Sherlock Holmes and the Leading Lady

Am a huge fan of Sherlock Holmes and get a lot of enjoyment out of Arthur Conan Doyle's stories. Also love Basil Rathbone's and especially Jeremy Brett's interpretations to death. So would naturally see any Sherlock Holmes adaptation that comes my way, regardless of its reception.

Furthermore, interest in seeing early films based on Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes stories and wanting to see as many adaptations of any Sherlock Holmes stories as possible sparked my interest in seeing 'Sherlock Holmes and the Leading Lady', especially with such an interesting idea for a story and Christopher Lee makes anything worthwhile.

There are better Sherlock Holmes-related films/adaptations certainly than 'Sherlock Holmes and the Leading Lady', the best of the Jeremy Brett adaptations and films of Basil Rathone fit under this category. It's not one of the worst either, it is better than all the Matt Frewer films (particularly 'The Sign of Four') and also much better than the abominable Peter Cook 'The Hound of the Baskervilles'.

'Sherlock Holmes and the Leading Lady' is pretty decent and is the better Christopher Lee/Patrick MacNee Sherlock Holmes adaptation, the other being 'Incident at Victoria Falls'. The always dependable, even legendary, Christopher Lee, is excellent as Holmes, regardless of any reservations about him being too old. Patrick MacNee is both bumbling and loyal, without being too much of a buffoon or an idiot. The chemistry between them really lifts the proceedings, lots of fun and charm in it.

Generally the cast fare well, didn't think luminous Morgan Fairchild fared that badly or out of place. Actually thought that applied much more to the utterly bizarre turn of Engelbert Humperdinck.

The mystery is intriguing, and much easier to follow than 'Incident at Victoria Falls', and there are a few exciting moments and an ending that is at least comprehensible. There are moments of thought-provoking dialogue. It is very nicely filmed with evocative and handsome production design.

However, some of the pace is long-winded with some aimless stretches. Would have liked more deduction.

The music feels and sounds like it belonged somewhere else entirely, it certainly didn't fit here, while the script tends to be stodgy and banal, with quite a number of howlers.

All in all, decent. 6/10 Bethany Cox

In their very late 60s, Christopher Lee and Patrick McNee made a couple made for TV Sherlock Holmes stories. Each was about 3 hours and both were stories not written by Arthur Conan Doyle. Instead, they are supposed to be stories of cases which occurred later in life...presumably after Watson stopped chronicling his adventures.

Of the two, "Sherlock Holmes and the Leading Lady" is actually based in part on one of the Conan Doyle stories. It brings back Irene Adler from "A Scandal in Bohemia" and she is the only woman that ever impressed Holmes...and he referred to her as THE woman in later tales...and with great admiration.

When the story begins, an Austrian inventor is going to sell his remote control detonating device to the British government. But some enemy agents steal the blueprints and soon the creator himself is found dead. Holmes and Watson are called in to try to locate the blueprints and capture the murderers.

Despite Irene Adler leaving Holmes a letter saying she was leaving Europe never to return in the original story, it seems her husband has died and she has returned to the stage to sing opera. She is happy to see Holmes and seems to see the possibility of romance. The asexual Holmes, while happy to see her, has no such notions and sees her as a way to get one step closer to the killer. What's next? See the film.

I think some Conan Doyle purists might enjoy seeing Ms. Adler again, as "The Scandal in Bohemia" is one of his best and most memorable stories....and a great character. Unfortunately, Morgan Fairchild is not a great choice, as it's VERY obvious she is not actually singing but very poorly lip synching. I don't know how much is her blame or the directors...but the first number she sings is pretty bad...with her mouth not exactly following the lyrics and her body not moving as if she is singing. She also is way too young for the part considering it is supposed to occur many years after the first story.

So is the film any good apart from this? It's decent...but like the next Holmes made for TV movie, "Incident at Victoria Falls", it's way overlong and the pacing is at times glacial. Shaving an hour or so off the film might have helped. Still, it think for many it's still well worth seeing...even if no one will apparently ever equal the quality and accuracy of the Jeremy Brett Sherlock Holmes stories made for Grenada TV.

Not really good, but not really terrible either. Starring Christopher Lee as aged Holmes, Patrick MacNee as Watson and Morgan Fairchild as theatre diva Irene Adler, this TV production has respectable but anodyne BBC costume drama look and so-so mystery. Script by Bob Shayne and British crime fiction writer H R F Keating is a bit dull, direction by Peter Sasdy lacks lushness of Twins of Evil (1971). Polluted by some atrocious dialogue, like "witty" (read: juvenile) mockery of gluttons - in Freudian terms, I am not in anal state to enjoy such antics - and enlivened by cameos from famous historical persons, this is a mediocre pastiche.

The British government is about to buy the plans to a revolutionary bomb detonator when its plans are stolen and its Austrian inventor murdered. Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson go to Vienna to track down the plans. They walk into a tangled web of international intrigue with the agents of several governments trying to get hold of the plans.

Not based on a Sir Arthur Conan Doyle work and it shows. Lacks the tension and tightness of an original Holmes story. Plus the writers feel the need to throw in some historical figures - Sigmund Freud, Eliot Ness - as characters just to engage modern audiences. Even then they botch it as the real Eliot Ness was seven years old at the time this film was set, not the 20-something portrayed here.

At three hours long it's also a bit of a grind to get through. Quite a lot of padding, sub-plots and needless detours.

This said, the main plot is reasonably interesting. The Irene Adler sub-plot does add a different dimension to Sherlock Holmes. Moreover, Christopher Lee is great as Holmes, giving him the required level of gravitas and intelligence.

Some readers seem to think Morgan Fairchild was wrong as Irene Adler ( Norton) but I think she was just right. Irene is an American and she is supposed to be a looker and a flamboyant actress. Morgan has those qualities in spades. Despite age differences ( which may have existed in the original story too), I think Lee and Fairchild have a chemistry. The rest of the plot was also not bad. MacNee is a little too goofy as Watson. I prefer the more dignified portrayals of John Mills, David Burke, Edward Hardwicke and even Colin Blakely. MacNee is too much in the Nigel Bruce mold. I wish that more "Golden Years" stories about Holmes had been made. As it is we must content ourselves with this one and "Victoria Falls". The mix of real characters with the fictional was very "Ragtime". Lee was outstanding as Holmes