Cushing a bit on the priggish side as Holmes?
this seems like it would be easy to overdo...
I liked Robert Stephens' Holmes in Wilder's THE PRIVATE LIFE OF>>>....2nd best after Brett
this seems like it would be easy to overdo...
I liked Robert Stephens' Holmes in Wilder's THE PRIVATE LIFE OF>>>....2nd best after Brett
I thought Cushing was perfect as Holmes, he's my favourite in the role.
"I don't need to fight to prove I'm right. I don't need to be forgiven."
yeah i think that too.
i love peter cushing, hes the best sherlock holmes and i love the scene with the clergy man and the telescope.
peter is mr hammer horror and always will be.
Brett WAS Holmes. Stephens was pretty good (I heard they originally wanted Peter O'Toole and Stephens plays it like O'Toole might have), and I also liked Nichol Williamson in The Seven % Solution. Cushings portrayal is too ... well, I guess "priggish" is as good a word as any.
shareWell for me Cushing WAS (and IS) Holmes with Brett a close second.
"I don't need to fight to prove I'm right. I don't need to be forgiven."
Definitions of priggish on the Web:
exaggeratedly proper; "my straitlaced Aunt Anna doesn't approve of my miniskirts"
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
Cushing captured Holmes' arrogance and grumpiness far better than any actor until Jeremy Brett.
Andre Morell was superb as Watson, very like the dashing David Burke in the later Granada TV series.
All in all, very good casting for this film.
Yeah, I have to agree. As I said earlier in the thread about "which was the best version" I think Cushing was far more manic and impulsive than anyone else, traits which I've always found in the books...along with his arrogance and grumpiness (misinterpreted as "priggishness")! He wasn't impatiently telling people how to behave like some old Aunt, he was constantly exasperated at having to laboriously explain everything in detail because of how dull-witted and slow they were compared to him! (Of course, it's quite possible not to like someone like that...but, after all, Holmes wasn't really a very likeable person, not even in the books. We enjoy him for what he's capable of doing and how he accomplishes what he does, not necessarily for who he is.)
By the way, that's also a very telling point about the authenticity of Morell's Watson: one gets the impression that he is the one confidant whom Holmes trusts to "get it," or at least persevere (and put up!) with him. For once you can actually understand why Conan Doyle's Holmes would have developed such a lasting friendship and partnership with him, and even be occasionally inspired by him. (Which, for that matter, also leads us back to being a telling point as to the authenticity of Cushing's Holmes.) He is the yin to Holmes' yang, perfectly complementary and absolutely necessary.
(In fact, it's probably that very relationship which most reveals the inauthenticity of the Rathbone series. Although Basil had a lot of the mannerisms down [and was marvelously entertaining in the part, don't get me wrong], he was also soft enough to love and be endeared to his bumbling friend; one can't imagine Cushing's Holmes tolerating such nonsense...nor Conan Doyle's.)
There is nothing wrong with Cushing's performance. But, let's be honest, Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce are perfect for the roles. Their chemistry is amazing, and Basil really gives an in-depth performance. I feel as if Cushing just acts grumpy and smart, and that's it. Of course, the movies that Rathbone and Bruce were in were not always wonderful, but if you look at the performances alone, it's a real treat.
Brett is also extremely good. Sometimes, I feel like he overdoes it a bit, but in general, I think Rathbone and Brett were the two best.
Jake-219 -
Well said! To paraphrase something that Peter Cushing said in an interview, "The problem with playing Holmes is that he goes up and down like a Yo Yo. That can be annoying for an audience. So, you have to find a way to do it."
When I met Peter Cushing, I found him to be enormously likable in person, a really charming man. So, it's remarkable that he did not rely on his natural charm in playing Holmes. He took the risk of letting Holmes be unlikable. The result was what I consider the most accurate interpretation of Holmes up until that time.
In the 1970's, The Royal Shakespeare Company brought their production of William Gillette's SHERLOCK HOLMES to Broadway, featuring the remarkable John Wood as Holmes. He was nominated for a Tony Award for his wonderful performance. Luckily, I knew the Assistant Stage Manager, who was a friend of John Wood's. He gave me the chance to see the set after a performance, and of course to meet John Wood. When I mentioned to the assistant stage manager that John Wood's interpretation reminded me of Peter Cushing, he smiled broadly and nodded in an animated manner. Obviously, John Wood had been influenced by Cushing.
On a New York PBS Television fund raiser (they were showing the Granada series on MYSTERY at the time), Jeremy Brett appeared as a guest. He described Basil Rathbone as "the ideal Holmes, " and went on to add, "Of course Peter Cushing was marvelous."
By the way, a good friend of mine talked to Peter Cushing for several hours. Peter (as everyone called him) told my friend that Andre Morell was an 11th hour replacement for Watson. Unfortunately, my friend could not remember the actor who had been originally cast.
"Ignore the man behind the curtain!"
Poor choice of words.
Try - mercurial; dynamic; arrogant; acerbic; incisive; misanthropic; and one not to suffer fools gladly - most of the traits that one finds in Holmes in the original stories. Cushing's ability to capture Holmes' mercurial nature was remarkable. If only he had had the opportunity to play Holmes in first class productions.
"Ignore the man behind the curtain!"
Agreed. I would say that Cushing's Holmes in this film is second only to Jeremy Brett's interpretation in the Grenada series. He truly does bring to the surface Holmes's eccentricity and the rather misanthropic streak that runs throughout the canon. Cushing was a lifelong fan of the Holmes stories, and his performance reflects a deep understanding of the character.
Oddly enough, in the later BBC television series, Cushing's performance couldn't have been more different. There, he played Holmes as far too ebullient and likable, a mistake often made by actors who don't know better. It was strange to see Cushing take the character in that direction, after his wonderful portrayal in Hammer's Hound.
"Oddly enough, in the later BBC television series, Cushing's performance couldn't have been more different. There, he played Holmes as far too ebullient and likable, a mistake often made by actors who don't know better. It was strange to see Cushing take the character in that direction, after his wonderful portrayal in Hammer's Hound."
Cushing was apparently not happy with his performance in the TV series as he felt there was never enough time to do the stories justice and everything was rushed with last minute rewrites. Personally I think his TV performance is still better than most other actors performances as Holmes. Hammer's Hounds is his best though.
"I don't need to fight to prove I'm right. I don't need to be forgiven."
Yeah, I read about his frustration with the series' production schedule. It's a shame that the people behind the scenes weren't as serious about it as Cushing was. But that's so often the case. The same thing happened with the '80s TV movies starring Ian Richardson. He fought them on the cliches...the deerstalker and Inverness, the Meershaum...but in the end, the producers got their way.
I'd actually place Cushing's Holmes in the BBC series at about the same level as Richardson's in Hound and Sign of Four. A good, but rather too jovial Holmes, in productions flawed by the money-men. It was just a bit harder to watch Cushing's "likable" take on Holmes, after seeing his fantastic portrayal in Hound. I can't help but think how much better the series could have been.
I would say that Cushing's Holmes in this film is second only to Jeremy Brett's interpretation . . .
I'd rank them the other way around, myself. Brett was excellent too, but to my mind he tended to play Holmes as too neurotic at the wrong times.
----
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Cushing´s by far the worst Holmes I´ve seen - a small, pale, bony and jumpy rat bastard. Quite insufferable. And Morell makes for a particularly bland, forgettable Watson; all in all, the main thing that keeps this version afloat, is technicolor.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan
I guess we're in the minority here, but I agree w/your characterization of Cushing and Morell. I don't care that Rathbone and Bruce weren't faithful to the characterizations in the books. They will always be my favorite pairing. Rathbone's Holmes was always precise and observant without being overbearing; and Bruce's Watson was endearing. They complemented each other in a uniquely entertaining way. I'm looking forward to the next time the 1939 version comes around again. (Btw, it's rated much more highly than the '59 version on imdb, and it deserves it.)
share