Sherlock Holmes in New York (1976) (TV)

User Rating:

5.7/10   

Director:

Boris Sagal

Writer:

Alvin Sapinsley (writer)

Release Date:

18 October 1976 (USA)

Genre:

Crime | Mystery

Plot:

Roger Moore dons the deerstalker and pipe to play master sleuth Sherlock Holmes. In this mystery, Holmes...

Plot Keywords:

Sherlock Holmes | Trapdoor | Detective | Character Name In Title

Awards:

1 nomination

Cast

Roger Moore	...	Sherlock Holmes
John Huston	...	Professor Moriarty
Patrick Macnee	...	Doctor Watson
Charlotte Rampling	...	Irene Adler
David Huddleston	...	Inspector Lafferty NYPD
Signe Hasso	...	Fraulein Reichenbach
Gig Young	...	Mortimer McGrew
Leon Ames	...	Daniel Furman
John Abbott	...	Heller
Jackie Coogan	...	Haymarket Hotel Proprietor
Maria Grimm	...	Nicole Romaine
William 'Billy' Benedict	...	Telegraph Office Manager (as William Benedict)
Marjorie Bennett	...	Mrs. Martha Hudson
Paul Sorensen	...	Man in checkered suit
John Steadman	...	Stage Doorman

Runtime:

100 min | Germany:93 min

Country:

USA

Language:

English

Color:

Color

Aspect Ratio:

1.33 : 1

Sound Mix:

Mono (RCA Photophone Sound Recording)

Filming Locations:

New York City, New York, USA

Company:

20th Century Fox Television

Trivia:

John Huston was cast after a high-profile big name British actor passed on the role.

Goofs:

Factual errors: The weight and value of the stolen gold is described using avoirdupois weight at 16 ounces to the pound ($28,000 per brick). Gold is measured in Troy weight at 12 ounces to the pound ($21,000 per brick).

Movie Connections:

References Goldfinger (1964)

Not great but Moore is good and compensates for the many weaknesses - not least a terrible turn from Huston as a toothless Moriarty

Having captured the gang of Professor Moriarty and foiled his plan of assassination, Sherlock Holmes finds himself at a loss. Moriarty has escaped capture and vowed to show up Holmes no end. Actress Irene Adler is an acquaintance of Holmes and has sent him tickets for each of her opening nights for over 9 years - she is opening in New York and Holmes awaits her tickets. When they arrive ripped up, Holmes and Watson set out for New York immediately to find that nothing is obviously wrong. However when Adler doesn't show up for the play, Holmes finds himself drawn into a plot that involves kidnapping and an incredible theft of gold from the International Gold Exchange.

Despite the fact that this is a Roger Moore film I decided to give it a stab on the basis that I quite enjoy the character of Sherlock Holmes. From the very start the weaknesses of the film are as clear as day but the basics of the film are enjoyable enough to make this worth watching. The plot is passable and is delivered with a good sense of pace that makes it enjoyable - however it must be said that the plot is hardly worthy of Moriarty, whom we are told is a master criminal. Holmes solves it all far too easily and it is to the film's detriment, although the number of steps required to get to the end is impressive they are all too simple - it would have been better to have had fewer deductions from Holmes but a more complex plot. As it is it works well enough for the material and is far from the weakest part of the film.

The film's low values are clear from the start - Holmes' absurd sideburns look like they have crawled onto his face without him noticing for example. The lighting, shot-framing and cinematography all make the film feel rather dated (to the 70's rather than the turn of century). These really hurt the film and it never looks like a great deal of money was spent on it. The cast are a mixed bag. It would be easy to dismiss Moore as Holmes and, in fairness, I feared the worst but was reasonably happy with his performance. While he doesn't compare to the best of them, Moore's Holmes is strong in his display as a human rather than a perfect crime fighter. Moore is a little hammy at times (his disguises are absurd) but generally he does quite well. Macnee is given little to do and has lifted his Watson directly from the Nigel Bruce School of Acting - making Watson a bit of a buffoon; hardly original but still quite enjoyable. Of course the worst performance comes from Huston who plays his Moriarty with an Irish brogue at times and not once comes across as a match for Holmes, rather he comes over as a basic thug in charge of a poor gang and I can honestly say I have never seen the character portrayed with less ability than this. Rampling is another famous face but is given nothing to do but be part of a romantic subplot that is out of place and doesn't work. The acting is generally bad but to give him his dues, Moore is not including in my list of bad performances in this movie.

Overall this is not a great movie and doesn't compare to the Rathbone series of Holmes' films (for my money anyway). The basic plot is passable but is too simply solved and includes a redundant romantic subplot. The character of Holmes is more interesting than usual and is delivered quite well by Moore (nobody's first choice for Holmes but still OK). The film is full of weaknesses but is still worth a watch for fans - however I doubt anyone will fail to be shocked by the sheer awfulness of both the character of Moriarty and the performance of John Huston in portraying him.