The Hound of the Baskervilles

1982

Seasons & Episodes

  • 1
6.9| NA| en| More Info
Released: 03 October 1982 Ended
Producted By:
Country: United Kingdom
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Info

When a young heir inherits a noble title that apparently has a deadly curse to it, Sherlock Holmes is hired to investigate. A British television serial based on Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's novel.

Genre

Drama, Sci-Fi

Watch Online

The Hound of the Baskervilles (1982) is now streaming with subscription on Britbox

Director

Production Companies

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime.
Watch Now
The Hound of the Baskervilles Videos and Images

The Hound of the Baskervilles Audience Reviews

ChanFamous I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.
Geraldine The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.
Logan By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.
Jenni Devyn Worth seeing just to witness how winsome it is.
Paul Evans I've had this production tucked away for over a decade and never seen it, until now. As a die hard Tom Baker fan (Doctor Who) I have struggled on occasion to get to grips with him in other roles, but as always he totally came up trumps. My initial thoughts of him being miscast were unfair and wrong, he gave a very strong, down to Earth, honest performance, adding character and presence, not dramatics as I had expected. Terence Rigby made for a very good Watson too, finally not made to be a bumbling buffoon, he was a worthy sidekick to the great detective.I was very impressed by the production values and the closeness of the original text, it didn't seem like they'd tinkered about with the script a great deal. The costumes and set designs look spot on, that quality you always expect from the BBC.My only negative would be the casting of Nicholas Woodeson, and his character, a fine actor, but I found the character lacking in any warmth, unsympathetic almost, I picture Henry Baskerville as handsome and lacking harshness. If our Henry here had been dog food, I'd not have lost a huge amount of sleep.It's a brilliant production, well worth obtaining. 8/10
rob-fisher6 We love Tom Baker, but the quality of the direction and supporting cast makes a mockery of the very concept of dramatic performance. As a lifelong Sherlock Holmes fan, born in the cradle of Dartmoor's misty tors, this production betrays both its fictional and historical roots, and is merely a hollow imitation of its source, which was served far more ably by the incomparable Jeremy Brett. Baker mistakes adult fiction for a serious performance and would have been better served by allowing the eccentricity of the 'doctor' to come to the fore. What this production badly needed was for someone, either in front or behind the camera, to take control and allow the multi-faceted nature of Holmes' character to drive events. A wasted opportunity that contributes nothing to the genre. It only contributed to putting the final nails in Baker's career.Big bag o' thrash.
dittoheadaz This was one of the better adaptations of the original story. There were a few sections of the plot that had to be removed from the script due to time considerations (as usual), but at least I didn't notice any items that were either left unresolved or unexplained (which happens when scripts are hacked or the final product is edited because of time). Tom Baker once again demonstrated his acting ability (from the evil Koura to the good Doctor to the brainy Sherlock Holmes). The only weakness was in a change from the original plot at the end (spoiler coming!): In the original, Stapleton vanished and was presumed to have died in the Grimpen Mire. In this version, Holmes and crew caught up with him (despite his incredible head start) and after a halfhearted attempt to rescue Stapleton, they stood there and watched him sink. (Not even a try to set up a "human bridge" - and they saw where Stapleton had been stepping up to the point where he got caught in the mud.) Other than that, an excellent version! (Although, to be honest, I was half-expecting Holmes to offer Lestrade a jelly baby as he was leaving at the end...)
captnemo Tom Baker did this film just after putting in 7 years as Dr. Who. There are traces of his eccentric turn as The Doctor that show up here. I enjoyed him as Holmes. The story is familiar to me so I could look at other things at leisure. It does look pretty good, considering it's a BBC-type tv production. This is neither the best nor the worst version of this story I've seen. The fact that Baker donned the Holmes outfit in a Dr. Who serial and that he had played Holmes on stage before must have made him very comfortable in the role, for he does so effortlessly. Tom Baker is such a joy to watch doing anything, and the chance to see him play one of my favorite characters gave me special thrill. His Holmes seems to enjoy life more. He dives into the chance to solve this most chilling of murder mysteries. The supporting cast is fine, and special kudos must go out to the set designers. All in all, I would give it a "6" out of "10".