| 
 enlarge | Director: David Attwood
Actors: Richard Roxburgh, Ian Hart, Richard E. Grant, Matt Day, John Nettles (ii)
Studio: BBC Warner
Category: DVD
List Price: $19.98
Buy New: $8.79
You Save: $11.19 (56%)
New (23) Used (8) from $8.49
Avg. Customer Rating:  63 reviews
Sales Rank: 26499
Format: Anamorphic, Closed-captioned, Color, Dolby, Dvd-video, Ntsc
Languages: English (Original Language), English (Subtitled)
Rating: NR (Not Rated)
Number Of Items: 1
Running Time: 100
Aspect Ratio: 1.85:1
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1
Dimensions (in): 7.5 x 5.4 x 0.6
MPN: DE1731E
ISBN: 0790774208
UPC: 794051173126
EAN: 9780790774206
ASIN: B0000797E7
Theatrical Release Date: January 19, 2003
Release Date: January 21, 2003
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Shipping: Expedited shipping available
Shipping: International shipping available
Condition: Brand new with security seals. Was part of a box set or two pack and is misssing outer shrink wrap. Case has never been opened in stock and ships today!
|
| Customer Reviews:
Good on you BBC March 17, 2007
"Hounds" captured the mood of the period, the strong dominant male attitude of the day, with an accent on more than just the Holmes character.
John Nettles (Midsomer Murders, Inspector Barnaby) as Dr. Mortimer brought depth to the film as an intelligent man of science, caring, intense, troubled and persistent in his quest for answers.
Thanks to all for your production efforts. Worth the remake.
Very stylish, but not really that great December 31, 2006
2 out of 3 found this review helpful
I am a Richard Roxburgh fan. Mostly because he is so darn cool, and even in horrible movies you still kind of like him, darn it. He's like an Aussie Tim Allen, zing.
I did not notice his twangy accent, and believe me I looked, because everybody complained about it. I liked watson very much, mostly because he seemed exactly like the one in Doyle's books. The Watson from the Brett movies seemed a little rugged to me, although I liked how he and Holmes had insightful conversations. Here, Watson mostly throws hissy-fits like an angry spouse or something, but I thought it was funny. When Holmes makes him angry, he quickly tries to defuse him with compliments (much like a guy trying to calm his angry girlfriend) but of course it doesn't work. They really are like a couple, no getting around that. But that's what makes it interesting. Holmes would probably be an infuriating friend to have, I think.
Roxburgh may be a little too good-looking, what with his perfect teeth and all, for Holmes, but he downplays it ok. I liked the small touches, like sniffing a perfume-scented letter from a woman (quickly filing that part of his brain away a milisecond later, like a machine), or laughing in a creepy way like in the books.
The main issue is that this story has been done and done. They don't help matters by making the villain totally transparent. In the seance scene, the camera lingers for one frame in a totally bogus way that gives away everything. There are a couple orginial takes on the material, mostly involving Richard E. Grant, who rules as usual. He was perfectly cast and while I agree it's weird that he's taller than Holmes, he himself would not make a good Holmes in my opinion. But I concede he'd be better then *shudder* Rupert Everett.
Overall, I bought it because I like Roxburgh, but as a piece by itself it's a novelty. I still prefer it to the other film adaptations, because the ending to this version derails from the plot of the book in a ludicrous but interesting way.
 seriously, some people act as though they've read the books and they haven't June 2, 2006
2 out of 6 found this review helpful
This version has the feel of what I thought it should have. Whenever I read holmes stories I think of fog/excitement and oddly enough the darker side of humanity.
I've read almost all the sherlock holmes stories and when people complain about sherlock's drug use in this verion it bothers me because it was mentioned in the various stories that he used morphine and cocaine. Even if it wasn't in "the hound of the baskervilles", it was in doyle's portrayal and therefore accurate to the character.
It's even been mentioned in another film adaption, so it's not like this is the first one to play with the "OMG HOLMES IS A DRUGGIE" thing.
If this scene bothers you pretend it's insulin or something but don't say it's horrible to mention his habit. (and it wasn't really a habit so much as a stress/needing excitement evening out) thing.
So don't give people who haven't read the books the wrong impression.
Obviously there were some liberties, but the drug use WASN'T one of them.
Not as good as it could have been March 28, 2006
3 out of 4 found this review helpful
This movie changed way too many things in the book that it didn't need to to conserve the length of the movie and it wasn't scary enough. Also, it isn't very well filmed because as my siser and my mom and I were watching it, in the corner of the screen we saw a guy wearing blue jeans and a white t-shirt who was obviously part of the crew. One more thing: I kind of expected Holmes to be older.
Not the best Hound, but not the worst December 19, 2005
2 out of 2 found this review helpful
I saw this version when it aired on Masterpiece Theatre, and it had a piece for the filmmakers at the end. The filmmakers said that they were trying to enhance the feeling of horror in the story. In that, they have succeeded. The Grimpen Mire is genuinely creepy, and the pacing and scenery do enhance the feelings of claustrophobia and fear of the unknown. Hart's Watson is not stupid (my first criterion for a good Holmes movie) and is the equal of Hardwicke and Burke. Hart's Stapleton is also truly creepy, and it is very clear (and logical) in how he is able to control his wife. No, that is not part of the stroy, but I don't find it to be an impossible addition/clarification.
That said, while I did not mind moving the timing of the story, one of the final scenes is so far from what is in the story, it ruined all of the good feelings I had held earlier. Perhaps rewatching this move with the knowledge of how the book was changed will enable me to enjoy the film for what it is worth, but I don't know. That change may have enhanced the horror of the stroy, but it also changed the characters in a way that I do not think is true to the spirit of the book.
|
|
|