Blogorium Review: The Seven-Per-Cent Solution

I don't know what to make of the 1976 Sherlock Holmes adventure The Seven-Per-Cent Solution, although I think that many detractors of the 2009 reboot starring Robert Downey, Jr. and Jude Law might want to rethink the "it's awful because Guy Ritchie made Holmes an action star," at least once they've seen this curious mishmash of detective fiction, wry but inconsistent humor, nonsensical action, and odd pacing.

The story, which is non-canonical (meaning that it's not one of Arthur Conan Doyle's Holmes tales), was adapted for the screen by the author's novel, Nicholas Meyer* and directed by Herbert Ross, deals with Sherlock Holmes' increasing addiction to cocaine (hinted at in the Doyle stories but made explicit in Meyer's novel; the title refers to Holmes' preferred mixture - seven-per-cent cocaine, ninety-three-per-cent water). In a fit of paranoia, Holmes (Nicol Williamson) locks himself in his study and informs Dr. Watson (Robert Duvall) that the nefarious Professor Moriarty (Laurence Olivier) is plotting to kill him. The befuddled Moriarty appeals to Watson, confused to why he is the source of threatening letters and being stalked by Holmes. Watson and Mycroft Holmes (Charles Gray) conspire to trick the detective into visiting Vienna, home of famous psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud (Alan Arkin). During treatment, Holmes, Watson, and Freud become embroiled in a kidnapping scheme involving Lola Deveraux (Vanessa Redgrave), a former patient of Freud and mistress of Baron von Leinsdorf (Jeremy Kemp).

The Seven-Per-Cent Solution is meant to be a comedy - at least, IMDB indicates that alongside "adventure" and "crime" - although you wouldn't really know it for long stretches of the film. While it does open promising that "the story is true - only the facts have been made up," the film teeters between wry and serious. I can understand chuckling at the voice-over from Watson; it relays, in a clever fashion, where this adventure fits in with other Holmes adventures**. The voice-over, which I would suspect Meyer lifted directly from his novel, disappears shortly after Holmes and Watson arrive in Vienna, and the humorous elements could easily be taken as serious, compounded by a shift in tone near the end of the film (more on this below). Whether we're supposed to find Lowenstein (Joel Grey)'s horror at a dead nun funny or not is up to you.

After seeing the film in totality, I was surprised how much Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes borrows from The Seven-Per-Cent Solution, particularly the beginning and ending. The erratic, unpredictable-but-nevertheless-brilliant Holmes bounces around London, confounding Watson, hiding in the bushes, disguised, and generally making life difficult for his compatriots. In this film, the blame lies centrally in his cocaine abuse, but the "manic" Holmes of Ritchie's film is manifest in Nicol Williamson's performance. The stoic, slightly annoyed Watson is less apparently embodied in Robert Duvall, but I must admit I was slightly distracted by his accent, which shifted between bad and laughable (the voice-overs are the worst)***.

Late in the film, after Sigmund Freud's role becomes as perfunctory as Jack the Ripper's in Murder By Decree, the trail of clues gives way to the sort of action 2009's Sherlock Holmes is criticized for: there's a car train chase, a gun fight that becomes a sword fight which inexplicably moves from inside a train car to on top of the train, Sigmund Freud providing the inspiration for Liam Neeson in Taken (I only wish I was kidding), and a moment which I must assume was meant to be clever but is instead painfully stupid (it involves axes and a superfluous train car).

This sequence is followed, unfortunately, by a radical shift in tone, brought about by a need to justify Sigmund Freud's presence in the film (his "treatment" earlier in the narrative merely consists of hypnotizing Holmes while the detective detoxes), and a final hypnosis session ham-handedly tries to explain away Holmes' mistrust of women, his addiction, his choice of profession, and his suspicion of Professor Moriarty. To say much more would spoil the end of the film, but it culminates in an abrupt and brutal flashback that robs the film of its lighthearted tone. Then again, the film also attempts to shoehorn in an eleventh-hour romance angle for no reason.

