Skip to main content

The best place to hide a needle is not in a haystack, but among a lot of other needles.

The Sign of Four
(1983)

(SPOILERS) The first of two TV movies featuring Ian Richardson as Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's greatest creation, and a very upbeat, personable Sherlock Holmes he makes too, making for an effective contrast with the more burdened Jeremy Brett incarnation of a few years later. The Sign of Four is lightweight but efficient, its biggest stumble being the manner in which it reframes the plot so as to present most of the salient facts upfront and as a consequence impinge on the mystery and sleuth's deductions.

               
A huge contretemps surrounded the production of this and The Hound of the Baskervilles regarding laying claim to the detective's cases. Producer Sy Weintraub, who had previously focussed on Edgar Rice Burroughs, including Ron "Doc Savage" Elly as a TV Tarzan in the '60s, had bought the rights only to discover they were about to expire in England, with Granada poised to make their (often definitive) adaptations. A subsequent out-of-court settlement saw Weintraub walking away with his costs on the truncated project covered and a profit too.


Something of a shame, as while no one is likely to claim a protracted stint in the role would have been anywhere near as essential as Brett's take, Richardson's performance goes a long way to embolden an otherwise competent but unremarkable production. Weintraub is reported to have planned a series of twenty-two two-hour (with ads) adaptations, and besides the two that got made (Richardson said he signed for six), Charles Edward Pogue also penned The Prince/Napoleon of Crime (featuring Moriarty). This later became the "rather awful" (Poe’s wordsHands of a Murderer starring Edward Woodward. The writer's intervening '80s saw an array of prolific projects, meanwhile, including Psycho IIIThe Fly remake (heavily rewritten by Cronenberg) and the underrated D.O.A. remake. 


Whatever Pogue’s virtues elsewhere (and The Hound of the Baskervilles fares much better), his decision to divest The Sign of Four of its investigative flair rather cripples any narrative tension. It doesn't drag exactly, but neither does it grip. Director Desmond Davis (Ray Harryhausen's Clash of the Titans) does a serviceable job, with a nod towards a gothic, Hammer tone at times, but his most notable decision is to perma-flood the exterior (and sometimes interior) locations with authentic period fog.


WatsonWhat a very attractive woman.
HolmesIs she?

David Healy offers an amiable enough Watson (Richardson much preferred working with him to Donald Churchill in Hound; Healy was unavailable due to appearing on stage in Guys and Dolls), although Cherie Lunghi’s Mary Morstan is so far out of his league, it’s ridiculous. This may be the reason that, while Watson is evidently smitten ("That’s a rather liberal dosage. For Miss Morstan’s benefit I presume" notes Holmes of his partner's cologne), there’s nary a hint of reciprocation or anything further transpiring between them. 


Holmes is amused by his friend's behaviour, but while he's clearly unswayed by the opposite sex, it's in a jolly rather than dismissive way ("Watson, the most winning lady I ever knew was hanged for poisoning her three small children for their insurance money"). Also in terms of regulars is Terence Rigby's Inspector Layton… Well, kind of. He was evidently playing Lestrade (the character's name is dubbed), but this was changed when Ronald Lacey was cast as the character in Hound. Layton's very much in the mould of idiots of the Yard.


LaytonOne legged man and a short savage? It’s straight out of some penny novel.

Comparisons with the Brett adaptation four years later, one of the best of that series, then firing on all cylinders, are inevitable. It had the considerable boon of John Thaw guesting as Jonathan Small; not that Joe Melia isn't very good here, but he doesn't bring the air of menace Thaw does. The Brett version also managed to avoid causing offence with its depiction of Tonga, casting Kiran Shah rather than treating us to John Pedrick (an Ewok in Return of the Jedi) in black face. It doesn't help any that this Tonga is also a savage pigmy (probable) cannibal. Richardson is delivered a nice bit of pre-Downey Jr action when he rushes in to save Mary from Tonga's clutches, wrestling with him and all but throwing him out of an upstairs window. Later, he manfully tussles with a knife-wielding Small and emerges victorious.


HolmesI never guess. It is destructive to logic.

There's much to relish in Richardson's portrayal. His brio is infectious, be it lacing his conversation with innuendos when speaking to a boat-owner's wife while disguised or winding up an oblivious Watson when he returns to 221B, the latter scoffing food and demanding he wait until Holmes returns ("If you’re going to force me to stay Watson, you might at least offer me a muffin"). He's generous of nature and spirit, be it towards the Baker Street Irregulars ("You'll make a first-class Scotland Yard Inspector one day" he tells Wiggins) or the bloodhound they enlist to track down the source of creosote ("Good old, Toby" he exclaims enthusiastically). Davis includes a nice visual conceit here, cutting progressively through modes of transport as Holmes and Watson converse; from walking, to riding in a rag-and-bone cart, on bicycles, and in the back of a coal truck.


HolmesOhhh, I'm drawn to these sordid affairs like a magnet.

Also of note is the presence of Radio 4's illustrious Holmes Clive Merrison as Bartholomew Sholto. And that, if Mary Morstan is spared a fate worse than Watson, she is compensated with part of the prize Agra treasure (the Great Mogul) by Holmes. The rest doesn't end up on the bottom of the Thames, since Holmes locates it in Small's peg leg. Will he do the honours and fence the Mogul for her? A solid Sherlock Holmes tale, then, but mostly for Richardson's exuberant take on the role. Be warned however, if tempted by the Blu-ray release; despite a 4K restoration, Second Sight have seen fit to cut the top and bottom of the picture to render it in widescreen. The dolts.


Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Popular posts from this blog

You were this amazing occidental samurai.

Ricochet (1991) (SPOILERS) You have to wonder at Denzel Washington’s agent at this point in the actor’s career. He’d recently won his first Oscar for Glory , yet followed it with less-than-glorious heart-transplant ghost comedy Heart Condition (Bob Hoskins’ racist cop receives Washington’s dead lawyer’s ticker; a recipe for hijinks!) Not long after, he dipped his tentative toe in the action arena with this Joel Silver production; Denzel has made his share of action fare since, of course, most of it serviceable if unremarkable, but none of it comes near to delivering the schlocky excesses of Ricochet , a movie at once ingenious and risible in its plot permutations, performances and production profligacy.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

Well, something’s broke on your daddy’s spaceship.

Apollo 13 (1995) (SPOILERS) The NASA propaganda movie to end all NASA propaganda movies. Their original conception of the perilous Apollo 13 mission deserves due credit in itself; what better way to bolster waning interest in slightly naff perambulations around a TV studio than to manufacture a crisis event, one emphasising the absurd fragility of the alleged non-terrestrial excursions and the indomitable force that is “science” in achieving them? Apollo 13 the lunar mission was tailor made for Apollo 13 the movie version – make believe the make-believe – and who could have been better to lead this fantasy ride than Guantanamo Hanks at his all-American popularity peak?

I can’t be the worst. What about that hotdog one?

Everything Everywhere All at Once (2022) (SPOILERS) It would have been a merciful release, had the title card “ The End ”, flashing on screen a little before the ninety-minute mark, not been a false dawn. True, I would still have been unable to swab the bloody dildoes fight from my mind, but at least Everything Everywhere All at Once would have been short. Indeed, by the actual end I was put in mind of a line spoken by co-star James Wong in one of his most indelible roles: “ Now this really pisses me off to no end ”. Or to put it another way, Everything Everywhere All at Once rubbed me up the wrong which way quite a lot of most of the time.

We’ve got the best ball and chain in the world. Your ass.

Wedlock (1991) (SPOILERS) The futuristic prison movie seemed possessed of a particular cachet around this time, quite possibly sparked by the grisly possibilities of hi-tech disincentives to escape. On that front, HBO TV movie Wedlock more than delivers its FX money shot. Elsewhere, it’s less sure of itself, rather fumbling when it exchanges prison tropes for fugitives-on-the-run ones.

Drank the red. Good for you.

Morbius (2022) (SPOILERS) Generic isn’t necessarily a slur. Not if, by implication, it’s suggestive of the kind of movie made twenty years ago, when the alternative is the kind of super-woke content Disney currently prioritises. Unfortunately, after a reasonable first hour, Morbius descends so resignedly into such unmoderated formula that you’re left with a too-clear image of Sony’s Spider-Verse when it lacks a larger-than-life performer (Tom Hardy, for example) at the centre of any given vehicle.

So, you’re telling me that NASA is going to kill the President of the United States with an earthquake?

Conspiracy Theory (1997) (SPOILERS) Mel Gibson’s official rehabilitation occurred with the announcement of 2016’s Oscar nominations, when Hacksaw Ridge garnered six nods, including Mel as director. Obviously, many refuse to be persuaded that there’s any legitimate atonement for the things someone says. They probably weren’t even convinced by Mel’s appearance in Daddy’s Home 2 , an act of abject obeisance if ever there was one. In other circles, though, Gibbo, or Mad Mel, is venerated as a saviour unsullied by the depraved Hollywood machine, one of the brave few who would not allow them to take his freedom. Or at least, his values. Of course, that’s frequently based on alleged comments he made, ones it’s highly likely he didn’t. But doesn’t that rather appeal to the premise of his 23-year-old star vehicle Conspiracy Theory , in which “ A good conspiracy theory is an unproveable one ”?

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

He’ll regret it to his dying day, if ever he lives that long.

The Quiet Man (1952) (SPOILERS) The John Wayne & John Ford film for those who don’t like John Wayne & John Ford films? The Quiet Man takes its cues from Ford’s earlier How Green Was My Valley in terms of, well less Anglophile and Hibernophile and Cambrophile nostalgia respectively for past times, climes and heritage, as Wayne’s pugilist returns to his family seat and stirs up a hot bed of emotions, not least with Maureen O’Hara’s red-headed hothead. The result is a very likeable movie, for all its inculcated Oirishness and studied eccentricity.

He doesn’t want to lead you. He just wants you to follow.

Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore (2022) (SPOILERS) The general failing of the prequel concept is a fairly self-evident one; it’s spurred by the desire to cash in, rather than to tell a story. This is why so few prequels, in any form, are worth the viewer/reader/listener’s time, in and of themselves. At best, they tend to be something of a well-rehearsed fait accompli. In the movie medium, even when there is material that withstands closer inspection (the Star Wars prequels; The Hobbit , if you like), the execution ends up botched. With Fantastic Beasts , there was never a whiff of such lofty purpose, and each subsequent sequel to the first prequel has succeeded only in drawing attention to its prosaic function: keeping franchise flag flying, even at half-mast. Hence Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore , belatedly arriving after twice the envisaged gap between instalments and course-correcting none of the problems present in The Crimes of Grindelwald .