Rathbone and Bruce

Ah, Christmas and New Year, that time when you really look for things to do with the family. This time I broke out the dvds of the Rathbone and Bruce Sherlock Holmes movies, and we all enjoyed them to our limits. They are a marvelous sequence of distinctive and bizarre cinematic gems, each weirdly faceted in its own little way. There have also been lots of games. We're big gamers, the parents and I. Your family is there to be treasured after all, and finding the best way to do that is half the battle. I may never win 'Ticket to Ride Europe'.

Now on to Rathbone and Bruce, the first mainstream and prolonged acting team to play Holmes and Watson. I had no idea until the advent of the new 'Sherlock' series, and the dvd commentaries therein, that this pairing was so influential and that their films originated the idea of an updated 'contemporary' Holmesian adaptation. They were the films to break that barrier, not 'Sherlock' and definitely not 'Elementary'. They started off with two traditional Sherlock movies, but after that Universal flung their hats over the fortress walls of (admittedly expensive) convention, climbed into the airy (and cheap) skies above and did something unprecedented: They took Holmes and Watson to the 1940s and pushed out twelve 'B' movies in five years, restoring them to the niche they originally prospered in: The pulp magazines. Of course the film equivalent of the Strand magazine would be second rate movies; it makes perfect sense. And they were great 'B' movies, for limitation breeds creativity. Those twelve productions were full of fascinating angles and photography, noir overtones, and bizarre new plots.  Moriarty got to die three times, and femme fatales drifted around in shadows, attempting to outwit the Great Detective. Or seduce him.

If there were shortcomings in these bizarre little gems, it was that the intelligence of Holmes was built up not so much by great deductions and demonstrations of genius but more by the sheer dumbness of his friends and partners. Nigel Bruce adored to play Watson as a total ignoramus, and he was funny and wonderful, but he did undermine the character of Watson for decades, and the comic ineptitude of Lestrade was often overplayed to the point of possible mental impairment. Had Lestrade been clubbed to the head a few too many times by 1942 perhaps? Still, Basil Rathbone's Holmes would often save the day by planning for their incompetence, often using Watson as little more than a pawn. Rathbone as Holmes is a tough casting choice to judge. He was certainly detached, seemingly intelligent, and gentleman enough for the role and pulls it off brilliantly on many occasions, but you don't always get a specifically Sherlock experience, which is mainly down to the material. When he got something genuinely Sherlock-like to do, there would be no doubts.

Oh, Rathbone and Bruce, you pioneered the modern portrayals of Holmes and Watson for all who followed you, and although you are the last of the screen combinations I have encountered so far you do not disappoint. For many you were the first to do it right and on multiple occasions. While no-one will probably ever topple Merrison and Williams for me personally, you were without doubt quintessential.

O.