction.

Sorry, this movie sucks

Absolutely brilliant

When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

We are drowning in adaptations of the Hound of the Baskervilles, some are better then others, but only one I would class as outstanding, and that is this one. It's all about Jeremy Brett, he was to Sherlock Holmes what David Suchet was to Poirot, he was the defining characterization, he made Holmes real and relevant, and during this particular production I would say he was at the height of his mastery. Supported wonderfully by Edward Hardwicke, who seems to get more screen time then Holmes, he is wonderfully solid. Neil Duncan is great too, good strong scenes between him and Brett when they discuss his skull. In many of the adaptations the hound is the problem, in some it looks like a model, and in others it looks like Scooby Doo, they got it right this time round in this excellent TV movie.

The cast is uniformly excellent and Jeremy Brett was probably at his peak in this."The Hound of the Baskervilles" is among the most famous in the Holmes canon (Note that Umberto Eco even named his "medieval Friar-detective "William of Baskerville" in "The Name of the Rose!) and this version probably exceeds even the early Basil Rathbone-Nigel Bruce version. Mr. Bruce always played Watson as a silly ass which Edward Hardwicke never did and this more sober approach benefits the story immensely.Brett played the part of Holmes over the period of many years and famously identified with the character to the point that it probably ruined his health both physically and mentally and may have helped lead to his early death. This identification was so complete that he was really over the top in many of the later installments.But not here.Special mention must be made of Kristoffer Tabori as Sir Henry, the American heir to Baskerville Hall.Though the story and its denouement are familiar to most devotees of the Holmes canon, this TV film version can still be watched with great pleasure.

This was a very fine adaptation of a great book. True it does start off slowly, like the book, and I don't think it is quite as good as 1987's Sign of Four. That was creepy, suspenseful, and featured a wonderfully understated performance from the late great John Thaw. The minor negatives aside, this is a conveniently faithful and suspenseful adaptation.It does benefit from fine camera work, wonderful scenery and costumes, and the music score was superb. And there are some genuinely creepy moments, in particular the opening and any other scene with the very scary looking Hound. It isn't all creepy though. There is a very charming ad libbing moment between Holmes and Watson, that was really nice to see.And the acting was great, especially Jeremy Brett as Holmes. Despite the fact that he was ill during production, he still gave a stellar turn as always in the role I remember him by most. Brett was a great actor, and it was a real shame when he died; I will always consider him as the definitive Holmes, with his gritty baritone and towering presence Brett was perfect as Holmes. Edward Hardwicke as Dr Watson is a really nice contrast, and their chemistry is evident here. The supporting performances were sterling, worth of note were James Faulkener and Ronald Pickup.All in all, while not as good as Sign of Four, it was a very atmospheric and faithful adaptation. 9/10 Bethany Cox

"The Hound of the Baskervilles" is not my favorite Sherlock Holmes film: There are problems with the hound no matter how it is portrayed, and the violence in the film is disturbing. "The Hound" has perhaps suffered from overexposure; it is by all odds the most famous of the Sherlock Holmes tales. It lacks the substance of other full-length Holmes films, such as "The Sign of Four" and "The Master Blackmailer." And it lacks the horror of "The Last Vampire," which Conan Doyle wrote as a tribute to his friend Bram Stoker, the celebrated author of "Dracula."The acting in the Sherlock Holmes films is consistently good. For me as for many other people, Jeremy Brett was the quintessential Holmes. It is a pity he is no longer around to play the part, and an even greater pity that the Holmes films are being remade in what promises to be a greatly inferior version.