There's a reason Basil Rathbone is still considered the definitive Sherlock Holmes: I don't think there's been a better casting in the history of cinema. It's like he came straight off the page.
And the films' Moriarty set the stage for every movie supervillain who followed -- he employs a man just to hang out at his house playing sinister music. It is amazing.
The writing, the chemistry, the staging and the mysteries themselves -- they're just perfect. And on top of all that, the first two films were released within six months of each other. 1939 was a hell of a year.
(EDIT TO ADD: It took me a minute to place where I recognized George Zucco from -- he's the model for Hugo Strange. I always knew Strange was a sort of Moriarty to Batman's Holmes, but I didn't realize how direct the physical resemblance was. Must have been a quick turnaround; Adventures of Sherlock Holmes was released on September 1, 1939, and Strange's first appearance was cover dated February 1940, which means it was actually released a couple of months earlier than that.)
Classic Films
Re: Classic Films
Batman seems to have lots of Moriarities.
- Mongrel
- Posts: 21333
- Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 6:28 pm
- Location: There's winners and there's losers // And I'm south of that line
Re: Classic Films
Thad wrote:There's a reason Basil Rathbone is still considered the definitive Sherlock Holmes: I don't think there's been a better casting in the history of cinema.
His series was TV and not a film, but I think Jeremy Brett has a bone to pick with that statement.
Re: Classic Films
Büge wrote:Batman seems to have lots of Moriarities.
Maybe so, but Strange was the first.
Indeed, he was the first of the Rogues -- predating Joker and Catwoman by a few months.
And the reference is pretty direct -- not just his appearance, but that he was (originally) written out in a pretty direct reference to the Reichenbach Falls duel.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests