"Sherlock" BBC series.

[Baron Kurtz]

Well, did anyone see it? I know several loungers did, but i'm not sure what they thought of it. For those not in the know, this is a 3-part series that just finished showing on BBC1 in the UK. It's been updated to the 21st century. Adapted in part by Mark Gatiss, of League of Gentlemen fame.

Here's the website.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00t4pgh

Anyway, I thought it was quite good. A sensitive updating of the characters and stories. I am a real hater of the overly camped-up Holmes a la Jeremy Brett, and the overly idiot-ified Watson a la every damn Watson there's ever been …

Well, the most recent series has Watson who's in the correct age range (middle 30s) and isn't a complete dullard/dolt/cretin/"comedy" foil.

I really enjoyed the 3 programs. What did others think?

bk

 

[Puzzicato]

I haven't watched the 3rd part yet, but I loved the first two! I thought they were extremely well done.

I loved the sense of place - gazing out from a City office towards the Gherkin, looking up Baker St to the Tube station etc.

I thought that it was very sensitively updated. There has been so much written about the homoerotic nature of Holmes and Watson's relationship, that it was nice having merest the nod to that, and I also liked the way Watson's PTSD was handled. I kept thinking that if Conan Doyle had known about Freud, he would have handled some of the stories differently, so seeing them done after 100+ years of psychoanalytic understanding was good.

I thought the casting was excellent. Nice to see Martin Freeman being given something interesting to do, and I liked that they acknowledged that a doctor who is also a soldier is probably not a complete chump.

They seem to find it easier to get taxis around London than I usually do though!

 

[Hereward]

I thought it was good and enough people did watch it for a new series to be likely.

 

[Miss Tuppence]

Personally I thought it was cracking. Loved that pace, humour, actors….. Well everything really. I can’t wait to see how Holmes and Watson get out of their bit of bother that occurred at the end. I say bring on the second series!

 

[Mahagonny Bill]

I liked the series quite a bit. I have a casual familiarity with the original stories, and many of the character traits of Holmes and Watson rang true for me.

and because I can't resist ....
SPOILERS! DO NOT READ OF YOU HAVE NOT SEEN EPISODE THREE!
Highlight for content

I can not believe that they ended the third and final episode with a cliffhanger like that. Although it does echo "The Final Problem", to end the series with Holmes and Moriarty in a Mexican standoff with no second series green-light was very very gutsy.

 

[Dav]

I watched all three and throughly enjoyed it, which was a surprise. Although I still think of Basil Rathbone as Holmes because that's who I remember as a child.
I wasn't too keen on the choice of actor for Moriarty, he just seemed to young to me.

 

[Ennie]

Hello,

I don´t know this new series, but for my taste Jeremy Brett is unbeatable. I have all episodes on DVD.
Homes updated for a new century uh - no!
Greetings Ennie

 

[Shaul-Ike Cohen]

Liked it quite a lot, and I hope they'll do more. Some things were just too much, but I expected that when I saw "Mark Gatiss" in the opening titles.

Good thing. Interestingly, the music was more early 1970s than either 1895 or 2010.

I'd rather not take part in the discussion about who's the best Holmes, but in short: I found Rupert Everett excellent, where script, director and actor finally showed that the Holmes stories have a strong aspect of fin-de-siècle decadence, even though the plot was weak. Anyway not Jeremy Brett in the Grenada's Sherlock Hams series, which was otherwise very nice.

(vanishing in the woodwork again)

 

[Deleted member 12480]

I've seen the first two, I don't know much about sherlock holmes but i really did like them, especially the first one. However i thought that the second one showed less of the route of his logic (like the words on screen when he was working something out - like the fingernails in the floorboards) and there was slightly less wit in the second one?

maybe its just me [huh] xxx

 

[dr greg]

o dear

Not shown here yet, but I'm an unashamed traditionalist, I loathed the WW2 stuff with Rathbone, and thought the Jeremy Brett version (on TV here again now) pretty much unbeatable...thought the recent movie was bollocks too.
I can't imagine Holmes' deductions and insights on human behaviour being relevant in our technological society.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

The Baroness and I agree that the Moriarty was absolutely f*ing dreadful. Shaul-Ike, long time no see!

bk

 

[Baron Kurtz]

I can't imagine Holmes' deductions and insights on human behaviour being relevant in our technological society.

Well, surely the continuing popularity of the stories and buying of the books proves this false? Just 'cause you got the internest doesn't mean you can find the truth.

bk

 

[dr greg]

revision

Well, surely the continuing popularity of the stories and buying of the books proves this false? Just 'cause you got the internest doesn't mean you can find the truth.

bk

That is what proves my argument I think, people still love the originals because it is the time and place as much as the characters that fascinates, as with any classic, who'd want to see The Maltese Falcon set on Mars wit Seth Rogan as Sam Spade? Even in 3000 AD there'd be limits to what would be acceptable.....

 

[Harp]

Not shown here yet, but I'm an unashamed traditionalist, I loathed the WW2 stuff with Rathbone, and thought the Jeremy Brett version (on TV here again now) pretty much unbeatable...

Brett did put his stamp on Holmes. R.I.P.

 

[Mahagonny Bill]

I've seen the first two, I don't know much about sherlock holmes but i really did like them, especially the first one. However i thought that the second one showed less of the route of his logic (like the words on screen when he was working something out - like the fingernails in the floorboards) and there was slightly less wit in the second one?

maybe its just me [huh] xxx

I agree that episode two was the weakest of the three. I think that is because each episode was written by a different author, and the co-creators of the series (Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat) wrote one and three. It wasn't a bad episode at all, it just pales in comparison to one and three.

 

[Shaul-Ike Cohen]

The Baroness and I agree that the Moriarty was absolutely f*ing dreadful. Shaul-Ike, long time no see!

bk

We two felt the same. Well, maybe without the asterisk.

(I'm still not really here.)

 

[Baron Kurtz]

people still love the originals because it is the time and place as much as the characters that fascinates, as with any classic

We disagree on this one. In the particular case of sherlock holmes, place is to some extent irrelevant. A good story is just that, wherever it's set.

who'd want to see The Maltese Falcon set on Mars wit Seth Rogan as Sam Spade? Even in 3000 AD there'd be limits to what would be acceptable.....

Or King Lear or Macbeth in 16th/17th century Japan?

bk

 

[dr greg]

storytime

Or King Lear or Macbeth in 16th/17th century Japan?

Or for that matter, a samurai story set in Mexico? Or High Noon on an asteroid with James Bond as the sheriff...
I must maintain my position however, that with Holmes the locale and time is immutable, go for a stroll down Baker St and see how a fictional address had to be created to satisfy the imagination of readers. That's a powerful statement of attachment to the mise-en-scene by generations of fans.

 

[undertaker]

I must agree....

Not shown here yet, but I'm an unashamed traditionalist, I loathed the WW2 stuff with Rathbone, and thought the Jeremy Brett version (on TV here again now) pretty much unbeatable...thought the recent movie was bollocks too.
I can't imagine Holmes' deductions and insights on human behaviour being relevant in our technological society.

...... concerning Brett. I have read the Sherlock Holmes stories completely and own the Granada Series on DVD. I can hear Brett and Hardwicke as I read the stories and even see them in my mind. I too have become somewhat of a purist when it comes to this, so much that I have refused to see the most recent Hollywood production. I absolutely love the foggy London streets and horsedrawn hansomes and cannot get my mind around the idea of anything else. But that's just me [huh].

Regards,
J.S.

 

[Shaul-Ike Cohen]

I have refused to see the most recent Hollywood production.

You didn't miss anything.