Hound Of The Baskervilles Movie And Book Comparison Essay

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s, The Hound of the Baskervilles, is a mystery novel about the curse of the Baskervilles. Sherlock Holmes and Watson try to solve the intriguing and complex riddle. The novel explores the theme of not being ruled by fear through the death and terization of characters while another isn’t letting themselves be petrified.

While there are some similarities between the novel and the movie, the movie is more appealing as it captures the reader’s attention and has a greater effect on them than the novel. The film has thrilling action, violence, horrid catastrophes and suspense. The exposition and presentation of the characters’ personalities throughout the film develop the mood which has a paramount effect on the audience making them realize how The Hound of Baskervilles is such an impressive quality

The Hound of Baskerville is a Sherlock Holmes mystery novel, which follows Dr. Holmes around as tries to uncover a murder at the Baskerville hall. This mystery novel puts in the shoes of Dr. Watson, Dr. Holmes witty assistant. While uncovering this mystery you Dr. Watson meets many elaborate characters that all have something to do with the murder. The overarching theme in this novel is the difference between natural and supernatural as well what's true and what is fantasy. Another smaller theme is the issue of classism. Private Peaceful is a historical fiction novel that takes place in World War One Belgium. Seventeen-year-old Private Thomas Peaceful waits anxiously in a barn for the German forces to kill him. While

The Hound of the Baskervilles novel is a “pretty good case to be made that this is Holmes at his finest; in any case, it's a great introduction to the master detective and his faithful chronicler. The plot moves along at a good pace, the quality of the writing is excellent” (Eisenhart). On the other hand, The Hound of the Baskervilles film adaptation is “nonetheless, a respectful, interesting, and worthwhile adaptation” (Troy). Both stories present a well written or acted plot that contains many moving, mysterious characters and events with an excellent introduction as well. They use the attributes of a mystery to create a suspenseful story audiences desire. The Hound of the Baskervilles,

Throne of Blood by Akira Kurosawa tells the story of a Japanese soldier who, after hearing a prophecy told to him by an evil spirit, kills the Japanese king to assume his role. The film has been hailed by many as the greatest rendition of Shakespeare’s Macbeth of all time, surpassing even direct reenactments of the classic in fidelity. Despite the fact that not a single line of dialog is shared between the two works, Akira Kurosawa has managed to capture the essence of the original play in all its glory. However, that is not say that the Throne of Blood is a complete carbon copy of Macbeth. Although the film possesses the same basic storyline, Kurosawa’s rendition of Macbeth has a set of unique qualities that separate it from the original Shakespearean story. The same goes for Roman Polanski’s Macbeth, which, although slightly deviating from the original story, can be considered a direct performance of the play. The argument of which play is better

The Hound of the Baskervilles combines essentially two main embedded narratives into one frame narrative which creates a one story, there is first the frame narrative of the detective and then the embedded narrative of the legend and well as the narrative of Sir Charles death and Sir Henry’s coming. By embedding the narratives into the frame narrative, you get one story of Sherlock Holmes working on a case that has to do with the Hound of the Baskervilles. The sensible and logical detective side of the novel takes root whenever Holmes is present in the narrative. In these sections of the book, logical reasoning overplays the eerie events that go on at Baskerville Hall. For a good part of the story, Holmes is not present, which leads the reader

When I was watching the movie I saw some stuff that was not the same as the book was, therefore I will write the things that are different. The first one that I saw was that in the book Mary never went outside, but in the movie she was playing outside in the sand. The next thing was that Mary’s hair is lite bland in the book, but in the movie, it is lite brown. The next thing I saw was that she did not appear that she was sick in the movie, as in the book it said that she was even sicker. The next thing I saw was that Mary did not see her mom that much as in the movie she saw her mom and dad a decent amount. The next thing that happened was that Mary’s mom had an ivory elephant in the movie, but it did not saw in in the book that she had

