The Great Sherlock Thread

[Ribs]

Oh, hello, I didn't see you there!

You either clicked on this thread for one of three reasons. You either;
A. Was curious about it's contents and had no interest in the topic.
B. Thought this thread was discussing the Ritchie films
or C. Wished to discuss the masterful BBC and PBS produced 'Sherlock' series, ran by Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat and starring Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman.

If you chose Option C, you are correct! That's right, the fantastic adventures of Sherlock and Dr. Watson shall continue starting New Years Day on BBC1 and each Sunday thereafter for a whopping three further weeks (insert 'Wow! Three Whole Weeks!'s)

If you've yet to experience the pure joy of the first series, it is available on Netflix streaming and on DVD (Amazon: US and UK).

Now then, let's get to the discussion, eh! Why not start with some thoughts on the first episode, Steven Moffat's "A Study in Pink"?

[WarpSpeed]

Oh, this isn't about Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's stories? Never mind, then....

[Ribs]

Originally Posted by WarpSpeed

Oh, this isn't about Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's stories? Never mind, then....

Yes, well. I would rather not have to remind myself of the Ritchie films, and decided to make it a specific thread because the most of the discussion would come from that. I suppose the other adaptations and such would be fine (I would also love to be able to pimp out the Big Finish audio adaptations of the original Conan Doyle stories). So yeah, feel free to do so. I just felt a place to discuss Sherlock (the show) would be nice as it's moderately popular.

[DAISHI]

He's a better detective than Hercule Poirot.

[LuigiHann]

I liked the first season. It left me wanting more. Don't have much more to say about it except that:

Cumberbatch would make an excellent "young Alan Rickman" if they ever need to do a prequel to a movie featuring Alan Rickman. He's also the first guy I'd call if I needed an Alan Rickman soundalike for any sort of spinnoff media voiceover.

Before The Beatles Rock Band came out in 2009, I felt that one of the screenshots really looked like a teaser for a detective show. Now I feel justified in thinking so. See attached.

[Alcoremortis]

I always thought that Benedict Cumberbatch would make an excellent Master, should Doctor Who decide to have the Master regenerate again. Alternatively, he would also make a good Doctor, provided that his Doctor also had a Valeyard to go with him.

But yes, this series rocks, though I don't share the opinion on the recent Holmes movies. Or at least the first one, I haven't seen the second yet.

Also, I would put forth "Without a Clue" as one of my favorite Holmesy stories...though if you're looking for the great detective being a great detective, it's probably not the movie you're looking for. But if you're looking for Holmes being a gambler, drunkard, womanizer, and all around idiot while Watson solves all the cases unrecognized, it's pretty damn hilarious.

[Hayden]

I just watched the first episode over a friend's house tonight (so yes, good timing for the thread to pop up). I found it quite terrific, actually. When she informed me that it was a modern-day adaptation, I was somewhat disappointed, admittedly. Traditionally, modern-day adaptations of anything have failed to impress or excited me. But, in this one, it worked incredibly well, and that was due to the fact that a modern setting just happened to be the right canvas for the story to be painted on, instead of a story or concept being forcefully shoved into a modern context merely for the hell of it. The decision to set the narrative in a current time simply worked, and it wasn't some gimmicky effort to modernize a classic concept, as I half-expected it to be.

Besides, the setting and scenery aren't what mattered most in this, anyway; it was the writing and plot, which were superbly written and cleverly conceived. And soon enough, any biased dislike or disappointment that I once towards the modern setting soon left my mind, as I became compelled by the plot and engaged by the series of events unfolding along the way.

I really can't wait to watch the other episodes now.

[Friar]

Originally Posted by Hayden

I just watched the first episode over a friend's house tonight (so yes, good timing for the thread to pop up). I found it quite terrific, actually. When she informed me that it was a modern-day adaptation, I was somewhat disappointed, admittedly. Traditionally, modern-day adaptations of anything have failed to impress or excited me. But, in this one, it worked incredibly well, and that was due to the fact that a modern setting just happened to be the right canvas for the story to be painted on, instead of a story or concept being forcefully shoved into a modern context merely for the hell of it. The decision to set the narrative in a current time simply worked, and it wasn't some gimmicky effort to modernize a classic concept, as I half-expected it to be.