Unfortunately, despite being well-acted (if not well-accented), The Seven-Per-Cent Solution is too disjointed to be effective as a film. Like its 2009 descendant, the film is all over the map tonally: partly comic, somewhat sleuth-centric, sporadically dark, and unnecessarily action-heavy with a dash of religious overtones. Guy Ritchie's take on Holmes at least balances the disparate elements and settles to entertain, but if you're looking for a funny non-canonical Sherlock Holmes film, might I direct you towards Without a Clue, which is funnier and has a better mystery. Like Murder By Decree, The Seven-Per-Cent Solution is a curio, a diversion, the sort of "Sherlock Holmes meets ___" mashup which is periodically in vogue, but not much more.


* Many of you know Meyers better for his involvement in Star Trek's II, IV, and VI or, as most people like to call them, "the good ones."
** At the outset, the film identifies itself as what "really" happened when Holmes "died" in The Final Problem: Watson apparently fabricated Holmes' death while the detective snuck away to combat his addiction.
*** For the record, Alan Arkin's accent is less laughable, although not particularly good.

Hamlet Week: Day One

Greetings, readers! This week the Cap'n is going to explore various permutations of Hamlet over the last seventy years, focusing primarily on five well known film versions of Shakespeare's play. I'm hoping to shed some light on the idea of adaptation, remakes, and artistic repetition by using one source text interpreted in varying ways.

Like the Post-Apocalypto-rama-rama, the reviews are going to take a little bit of a different turn for the tragedy of a Great Dane (but not Scooby Doo). In the interest of getting things rolling, allow me to introduce you to...

Cap'n Howdy's Handy Hamlet Handbook:

Date of Release: 1948

Directed By: Laurence Olivier

Dramatis Personae: Hamlet (Olivier), Claudius (Basil Sydney), Gertrude (Eileen Herlie), Horatio (Norman Woodland), Polonius (Felix Aylmer), Laertes (Terence Morgan), Ophelia (Jean Simmons)

Other Notable Cast Members: Peter Cushing (Star Wars, The Horror of Dracula) - Osric, Anthony Quayle (Lawrence of Arabia, Murder By Decree) - Marcellus, Patrick Troughton (Doctor Who, The Omen) - Player King, John Laurie (Hobson's Choice, The Prisoner of Zenda) - Francisco, Harcourt Williams (Roman Holiday, Around the World in 80 Days) - First Player, Stanley Holloway (Brief Encounter, Ten Little Indians) - Gravedigger, Desmond Llewelyn (Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, "Q" in almost every James Bond film) - Extra (uncredited), Patrick Macnee (The Avengers, The Howling) - Extra (uncredited), Christopher Lee (The Wicker Man, Circus of Fear) - Spear Carrier (uncredited).

Setting: Denmark, roughly the period Shakespeare wrote Hamlet (1599-1601). For the purposes of the film,Castle Elsinore is set on a cliff side (referencing some of the warnings given by Horatio and Marcellus that Hamlet should not follow his father's ghost).

Run time: 153 minutes

What's Missing: The interesting thing to note about various takes on Hamlet is not merely what they keep in, but what they choose to leave out. Omissions can speak volumes about the intended focus of each interpretation. Olivier's take on Hamlet omits Fortinbras almost entirely (save for one mention towards the end, and part of his final speech is given to Horatio), the characters of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern completely (much of their surviving dialogue is shifted to Polonius), one of the gravediggers. Many speeches are condensed, shortened, or removed entirely (most notably Act II, scene 2's "What a piece of work is man," originally delivered to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern). Hamlet's speech after meeting the Players is reduced to "The play's the thing / wherein I'll catch the conscience of the King!"

Removing Fortinbras changes two central components of the story: 1) the juxtaposition of two sons reacting to their fathers' death is removed, usually in favor of streamlining Hamlet's revenge narrative, and 2) it removes the backdrop war that Claudius is dealing with during the main story, robbing him of some depth and reducing him to a more villainous role. Consider that much of what Claudius does regarding Hamlet can also be read as an expedient attempt to shore up Denmark against the invading Fortinbras (indicated periodically in his speeches to Gertrude, Polonius, and Laertes).

