Der Hund von Baskerville (1939)

Der Hund von Baskerville: Directed by Sidney Lanfield. With Richard Greene, Basil Rathbone, Wendy Barrie, Nigel Bruce. Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson investigate the legend of a supernatural hound, a beast that may be stalking a young heir on the fog-shrouded moorland that makes up his estate.

“Of the half dozen or so different takes on The Hound of the Baskervilles that Iu0026#39;ve seen, this one is my favorite – just barely edging out the Hammer film from 1959. Why? There are a number of reasons I could cite.u003cbr/u003eu003cbr/u003e1. Acting – The 1939 version of the Hound of the Baskervilles has to have one of the strongest casts ever assembled for a Sherlock Holmes film. Itu0026#39;s a veritable Whou0026#39;s Who of 1930s/40s horror/thriller stars. Basil Rathbone, Lionel Atwill, John Carradine, Wendy Barrie, and Eily Malyon all give outstanding performances. Even E.E. Clive appears in a small but enjoyable role. And Nigel Bruce, whose bumbling Watson could really get on my nerves, gives one of his best performances as Holmesu0026#39; sidekick.u003cbr/u003eu003cbr/u003e2. Atmosphere – If thereu0026#39;s something that filmmakers from the 1930s knew how to do and were especially adept at, its creating atmosphere. From the fog shrouded moors to the dangerous London streets, thereu0026#39;s enough atmosphere in The Hound of the Baskervilles for two or three movies. The cinematography and lighting go along way to helping create this feeling. Itu0026#39;s something that seems lost on many of todayu0026#39;s filmmakers.u003cbr/u003eu003cbr/u003e3. Direction – While nothing outstanding, Sidney Lanfield is nonetheless solid in the directoru0026#39;s chair. One key is the pacing he gives to the film. The movie moves along quite nicely with very few moments that slow things down. Sure, this version of The Hound of the Baskervilles may veer away from the original source material, but itu0026#39;s for good reason. The film would have been too slow and, ultimately, quite dull had it stuck too closely to Sir Arthur Conan Doyleu0026#39;s work. Iu0026#39;ve read the book, but as much as I enjoy it, I realize changes have to be made for the screen.u003cbr/u003eu003cbr/u003eWhile there are a number of other things I could mention in The Hound of the Baskervilles that appeal to me, Iu0026#39;ll stop here before this thing gets out of hand. In the end, Iu0026#39;ve always found this a solid production and a very enjoyable film. Iu0026#39;ve got no problems rating it a 9/10.u003cbr/u003eu003cbr/u003eFinally, one thing that has always seemed odd to me is the appeal of The Hound of the Baskervilles. Donu0026#39;t misunderstand, itu0026#39;s a good story. But Iu0026#39;m not sure I understand why it has been filmed more often than any other Sherlock Holmes story. Why would a plot that has its main character (Holmes in this case) disappear for about half the movie be the most famous and most often filmed story from the characteru0026#39;s casebook? Like I said, itu0026#39;s just always seemed a bit odd to me.”