Sherlock Holmes In The Movies: Ranking 70 Feature-Length Films Starring The Iconic Detective [Part Two]

(Months ago, writer Rob Hunter set out on a wild and dangerous case: he would watch and rank as many feature-length Sherlock Holmes movies as possible. This is part two of his investigation. Part one can be read right here.)

Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes may not have been the first fictional detective – that honor belongs to Edgar Allan Poe's C. Auguste Dupin from 1841's "The Murders in the Rue Morgue" – but he's quite possibly the most well-known and ubiquitous in pop culture. He's a fascinating creation on the page and rarely less captivating on the screen despite the varied nature of his incarnations over the years.

If we consider both feature-length film and television movies (those 60 minutes or longer), there are roughly 110 adaptations and original adventures that have been produced since the early 20th century. Seeing them all is impossible as one or two have been lost to the ravages of time, but even in today's age of worldwide internet access seeing the remainder is just as unlikely. Believe me, I tried, but with the time and resources allotted, I've had to call it quits at 70. The missing films consist mostly of non-English adaptations I was unable to find subtitled (or at all) and a handful of TV movies that remained elusive and out of my reach.

As mentioned, the beauty of Holmes on screen is often in the varied forms he takes. They range from the casual to the intense, the anti-social to the fun-loving, and the prick-ish to the unmistakably human, and everyone's bound to have their own favorite performer in the role. Some prefer portrayals in line with Doyle's writings while others are open to performances that a bit more flexible, and someone somewhere is still probably pining for a Nicholas Rowe/Alan Cox reunion.

The Case: A serial killer with a taste for stockings is targeting teenage daughters of aristocrats.Doyle? NoHolmes and Watson? Rupert Everett and Ian HartEverett's Holmes is a bit more relaxed than many, and the script sees him acting more like an intense homicide detective than his usual pure observer as he works to catch the killer. Hart isn't quite as engaging, though, with a Watson who too often feels like a passerby instead of a sidekick. A young Michael Fassbender balances that out with his creepy, big-mouthed portrayal of the prime suspect. Side note and possible spoiler, while one of the more common refrains from the BBC's popular reboot sees Holmes saying "It's never twins" this other BBC production didn't get the memo.

The Case: A teenaged Holmes finds a best friend, the love of his young life, and the truth behind a series of mysterious deaths.Doyle? NoHolmes and Watson? Nicholas Rowe and Alan CoxThis Amblin production is something of a cult favorite, and it has a strong pedigree in producer Steven Spielberg, director Barry Levinson, and writer Chris Columbus, but I'm still going to make the bold claim that it's merely okay. It follows the prequel norm in trying too hard to explain so many elements about Holmes' character, interests, outfit, etc. It's as if his entire personality was defined by this one incident, and rather than be thrilling it's instead far too convenient. Still, performances are good, action beats are mildly exciting, and that stained-glass knight remains a pretty damn cool effect.

The Case: The devious Professor Moriarty is attempting to start a war in Europe, and that's not cool.Doyle? NoHolmes and Watson? Robert Downey Jr. and Jude LawGuy Ritchie's sequel to his own blockbuster reboot brings more action to the screen, and while it can't touch the first film it's an entertaining adventure all the same. The story's less interesting as the focus here is Moriarty's greedy scheme to cause chaos and bolster his bank accounts — yawn — but Ritchie's eye for stylish visuals and the continued charm of Downey Jr. and Law go a long way towards making this worth a watch.

The Case: How could a woman shoot herself in the head,die, and then return to murder her husband?Doyle? No.Holmes and Watson? Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin FreemanSetting an episode in Victorian times — Holmes' original time-frame — could easily have felt like a gimmick, but couching it in a "mind palace" excursion works to transport viewers back in time with minimal questions or concerns. The case and setting lend the show a terrifically gothic atmosphere, and there are a few legitimately creepy visual beats along the way. It's good fun with the weakest element being the end that brings us back into the present.

The Case: A fancy pearl is the target of ruthless thieves, villains, and murderers.Doyle? Doyle! Based on "The Adventure of the Six Napoleons" (1904)Holmes and Watson? Basil Rathbone and Nigel BruceThis same storyline would be used again (and better) two years later in Dressed to Kill, but this take on the story has its charms. Chief among them is a character named The Creeper who goes against the grain of Holmes' typical villains in that rather than being incredibly bright and devious he's instead a monstrous brute. His calling card is a trail of snapped spines, so he makes for an interesting nemesis for the brainy detective.

