4/10
Amazing that the series continued...but fortunate
20 February 2006
This is certainly among the worst efforts put forth by Universal in their "updated" Sherlock Holmes series. Oddly enough, it was also the first. What amazes me is that, following this debacle, the series continued to include 11 more films. It's quite fortunate that it did, however, since I'd venture to say that all of the subsequent entries were superior to this initial outing.

Here, we see for the first time...Sherlock Holmes, Nazi Basher! It's a strange occupation for "the world's foremost consulting detective." Here, Holmes acts more in the manner of a government agent...a proto-James Bond kind of character...ferreting out enemy spies and fighting WWII on behalf of the British government. Indeed, in this film (and the two entries which immediately followed), one might get the impression that Holmes is on the government payroll.

The film could have been interesting, on its own, as a piece of stand-alone wartime propaganda. But as a Sherlock Holmes film, it's an abject failure. Deduction takes a back seat to espionage in a most unflattering fashion. With as much as Arthur Conan Doyle's detective admonished Watson for dramatizing and romanticizing his cases, instead of focusing on the science behind his reasoning, I wonder what he'd have to say about The Voice of Terror, which all but ignores the principles of deductive reasoning, in favor of wartime intrigue and sappy back-slapping patriotism. Methinks the good detective would not be kind in his choice of invectives.

Purporting inspiration from Arthur Conan Doyle's tale, His Last Bow, the film takes only the name of one character and a brief speech by Holmes from the story in question. The rest is the invention of the film's screenwriter, and for the most part, is decidedly un-Holmesian. Though the disclaimer at the beginning of the film tells us that Holmes is unchanging...and thus, the perfect man to solve the world's modern problems...and that "he remains the master of deductive reasoning," it seems that this Holmes is very much changed, indeed...and that deductive reasoning is scarcely his stock and trade. Surely, he relies as much upon chance as he does upon logical deduction...lucking his way through the picture, as it were. A pity as Conan Doyle's stated reason for creating Holmes was: "It always annoyed me how in the old-fashioned detective story, the detective always seemed to get at his results by some sort of lucky chance or a fluke." Indeed, this film...and to some extent, the two which immediately succeeded it...personified everything that Conan Doyle seemed to dislike in detective stories. As such, it is a perversion of the character to the utmost extent.

This did not go unnoticed among critics and noted "Sherlockians" at the time of the film's release. There was considerable criticism of the film on those grounds...and also because Watson, though always well-played by Nigel Bruce, had been transformed from Conan Doyle's "everyman" into a bumbling fool. This latter condition would, unfortunately, prove permanent throughout the course of the series...but the former was soon remedied. After the dismal critical and box office failure of the third entry, Sherlock Holmes in Washington, the direction of the series was changed. The Nazi agents disappeared, overt wartime references dwindled, and eventually vanished from the series, and Holmes returned to solving baffling cases through the science of deduction.

A great deal of credit must go to Roy William Neill for guiding the series throughout its run. In fact, it's interesting to note that the series took its turn for the better once he was named Associate Producer (on the fourth film)...and also, that this first venture, The Voice of Terror, was the only film in the series which he did not direct.
9 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed