The BBC Sherlock Holmes Collection ( A Study in Scarlet / The Boscombe Valley Mystery / The Hound of the Baskervilles / The Sign of Four / The [ NON-USA FORMAT, PAL, Reg.2.4 Import - United Kingd

This was a great show. It's too bad that only 5 stories of Peter Cushing's season as the greatest detective survived the BBC purge of many of it's classic tv shows. Still worth it Cushing and Nigel Stock's performance as Watson.

Cushing is fantastic and my only complaint is that more episodes are not availible. The six that are here look a bit dated, as they have that old TV "look" to them but this was the 60's after all and the BBC was one step above PBS level at this point in time from what I've heard so have a care and get over it. Once your jaded, 2010, everything 3D and CGI minds adjust it is fine. The transfer itself is very clear and clean cut.The stories and acting are what matter here and each episode holds your interest and just to see Peter Cushing play as Holmes is worth the price of admission. He takes command and demands your attention in every scene. Nigel Stock is a capable Watson and along with the Wimer series recently released, provides a nice bridge between seasons from '64/65 to '68. From a Sherlock Holmes fan POV, this is a must own and a part of Sherlockian history. Combined with Cushing's '59 Hammer version of Hound and TV's Masks of Death, he deserves to be mentioned along with Brett and Rathbone as the best to ever play the role.

A&E's release of what they call the surviving 5 episodes of the BBC-produced 1960s color Sherlock Holmes starring Peter Cushing is odd for several reasons. The first is that A&E released it on DVD instead of the BBC themselves, through their BBC/2Entertain branded DVD line. Secondly, the package actually contains SIX 50 minute episodes, since The Hound of the Baskervilles is a two-parter. The episodes themselves are characteristic of BBC video/film productions of the time, with the inherent occasional video dropouts and abrupt cutting between video and film shots. Frankly, they look far better than I expected given the BBC's usual treatment of its old programs.Regarding the performances: Peter Cushing was, by all reports, a polite and gentlemanly man--as is his Holmes. If you are looking for the abrupt and occasionally impatient man of action found in the Doyle canon, you will be disappointed. This Holmes is so well-mannered and neat that you cannot imagine him falling victim to the lackadaisical debauchery of a consulting detective between cases. The very idea of this dapper and upright Holmes mixing a 7% solution for his needle is laughable. Cushing's gentlemanly portrayal is always enjoyable, if occasionally silly. One particular scene springs to mind where he is handed a series of objects to examine and politely thanks the giver after receiving each and every one. Nigel Stock's portrayal of Dr. Watson can best be understood if we imagine a line graph where Basil Rathbone's crony Nigel Bruce represents the bumbling end and Jeremy Brett's David Burke/Edward Hardwicke represent the serious end. Stock falls precisely in the middle. His Watson is occasionally bumbling and played for comic effect (in four out of six episodes) and serious and brave (in the two-part Hound of the Baskervilles). As with Cushing's performance, Stock is relentlessly likeable.What else to say? As with many versions of Holmes, these adventures contain enough burning tobacco to make even the viewer sick from secondhand smoke. Perhaps that was why London was so darn foggy back then. But I digress. The episodes have the occasional awkward moments and unusual directorial choices--probably a result of limited budgets. Almost everyone knows the point in Hound of the Baskervilles where a lamp in an upstairs window signals to someone across the darkened moor. This is the only production to my knowledge that does not even show the other person signaling back. The characters just claim he is and look off screen. You could almost imagine a BBC accountant punching an old fashioned adding machine and tut-tutting "No--You can't show a light on the moor. It'll cost an extra 80 quid for the process shot!" Another instance has Holmes and Watson, obviously garbed for the 1890s, trailing a clue along what very much appears to be a 1960s street. Did they really use window treatments like that in the 19th century? But I digress again.The sole extra is an episode of A&E's Biography of Sherlock Holmes minus the Biography credits. I guess A&E couldn't get the rights to their own credits (perhaps they belong to BBC video--okay, maybe not). In any case, the episode is filled with common facts about Holmes, yet remains fun for the sequences where David Burke reprises his Watson character to attend a dinner with the London Sherlock Holmes Society. The head of the society makes a nice speech admitting Holmes is not real and then turns things over to his real but fictional guest Dr. Watson. Do not think about the proceeding too long or your head will hurt.The episodes are largely faithful to the stories and the series is constantly enjoyable viewing. The above caveats and deprecations aside, I give it 4 out of 5 stars. Highly recommended!

Just a note to clear up some points technically speaking for all of you, since there is so much anguish about the series by the viewers.This is from an old 1960s BBC TV series, shot the same way and with the same budget as Dr. Who and everything else done by them, these are NOT 'movies'. This means, they were by necessity shot in the studio, on stage, with TV cameras like an American Soap Opera is done to this day. They were recorded therefore, on one inch video tape and switched live, which is done to save tons of money on editing, and uses really good, professional, stage actors who can learn the entire script in one go, and just do it. When exteriors and locations are required they use a film camera, probably 16 mm, to film those scenes, again, like on Dr. Who and everything else the BBC TV networks need to do. If it were not for this technique you would not have had any of this sort of television in England at all. They could NOT afford to film all there TV series like we have always done here in commercial America. The British taxpayers and the TV set licensing system they use actually pays for the main costs of production. See what I mean? So don't compare these types of shows with full budget feature motion pictures, or even American commercial TV series, which are shot on 35mm film and edited for air. This is theatre in the true sense.I encourage you to get this series because they have added a bonus feature which is VERY expensive to buy on its own direct from A&E Biography, the 1995 documentary on Holmes produced on the death of Jeremy Brett that year. It is really good, and we show it at our annual Holmes Society meeting each January 6th, Holmes' birthday. A&E charges upwards of $30 for this doc (if you can find it); it's about 16 years old now.Cheers,Randel SmithTexas