Dropping Rosencrantz and Guildenstern takes away opportunities to a) see Hamlet's ability to adapt to changing circumstances (i.e. their arrival and its significance), and b) give better depth to his plan without the single-minded manipulative tone this version of Hamlet possesses instead. It also somewhat changes the decision by Claudius to send Hamlet to England (and have him executed) without his schoolmates.

Other Deviations: The Players' tragedy is delivered entirely in pantomime, with the focus centered entirely on the court's reaction to Claudius. All the reactionary dialogue is removed between the introductory speech and "Give me some light!" Olivier also adds an opening narration, stressing the mental state of Hamlet, including a line not in the play, "This is the tragedy of a man who could not make up his mind." Osric is introduced earlier in the film, delivering letters from Hamlet to Claudius and Gertrude, before Horatio receives notice from the pirates.

What Works: Olivier's version of Hamlet is a a study in deep focus black and white photography and ambitious camera moves. Much of the Player's performance is shot in long, sweeping takes, tracking around and through the crowd with a minimum of cutting, letting the pantomimed performance build with a clearer sense of rhythm. Olivier transitions between scenes with dizzying pans throughout the castle, providing a sense of motion to counterbalance the static, internal soliloquies punctuated throughout the film.

He also uses a recurring motif with the Ghost of Hamlet (who Olivier voiced) of heartbeat audio cues synced to a loss of camera focus that's quite effective. There's something terrifying about the effects work on Hamlet's Ghost that I'd swear involved better camera trickery than existed at the time (the ghost alternately resembles a dessicated puppet or one of the Haunted Mansion's holograms, but used more effectively that the description conveys). When the Ghost reappears in Gertrude's room, Olivier uses a subjective camera view looking at Hamlet (and one trick shot) to convey Gertrude's inability to see the spirit.

Hamlet is most assuredly not crazy in this version of the film, and the removal of certain speeches and plot elements accentuate the calculated manipulation of Ophelia, Gertrude, and Polonius in his plan. It's unclear how much Horatio knows at any point in the film, but Hamlet's plan up until the death of Polonius is ruthless and, at times, cruel (tinged with kindness, but more as an after-thought, like the final "to a nunnery, go").


What Doesn't Work: The editing, particularly early on, is awkward and tends to disrupt the rhythm of speeches. While Olivier is very good on camera, many of the other actors begin the film too formal in their delivery, and the blocking is reminiscent of a stage production (to give you a good idea, it's immediately clear that Claudius is a villain by the way he callously throws a cup at his servant, and his reaction to the Players' performance has no nuance whatsoever; it is merely horror from the poisoning onward).

This is a bit of a nitpick, but Olivier (who was 41 when the film was made) was 11 years older than Eileen Herlie, who plays his mother, Gertrude. At no point does she look old enough to be his mother; often, she looks only slightly older than the 19 year-old Jean Simmons' Ophelia. The decision (by Olivier or Cushing) to play Osric as something of a fop is also slightly out of sync with the rest of the performances.

I'm not quite certain why Olivier moves his "To be, or not to be" until after the confrontation with Ophelia. It's placement immediately after the scene doesn't make much sense, and moves Hamlet away from the other characters in an unnatural way. Olivier makes an early decision to fixate on key images in Elsinore (the bed of Gertrude and Claudius, the image of Christ in prayer, Hamlet's empty chair, and the tower where the Ghost confronts his son), but I cannot say with certainty that I agree that soliloquy needs to be delivered on the tower facing the cliffs below.

Final Thoughts: Despite some massive omissions and some early (and jarring) editing, Laurence Olivier's Hamlet builds up a full head of steam by the midpoint and is often impressive to watch. While it's not surprising to lose Fortinbras (and lamentable to lose Rosencrantz and Guildenstern), Olivier is a calculating, fierce Hamlet, and his active camerawork provides momentum when the formalism of performances threaten to slow the pace. Most certainly worth seeing.