Baker Street Irregulars discussion

Are there any good Sherlock Holmes podcasts. Right now, I listen to the two guys who do a short one called "Trifles", usually under 20 minutes, and they also do a longer one "I Hear Of Sherlock Everywhere." I tried the one done by Baker Street Babes, but it wasn't for me, and also the sound quality was not good. There is another one that's supposed to be devoted just to Jeremy Brett's portrayal of Holmes, don't know what it's called.

The Jeremy Brett Sherlock Holmes podcast is extraordinary!

http://sherlockpodcast.com/

Not a Sherlock-specific podcast, but Adapt or Perish did two mammoth episodes on Sherlock Holmes, one on the character and the other on Hound of the Baskervilles.

https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/adap...

Both podcasts are available on most of the major platforms.

Mary wrote: "The Jeremy Brett Sherlock Holmes podcast is extraordinary!

http://sherlockpodcast.com/

Not a Sherlock-specific podcast, but Adapt or Perish did two mammoth episodes on Sherlock Holmes, one on the..."

Thanks - I loved Brett's portrayal. I don't think there was ever a better Holmes.

Barbara wrote: "Mary wrote: "The Jeremy Brett Sherlock Holmes podcast is extraordinary!

http://sherlockpodcast.com/

Not a Sherlock-specific podcast, but Adapt or Perish did two mammoth episodes on Sherlock Holme..."

I've given it a great deal of thought, and Brett's Holmes may be my favorite portrayal of any character on screen, certainly the one that's meant the most to me and changed my life the most.

I will say, out of curiosity, I did revisit Peter Cushing's Holmes and it was excellent, although the scripts of his TV show weren't nearly as good as the Granada.

Mary wrote: "Barbara wrote: "Mary wrote: "The Jeremy Brett Sherlock Holmes podcast is extraordinary!

http://sherlockpodcast.com/

Not a Sherlock-specific podcast, but Adapt or Perish did two mammoth episodes o..."

It's interesting to watch episodes of the same adventure done by both Cushing and Brett. I've only seen The Blue Carbuncle and The Copper Beeches and then the Hound of the Baskervilles. The Brett versions of the short stories were much better done. The Brett version of the Hound stuck closer to the story, but I don't know that I've ever seen a version I really liked.

Barbara wrote: "Mary wrote: "Barbara wrote: "Mary wrote: "The Jeremy Brett Sherlock Holmes podcast is extraordinary!

http://sherlockpodcast.com/

Not a Sherlock-specific podcast, but Adapt or Perish did two mammo..."

I did like the first part of the Brett adaptation--I thought Dr. Mortimer was quite strong--and after that, the faithfulness, as you say, is appreciated. And Brett is always wonderful. The Hammer Hound, well, it's Hammer-style rather than Doyle, but still great fun, and Cushing and Lee are terrific. I recently rewatched the Rathbone Hound, and was quite disappointed. I hadn't seen it since childhood, and it wasn't nearly as good as I remembered it.

But I agree, there isn't a definitive Hound, unlike how I feel about the Brett short story adaptations of Seasons 1 and 2. Unlike the short stories, which are heavily dependent upon dialogue, the Hound is heavily dependent upon atmospherics. Most versions haven't really had the budget to do that, although pacing is also a problem so the viewer is actually frightened about what will pop out of the bushes.

Despite the changes - in some cases big ones - I thought the best versions of the Hound were the 1929 German version, the Cushing Hammer version (not the BBC one he did ten years later), and the Richard Roxburgh version. The main reasons are, they were bigger, better productions, and the Watsons were better, and more physically and/or age appropriate than Edward Hardwicke and Nigel Bruce. I’m really not a fan of either of them, although Brett and Rathbone were ok as Sherlock, Nigel Bruce for the obvious reasons, but Hardwicke was also too old and physically wrong for Watson in all the Brett ones he was in. They should have went with an actor in his 30’s or 40’s when they recast Watson

I feel Edward Hardwicke as Watson was especially detrimental to the adaptations of The Sign of Four (where he’s supposed to marry Mary Morstan in the novel), and the Hound where he has the biggest role of all the stories, pretty much, and should be younger, thinner, and a bit more energetic.

The Watson in the 1929 version was a bit more comedic and not as bright, although the approach and way he played it was much better than other “dumb” Watsons. When he realized he was wrong, it was more like, “oh yeah! Of course!” And smiles and shakes his head vs Nigel Bruce and others who say “what did I do?” With the frown on their faces.

I do agree the Brett and Cushing BBC versions were closer to the novel, but I thought the masterpiece theatre approach wrecked both of them and made them more boring, where it should feel more like a cinematic Victorian set movie, and the Brett version was the worst of all the adaptations he starred in. Both Watsons were very weak. I thought Nigel Stock was detrimental to the Cushing bbc series, although I thought the first season with Douglas Wilmer was much better. Really, for both series, the first season was the only decent one. The Brett series went downhill immediately after the Adventures. There’s stories regarding both series about why the declined. For the Brett series, a lot of it had to do with his health. For the BBC, it had to do with budget.

Bruce wrote: "I do agree the Brett and Cushing BBC versions were closer to the novel, but I thought the masterpiece theatre approach wrecked both of them and made them more boring, where it should feel more like..."