Besides, the setting and scenery aren't what mattered most in this, anyway; it was the writing and plot, which were superbly written and cleverly conceived. And soon enough, any biased dislike or disappointment that I once towards the modern setting soon left my mind, as I became compelled by the plot and engaged by the series of events unfolding along the way.

I really can't wait to watch the other episodes now.

It's also worth bearing in mind the new series starts (in the UK) in a few days.

The series is fantastic, and remains the only version of sherlock holmes I enjoy (the others I've seen, with the exception of the movie, have been watchable, no more, no less.)

[Ribs]

Rewatched the exemplary A Study in Pink today - just an excellent, excellent piece of Television. Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman just slip into the roles beautifully, perfect fits for the re-thought versions of each of the characters. Lastrade and Mycroft - two characters I always appreciate but I find tend to be underplayed in most Holmes fiction for some reason - are also fantastically handled, with Gatiss' portrayal of Mycroft being a show-stealer from not only the fantastic Martin Freeman, but also managing to feel like an equal to Cumberbatch's Holmes. Genius, brilliant, etc. 10/10, what have you.

My only complaint is 'The Game is on!' - what the bleeding eck was wrong with it being afoot?

Any thoughts on the second episode, Steve Thompson's The Blind Banker?

[DAISHI]

Nobody should be named Benedict Cumberbatch.

[Ribs]

Originally Posted by DAISHI

Nobody should be named Benedict Cumberbatch.

There's this kid they got to appear in Doctor Who this past season legitimately named Ezekiel Wigglesworth. Why some of us aren't this lucky is beyone me.

[Vainamoinen]

I own the blu rays and really wasn't disappointed by this series. The "Study in Pink" starts out strong, although a little predictable (40 minutes in, my friend already knew who the killer is). Holmes and Watson are brilliantly transferred into the 21st century. Holmes is a veritable sociopath and one sometimes wonders where this will eventually lead him. It's a rather different problem than in the books, where drugs came into play whenever the detective was bored. Here, Sherlock only uses nicotine patches when he needs to concentrate - that was never one of Holmes' problems in the book.

Martin Freeman makes a formidable Watson. Conan Doyle's Watson came fresh from Afghanistan - it's sad to see that his modern counterpart can come from the same country as a soldier. Watson, mostly the voice of reason in Doyle's work, starts out in almost the same role. However his crackpot potential becomes very aware in the first movie. He and Holmes form a dangerous couple in the BBC series.

There was some discussion among my friends as to how Holmes' deductions play out. It's been quite some years since I read the books (I was the greatest fan when I was 15), but his conclusions based on almost nothing were always ludicrously far-fetched and the series continues that tradition very nicely.

My point of critique was mainly with the last episode, "the Great Game". I'm not familiar with the bulk of Moffat's work, having only seen some key episodes of Doctor Who, but it seems to me that he sometimes loses his instinct when a story has enough pizzazz or what have you. This third TV movie was completely overdone, started out as a mildly enjoyable case stakkato and ended up as a bad spy movie parody which desperately tried to have the most interesting/eccentric bad guy in the history of moving pictures. Moffat kills his good basic idea and the entire narrative by piling up his finale moment into an insane heap of nonsense that would undoubtedly topple if it wasn't for those equally insane amounts of glue.

[Ribs]

I was avoiding commenting on the Great Game until tomorrow, but I feel the need to point out that it was written by Mark Gatiss, co-creator and actor who plays Mycroft.

And I think it's brilliant. One of the best episodes of television ever. How it all builds to that last scene is just amazing - and the cameo from Peter Davison didn't hurt.

[FitzoliverJ]

I personally thought the third episode was superb; I wasn't entirely interested in the villain of the first, and while the middle story was interesting the writing was obviously weaker.