It is the private lives of the soldiers, their love, and fears that drives the novel and also the film. This is what grounds the movie and through these personalities traits of each major character in the film, it shows the historical mindset of those who fought during the Civil War. An except for the reviews conclusion, states how well the film was directed by Ronald F. Maxwell;

After this, it seems like everyone gets injured or killed. While the hound chases Sir Henry, it bites his neck a couple times, luckily Holmes managed to kill the hound before it completely killed Sir Henry. David Atwood changed this part more suspenseful, exciting, and scary. After getting Sir Henry back to safety, Holmes and the others find Stapleton and captures him. Watson looks for Mrs. Stapleton while Holmes is questioning Mr. Stapleton. Watson finds Mrs. Stapleton tied in ropes, hanging from the ceiling. The suspense builds, especially when Watson checks for Mrs. Stapleton’s pulse. There was no pulse, Watson thundered back to Stapleton with a gun ready to shoot. Holmes is stopping Watson from shooting and Stapleton takes this uprise as an opportunity to shoot Watson then run away. In the book Watson never got shot, but the movie wanted more excitement. Holmes, while chasing Stapleton, falls into quick”mud” and Stapleton gets ready to shoot him. The suspense builds up one last time in this movie, and then Stapleton gets shot in the head by Watson. All of these death and shooting scenes were added for more excitement. If they just heard Holmes say he fell in a ditch in died, like the book, there would be no

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s work, The Hound of the Baskervilles, provides insight into the values of the late Victorian Period. The people of this prosperous age valued a cultured demeanor and respected the social order. This story was written for the Victorian reader and reflects these views. Doyle created Sherlock Holmes to represent what his audience valued in a man of high status. Throughout the sleuth story, Sherlock Holmes and Watson strive to maintain civil order. A murderer must be stopped from cheating the class system and an escaped convict must pay for his transgressions.

Sir Arthur Conan Doyles The Hound of the Baskervilles is a mysterious Sherlock Holmes story that is sure to surprise you. It doesn’t contain any incredibly scary parts, despite its misleading title, due to the era in which it was created. As with any movie mad in the mid to late 1900’s its made in black and white, and the special effects/camera work isn’t the best. But besides these few minor drawbacks The Hound of the Baskervilles is a great, classic movie that contains an intriguing story, a well rounded cast of characters, and a killer who is sure to surprise you.

Dread, Societal Decadence and the Gothic Attributes that make Doyle’s Detective Novel The Hound of the Baskervilles Effective

The book “The Hound Of The Baskerville” was written in 1901. The novel was published in serial form from 1901 to 1902, in the strand. It continues to enjoy much success today and is considered by some Sherlock Holmes scholars to be Doyle’s best work. It has inspired over twenty film and television reinterpretations, made in places as diverse as Germany, Australia, Canada, the United States, and of course, the United Kingdom. The most recent such reinvention of this story can be seen in the BBC series Sherlock, although this retelling very much differs from the original novel.

Each person is unique in some way. And because of this, one person may like one thing more than someone else does. In an adaptation of the original novel by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle of The Hound of the Baskervilles, producer Steven Canny attempts to captivate a different and perhaps more modern group of viewers. Unlike the novel, the play is intended to appeal to an audience that is more appreciative of humor than suspense through changes in mood, characters, and presentation of clues.

Some of these factors include, alteration of lines, scene arrangement and exposition. The book has very little dramatic factors other than the murder. On the other hand, The Hound of the Baskervilles movie has many dramatic factors added into it. A line that originally belonged to Dr. Mortimer during the exposition was rearranged. The new owner of that line is Stapleton. Stapleton is the creepy, wife abusing, murderer and this quote makes him even creepier. “Would you have an objection of my running of my finger along your parietal fissure? A cast of your skull, sir, until the original available, would be an ornament to any anthropological museum. It is not my intention to be fulsome but I confess that I covet your skull,” (9). Now doesn’t that sound creepy. If this quote was said by Stapleton in the book it would have made Stapleton much more suspicious. The Hound of the Baskervilles movie’s director, David Attwood, was brilliant in his ways of creating drama and suspense in the