|
Post by ant-mac on Nov 6, 2018 2:08:09 GMT
SHERLOCK HOLMES AND THE VOICE OF TERROR (1942) 4/5.
This is the third film in the SHERLOCK HOLMES film series to feature Basil Rathbone as Sherlock Holmes and Nigel Bruce as Doctor John Watson. It is also the first film to be produced by Universal Pictures. It’s written by Robert Hardy Andrews and Lynn Riggs and is based on the story, HIS LAST BOW, by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. The music is provided by Frank Skinner, the film is produced by Howard Benedict and it’s directed by John Rawlins.
The film features Basil Rathbone, Nigel Bruce, Evelyn Ankers, Reginald Denny, Thomas Gómez, Henry Daniell, Montagu Love, Leyland Hodgson, Olaf Hytten. Hillary Brooke and Mary Gordon as Mrs Hudson.
SHERLOCK HOLMES AND THE VOICE OF TERROR is the first film in the film series to be set in contemporary times. It combines elements of the Sir Arthur Conan Doyle story HIS LAST BOW, to which it’s credited as an adaptation and it also loosely parallels the real-life activities of Lord Haw-haw.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Nov 6, 2018 2:23:34 GMT
To quote my review of it from one of @nxnwrocks’s threads:
|
|
|
Post by kleinreturns on Nov 6, 2018 3:33:49 GMT
I've never seen this movie.
|
|
|
Post by ant-mac on Nov 6, 2018 3:46:40 GMT
To quote my review of it from one of @nxnwrocks’s threads: I must admit that I find this film to be one of their lesser efforts.
In fact, I originally gave it 3/5, but then felt I was being a little harsh.
After all, it was Universal's first effort and the first foray in the film series into the present, so it was an experimental work in a manner of speaking.
|
|
|
Post by ant-mac on Nov 6, 2018 3:48:13 GMT
I've never seen this movie. I think it's worth the effort.
But it's only just over an hour in length.
So if you don't like it, at least you haven't wasted too much time.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Nov 6, 2018 3:50:03 GMT
I must admit that I find this film to be one of their lesser efforts.
In fact, I originally gave it 3/5, but then felt I was being a little harsh.
After all, it was Universal's first effort and the first foray in the film series into the present, so it was an experimental work in a manner of speaking.
Yeah, it’s not a masterpiece by any means, but it’s OK. I do think all of them (except Pursuit to Algiers, which quickly goes off the rails—and even that has its charms) are entertaining. But I prefer it when Holmes and Watson aren’t fighting Nazis, which really doesn’t mesh all that well with the Victorian air the characters still retain even in then-modern times. With all that said, I like the film noir aspects.
|
|
|
Post by ant-mac on Nov 6, 2018 3:54:14 GMT
I must admit that I find this film to be one of their lesser efforts.
In fact, I originally gave it 3/5, but then felt I was being a little harsh.
After all, it was Universal's first effort and the first foray in the film series into the present, so it was an experimental work in a manner of speaking.
Yeah, it’s not a masterpiece by any means, but it’s OK. I do think all of them (except Pursuit to Algiers, which quickly goes off the rails—and even that has its charms) are entertaining. But I prefer it when Holmes and Watson aren’t fighting Nazis, which really doesn’t mesh all that well with the Victorian air the characters still retain even in then-modern times. I like the film noir aspects. Perhaps if they'd focus more on the general menace of the Germans - such as in WWI - rather than specifically on Nazis. Although I expect Nazis make better villains.
However, Holmes did have stories set around the era of WWI, so that might have been a better "atmosphere" to try to capture.
And like you, I enjoy the film noir aspects very much.
|
|