The Case: With the real greatest detective out of town a minor case falls to his brother Sigerson.Doyle? No"Holmes and Watson?" Gene Wilder and Marty FeldmanRight off the bat, this movie should be far funnier than it is. Written and directed by Wilder, starring Wilder, Feldman, Madeline Kahn, Dom DeLuise, and Leo McKern as Moriarty —  and just a year after Young Frankenstein – this should have been a classic. It's unfortunately not as every gag that lands is followed by two that don't, but it's still a ridiculous and fun affair. Holmes and Watson are here as bookends, but the younger Holmes is the focus. For all its faults, though, 1970s Wilder is a madman in his prime resulting in some beautifully orchestrated chaos.

The Case: A modern update of the story where Doyle infamously "killed" Sherlock Holmes.Doyle? Doyle! Loosely based on "The Adventure of the Final Problem" (1893)Holmes and Watson? Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin FreemanThis series two finale is split so evenly between brilliance and disappointment that it makes its placement in this ranking difficult. The positives are made up mostly of Holmes' scenes with Moriarty as they crackle with energy, wit, and unpredictability. We get plenty of time spent between them, and it's almost always thrilling to watch. But woof to the mechanics of the plot. Trying to ruin Holmes is good, but Moriarty's ploy — Holmes is a fraud who hired actors and made up cases! — could be so easily fact-checked and proven wrong as to be annoying when no one does so. The ending is equally miserable in its ignoble end for Moriarty and the utterly convoluted nature of Holmes' faked demise, but damn, the elements that work well really, really work.

The Case: There's rumor of a hound. On the moors. By the old Baskerville estate.Doyle? Doyle! Based on The Hound of the Baskervilles (1902)Holmes and Watson? Jeremy Brett and Edward HardwickeAs is evidenced by its numerous appearances on this list it's safe to say that this is Doyle's most frequently adapted tale, and its ubiquitous nature has dampened some of its bite. Brett, as you may have heard, is the best Holmes and helps lift the film from a crowded field, but that only goes so far in a story that sends Holmes off screen for far too long. Still, familiarity isn't much of a negative meaning fans of the hound should be fans of this respectful adaptation.

The Case: A curse, a hound, and the moors walk into a bar.Doyle? Doyle! Based on The Hound of the Baskervilles (1901)Holmes and Watson? Basil Rathbone and Nigel BruceThis isn't the first adaptation of what is arguably the best known of Doyle's Holmes tales, but the Rathbone/Bruce pairing began here with positive results. Viewers knew immediately that they were in store for a more humorous and less competent Watson. A family curse and frightening canine attacks draw the duo to the countryside where they pursue the truth behind a recent murder and the promise of another, and it's an effective excursion into the fog-shrouded mystery that as usual with adaptations of this particular story only really suffers from less time with Holmes.

The Case: After years of receiving pearls from an anonymous benefactor a young woman is asked to meet, and she brings Sherlock Holmes along for the ride.Doyle? Doyle! Based on The Sign of the Four (1890)Holmes and Watson? Jeremy Brett and Edward HardwickeThe second of Doyle's four Holmes-centric novels has seen its share of adaptations, and each has made for nothing less than a competent telling of an intriguing tale. This version sticks closer than most to the book, and while that's a positive in theory it also leaves us with a healthy chunk of the tale told in flashback as well as the presence of a pointy-toothed native for better or worse. The story itself is still a strong one, though, and in case you haven't heard, Brett is the best Holmes and always worth watching.

The Case: Sherlock is forced to juggle both a recently acquitted Professor Moriarty and a woman whose life is in immediate danger.Doyle? Doyle! Based on the play Sherlock Holmes (1899) co-written by William GilletteHolmes and Watson? Basil Rathbone and Nigel BruceThe second Rathbone/Bruce feature is based on a play co-written by Doyle, and it features their first face-off with the legendary Moriarty. The film establishes duel plot lines destined to collide, and it manages some engaging set-pieces and sequences along the way. A big draw, though, is the always engaging Ida Lupino as the woman in trouble. It's also worth noting that at 85 minutes it's the longest of the series, and there's not a wasted frame.

