Unknown tales part of well-known detective's legacy

In the mid-19th century, a Scottish doctor started writing short stories to whittle away the boring hours he faced thanks to an all but failing medical practice. The doctor's name was Arthur Conan Doyle and the main character in the four novels and more than 60 short stories he would write during his lifetime was named Sherlock Holmes.\nDoyle's creation of the world's most famous consulting detective through his short stories in the London-based Strand Magazine have been performed on both the stage and screen. Almost as soon as silent films came about, a 1915 picture was made featuring one of Doyle's pieces. Most notably, Holmes and his faithful chronicler, Dr. John H. Watson, were played in the early days of radio by Sir John Gielgud and Sir Ralph Richards the last remains of Victorian theater. In the 1940s, Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce played the roles. In a BBC series, Jeremy Brett and Edward Hardwicke played the roles, their collaboration continuing into the mid-1990s.\nBut with the incredibly huge number of films produced now and in the past, many titles go by the wayside and are forgotten. It's a tragedy that even a few of my favorite Holmes titles have also become forgotten cans of celluloid.\nTwo of these are 1978's "Murder by Decree"and 1988's "Without A Clue." One is a clever intertwining of historical fiction, while the other is pure, mad-cap satire of the Holmes and Watson personas.\nYou're all familiar with the whole Jack the Ripper thing, right? You know, crazy guy in black goes around knocking off harlots in London's slums. Well, in "Murder by Decree" Holmes and Watson are mixed in with Jack the Ripper.\nThe film stars Christopher Plummer and James Mason. Mason plays Watson with an excellent amount of seriousness balanced with charm, humor and patriotic fervor to the Empire he served in India.\nMason's acting capability is unique in that he can convey meaning with conservative body movements, but also with excellent control over his melodic, rhythmic voice. His inflection is so near perfection, that no matter what the scene -- complaining about a pea, cheering a future monarch or bashing some scoundrel with his walking stick -- he never has to raise his voice above conversation volume. It is sheer pleasure to watch Mason's portrayal of Dr. Watson. He is perhaps the most believable and honest actor to play Watson in a film version.\nPlummer's portrayal of Holmes is also unique. Doyle's original analytical, almost cold-hearted and very impersonable Holmes was played quite the opposite by Plummer. Plummer played Holmes with the normal attributes of great observation, analytical skills and dogged pursuit of justice. But he also played the role with a sense of humanity that isn't seen often. He plays Holmes with a sense of humor -- he and Watson laugh together about Watson's ability to get himself into trouble. There is one scene where Holmes is greatly disturbed that he can do nothing for a damsel in distress and he shows an intense anger and even sheds tears.\nUntrue to Doyle, yes, but a good way to freshen up the staleness.\nThe most unorthodox and most entertaining tale of Holmesian lore takes place in a 1988 film released by Orion starring Michael Caine and Ben Kingsley. \nScreenwriters Gary Murphy and Larry Strawther have Sherlock as the same dashing, flamboyant character you'd have always imagined. But just because he tends to amaze people, doesn't mean he's the brains of the crime-caper solving mastermind of the pair.\nIn this film version, Watson scripts all of Holmes's solutions and serves as the PR genius that makes Holmes's character as well known as it is. And the reason for this is "elementary, my dear fellow," as Holmes would say. At the time Watson initially created Holmes, he was trying to land a job with a conservative medical college that probably would have frowned on his moonlighting as a gumshoe.\nBut all the bumbling badness Holmes creates finally becomes insufferable, and Watson throws him out and tries to make a go of it himself.\nAnd the antics begin.\nKingsley, who won the 1982 Oscar for Best Actor for playing the title role in "Ghandi," plays a stern and humorless straight man in what is one of his best performances. It's flawless. Kingsley creates for Watson a publicly loyal aide, but a privately bombastic, humorless genius, whose use of the slow-burn technique creates endless numbers of good set-ups for Caine's schtick as Holmes.\nCaine brings his versatility as a dramatic actor and skilled comedian to this role. His timing is exquisite in getting the most out of every laugh. Most of the laughs, by the way, are ones you need to look for. \nWhile Watson is always in the foreground of the shot being a clever detective, Holmes is in the background mumbling about something totally off the wall, stealing a pair of shoes or messing around with Watson's chemistry set to a disastrous end. \nI've watched this film at least eight times since I saw it for the first time in the early 1990s. Each time I watch the film, I still catch something I never saw the last time. I know every line to the film, but it's still just as fresh the eighth time as it was the first time.\nAll in all, if you have any appreciation at all for the classic tale of mystery and criminal connivery, these are definitely two movies worth the time and effort in tracking down and watching.