I've never seen the DVD, though - still waiting for the price to drop to clearance! - but I gather it has the one-hour unaired pilot on it. What's that like/how does it compare to "A Study in Pink"?

[BlankCanvasDJ]

Originally Posted by DAISHI

Nobody should be named Benedict Cumberbatch.

On the contrary, anyone who plays Sherlock Holmes should have a name like Benedict Cumberbatch. It's the best Sherlock actor name since Basil Rathbone.

I do love the new series and I think they did a fantastic job bringing Holmes into the 21st century. I'm really not surprised that it worked so well. Holmes was always meant to be a modern man. Just because he was written in the late 19th century doesn't mean he can only exist there (in fact, many of the earlier Holmes films placed him in the modern era as well). I'm definitely looking forward to season 2, I've already got the blu-ray preordered from amazon UK.

Also, the Guy Ritchie films are really not that bad. They get a lot more right than they get wrong, particularly in the first one. Jeremy Brett remains the definitive Holmes actor though.

[BlankCanvasDJ]

Originally Posted by FitzoliverJ

I've never seen the DVD, though - still waiting for the price to drop to clearance! - but I gather it has the one-hour unaired pilot on it. What's that like/how does it compare to "A Study in Pink"?

It's mostly the same plot, just with tighter editing and less of the stylistic flourishes that they added to the series afterwards. There are a couple bits that I actually liked a little better in the original pilot. For example, I like that Holmes nips the whole gay theory in the bud by saying he's married to his work and finds romance to be a waste of time and brainpower. The setting of the final showdown is also a bit more interesting. But overall, the second version of the pilot is much more polished and much better.

[Ribs]

Originally Posted by BlankCanvasDJ

For example, I like that Holmes nips the whole gay theory in the bud by saying he's married to his work and finds romance to be a waste of time and brainpower.

I just watched Pink yesterday, and that was most certainly there in the broadcast version.

[BlankCanvasDJ]

Originally Posted by Ribs

I just watched Pink yesterday, and that was most certainly there in the broadcast version.

You're right, I'm sorry, I got my versions mixed up. He does go into a bit more of his philosophy on it and any other non-work-related activity ("The brain is what matters. Everything else is transport.")

One thing I do remember that I liked better about the first version of the pilot, though, is that Holmes figured out the occupation of the killer fairly quickly. I liked that because, by the time they got to the restaurant scene, I had figured it out myself. It's not good to watch a Sherlock Holmes story and feel like you know something Holmes doesn't.

[Ribs]

Originally Posted by BlankCanvasDJ

You're right, I'm sorry, I got my versions mixed up. He does go into a bit more of his philosophy on it and any other non-work-related activity ("The brain is what matters. Everything else is transport.")

One thing I do remember that I liked better about the first version of the pilot, though, is that Holmes figured out the occupation of the killer fairly quickly. I liked that because, by the time they got to the restaurant scene, I had figured it out myself. It's not good to watch a Sherlock Holmes story and feel like you know something Holmes doesn't.

Yeah, upon rewatching it it's really rather obvious regarding the killer's ocupation from the first scene. Still very good television, though.

My thoughts on the Blind Banker, though, are decidedly more negative. It just feels out of place; Steve Thompson seems to be an okay writer, but the story suffers for feeling insignificant, which would not be a problem if the series was produced in longer runs. Then again, the same problem occurred in Thompson's rather forgettable episode of Doctor Who this past season, which was much shorter and still struggled to hold viewer's attention. It's an okay story, but I feel it's lacking in mystery which is necessary in a Holmes story (thankfully, the next episode will more then make up for the lack of mystery in this one). 6/10

I have faith in Thompson's episode this series, and find it odd that they've entrusted him with the proper adaptation of the Final Problem - a rather important story that could potentially greatly harm the series if adapted without proper skill.

[FitzoliverJ]

Originally Posted by Ribs

the same problem occurred in Thompson's rather forgettable episode of Doctor Who this past season, which was much shorter and still struggled to hold viewer's attention.

In his defence, it was also badly edited, and probably badly directed as well.