I loved Edward Hardwicke, although David Burke is, by far, my favorite Watson, and I do agree that Brett and Burke had (dare I say) a whiff of the sexual chemistry that I've never seen before or since that is certainly in the tales.

I still like The Return series, but the last Bretts are very painful to watch, because of the decline of his mental and physical health.

I thought Cushing was excellent, but the scripts and the supporting cast he had were never as good, certainly not his Watsons, and I've always believed that it's the Holmes-Watson relationship, not just Holmes that is the heart of the tales. If Cushing had better Watsons, I think he could have been a kinder, more gentlemanly rival to Brett's. Brett is always head and hands above everyone else for me, although I agree the Hound was pretty much paint by (fluorescent) numbers.

His first and last Watsons (Andre Morell in the 1959 Hound and John Mills in Masks of Death) were actually far more accurate than either David Burke or Edward Hardwicke. Edward Hardwicke was basically a smarter version of Nigel Bruce. Really, neither Cushing’s, Brett’s, or Rathbone’s Watsons, nor any of the older and fat Watsons were close to the books though, and if you think they are, you clearly aren’t familiar with the actual written stories by Doyle. In the earlier stories he was young, thin, and relatively handsome, and is a ladies man. In a Study in Scarlet, Stamford remarks that Watson is “thin as a lathe and brown as a nut” after returning from Afghanistan.

Nigel Stock in the Cushing BBC series, David Healy in the Sign of Four with Ian Richardson, Hardwicke in the Granada series, and Kenneth Welsh in the Matt Frewer films were so wrong for Watson that they couldn’t do the Sign of Four properly and the Cushing series also did A Study in a Scarlet, which was atrocious.

Only Holmes is the bachelor in the stories. Watson goes back and forth. He’s not supposed to be a fatherly figure like he’s portrayed numerous times.

Yes Brett was good. Yes Basil was good. Yes Cushing was a good Sherlock, but their fan bases are such fanatics, they can’t even acknowledge the shortcomings of the adaptations they were in.

Bruce wrote: "Nigel Stock in the Cushing BBC series, David Healy in the Sign of Four with Ian Richardson, Hardwicke in the Granada series, and Kenneth Welsh in the Matt Frewer films were so wrong for Watson that..."

Yeah Holmes remains a bachelor, but Watson makes a comment in one of the stories about having experience of women over four continents. I get zero sexual chemistry in the stories or in any of the screen pairings I've seen.
As for Watsons, David Burke is my favorite - I think he looked like my idea of Watson, was the right age, and also deferred to Holmes without being a pushover - very much stayed his own man.

Burke was a bit old. You DO realize Watson also got married in the novel The Sign of Four? It was also mentioned he was married again, several years after Mary died. You’re overlooking that, I think.

I think while Brett was ok, the whole series was flawed and masterpiece theatre-style boring.

Barbara wrote: "Bruce wrote: "Nigel Stock in the Cushing BBC series, David Healy in the Sign of Four with Ian Richardson, Hardwicke in the Granada series, and Kenneth Welsh in the Matt Frewer films were so wrong f..."

Yes, Watson's greatest love affair is clearly with Holmes, and I always think his comments about experience with women sound a bit like "methinks the doctor doth protest too much." The insta-romance with Mary is certainly the weakest aspect of the novel. I really love the fact that the Granada series deleted it, because the narrative contortions to get Watson back at Baker Street when he was "married" were always a bit much.

Edward Hardwicke and adaptation of Sign of Four were two of the main things that wrecked the series. He’s not an old fatherly or grandpa figure in the books. You’re completely ignoring who he is in the books. The stories were written by Doyle. The Brett series doesn’t define what Holmes and Watson are.

This group seems more like a Brett fan club than a Sherlock group. Every conversation on here seems to devolve into a love fest on the Brett series.

Bruce wrote: "Edward Hardwicke and adaptation of Sign of Four were two of the main things that wrecked the series. He’s not an old fatherly or grandpa figure in the books. You’re completely ignoring who he is in..."

There's absolutely no need to be rude. All of us here love Sherlock Holmes and have come her to discuss the book as passionate fans. We can have friendly disagreements about what adaptations worked or didn't work for us without being cruel.

Well the whole thing started out as my search for good Holmes podcasts. The one I mentioned at the beginning - the longer podcast - had a conversation a couple weeks ago with the author of Bending the Willow which was a book about the making of the Jeremy Brett series. It was aired around the 25th anniversary of Brett's death. The author - David Stewart Davies - also wrote several Holmes novels on his own and said one of them was considered for adaptation for the series, but it took place in Egypt and that presented problems for the production. Here is a link to that podcast https://www.ihearofsherlock.com/2020/...

thank you for that podcast!

yes i forgot who put it there but it was very good!

it was mary!

it was mary!

it was mary!

The Deductionist, Ben Cardall's podcast is back. Well worth checking out his youtube editions too.

I found another. The podcast is called "Rippercast" because a lot of the shows are devoted to discussing Jack the Ripper, but there are several that are subtitled "From Adler to Amberley" that discuss the Sherlock Holmes stories.

I came upon one recently, called "However Improbable" - a sort of online book club that discusses a different story and then goes into the historical background, adaptations and so forth. This week it's "The Dying Detective."
https://podcasts.apple.com/om/podcast...

interesting podcasts