The Case: Sherlock has a sister, and she is as brilliant as she is nucking futs.Doyle? Doyle! Loosely based on "The Adventure of the Musgrave Ritual" (1893), "The Adventure of the Three Garridebs" (1924), and "The Adventure of the Gloria Scott" (1893)Holmes and Watson? Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin FreemanThe final episode of the BBC's Sherlock Holmes reboot serves both a fantastic conclusion and a tease leaving viewers wanting more, and as is the case with other eps in the show it walks a fine line between strong style, affecting emotion, and a sloppy embrace of the illogical. The island prison is a great setting, and Holmes' discovery of the truth behind his sister Eurus (Sian Brooke) builds some impressive emotional beats en route to a highly satisfying end.

The Case: Compromising photos threatening to scandalize the Queen lead Holmes into the presence of the first woman to truly catch his interest and who happens to hold the key to the pictures.Doyle? Doyle! Based on "A Scandal in Bohemia" (1891)Holmes and Watson? Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin FreemanThe photos are something of a MacGuffin as the true core of the story is the budding dynamic between Holmes and Irene Adler. She's part genius and part villain, and while their fall into each other's fascination is perhaps a bit quick Cumberbatch and Lara Pulver make for an enticing pair. There are some fantastic back and forths between them as each moves a step ahead of the other, and while it mirrors his relationship with Moriarty in structure it exists with less vitriol and violence.

The Case: A series of hostages wrapped in explosives test Sherlock's deductive abilities with life and death consequences, but the real puzzle comes in his realization that a single man is behind it all.Doyle? Doyle! Very loosely based on "The Adventure of the Bruce-Partington Plans" (1908)Holmes and Watson? Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin FreemanHints of Moriarty's presence in previous episodes finally reveal the man himself here, and it was worth the wait. Andrew Scott's portrayal of the master criminal is as perfect a blend of charisma and evil as you could hope for, and he creates a tremendous counterpoint for Holmes. His appearance here is relatively brief, but he packs a punch in his actions and effect. Seeing Holmes knocked a bit off balance is equally worth the price of admission. It's lessened slightly by ending on a cliffhanger, but anything that brings viewers back for more can't be all bad.

The Case: A rash of serial suicides have hit London with seemingly unrelated people taking their lives in the same way, but Sherlock suspects it's actually murder.Doyle? Doyle! Loosely based on A Study in Scarlet (1887)Holmes and Watson? Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin FreemanThis first entry in the BBC's much-ballyhooed reboot does a terrific job introducing the characters to each other, to viewers, and to the 21st century. The story is good with a final face-off between Holmes and the cabbie killer that truly highlights the detective's personality and ego, and the production style is energetic and lively. For viewers who like their Holmes playing host to all manner of diagnosable personality disorders the character brought to life by Cumberbatch is heaven-sent. The real draw, though, is the fantastic chemistry between the leads — both Cumberbatch/Freeman and Holmes/Watson. Their banter is smart, fast, entertaining, and increasingly emotionally charged offering a usually strong balance to the methodical nature of the cases and writing.

The Case: With John Watson still recovering from his wife's death Sherlock publicly accuses a well-known personality of being a serial killer.Doyle? Doyle! Loosely based on "The Adventure of the Dying Detective" (1913)Holmes and Watson? Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin FreemanThings are a bit wobbly early on for various reasons including the show once again having one of its leads see and talk with a dead person — Holmes did it previously with Moriarty — but the structure of the story forces things back in the right direction. Toby Jones is terrific as the accused killer, and the H.H. Holmes allusions are on point. It's good stuff made great, though, by the sheer power of emotion as these two friends, Holmes and Watson, find each other once more. The wrap-up ties various threads together beautifully with the show's best new villain arrival since Moriarty's in "The Great Game," and every element is moving in high gear here from the characters to the deductions to the emotional appeal.

The Case: A woman engaged to be married is blackmailed by a devious and greedy villain.Doyle? Doyle! Based on "The Adventure of Charles Augustus Milverton" (1904)Holmes and Watson? Jeremy Brett and Edward HardwickeI've said it before and I'll say it again if we ever meet in person, but Jeremy Brett is the best and most consistently exciting Sherlock Holmes. He played the role 41 times over a decade, and this entry is among his most enthralling in a rare story where Holmes' mental efforts stumble and force him into a corner relying solely on physical, morally suspect action. The villain is cruel, the threat is real, and seeing Holmes in distress raises the drama immensely. The episode ends with a defeated Holmes telling Watson not to record this adventure, saying "There are certain aspects of which I am not proud. Please, bury this case deep in your file." It's powerful stuff.