Jump to content


Photo

Sherlock

Sherlock Holmes Mark Gatiss Steven Moffat

  • Please log in to reply
120 replies to this topic

#1 Overstreet

Overstreet

    Sometimes, there's a man.

  • Member
  • 17,304 posts

Posted 22 February 2010 - 05:04 PM

This article on the renewal of the PBS/BBC contract for Masterpiece Theater has information on a new Sherlock Holmes series, set in present-day London, with Benedict Cumberbatch as Holmes and Martin Freeman as Watson.

Why do I picture Danny DeVito's Penguin whenever I say "Benedict Cumberbatch"?



#2 BethR

BethR

    Getting medieval on media

  • Member
  • 2,859 posts

Posted 22 February 2010 - 09:33 PM

Why do I picture Danny DeVito's Penguin whenever I say "Benedict Cumberbatch"?

Because you didn't watch Amazing Grace with sufficient attention? ;)
If they're going to "modernize" the franchise, they should be making the Holmes/Mary Russell mysteries, but that'll be the day.

#3 Darrel Manson

Darrel Manson

    Detached Existential INFP Dreamer-Minstrel Redux

  • Member
  • 6,683 posts

Posted 23 February 2010 - 10:08 AM

If they're going to "modernize" the franchise, they should be making the Holmes/Mary Russell mysteries, but that'll be the day.

Yes, please.

#4 NBooth

NBooth

    Magpie of Ideas

  • Member
  • 2,897 posts

Posted 25 July 2010 - 11:59 AM

Just a bump to remind all you lucky people with BBCOne that the first episode of Sherlock (titled "A Study in Pink") airs tonight at nine.

Here's the series trailer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSQq_bC5kIw&feature=player_embedded

#5 mrmando

mrmando

    Lassie, the Barbarian Musical Thinker

  • Member
  • 3,636 posts

Posted 26 July 2010 - 03:31 AM


Why do I picture Danny DeVito's Penguin whenever I say "Benedict Cumberbatch"?

Because you didn't watch Amazing Grace with sufficient attention? ;)

Better that than Atonement (ewww).

#6 MattPage

MattPage

    Bible Films Geek.

  • Member
  • 4,194 posts

Posted 26 July 2010 - 05:03 AM

He was more fun than both in "Starter for 10" alongside James McAvoy and Rebecca Hall.

Matt

#7 MattPage

MattPage

    Bible Films Geek.

  • Member
  • 4,194 posts

Posted 26 July 2010 - 05:15 AM

Oh, and The Guardian's spoiler laden review. I plan to catch it on iPlayer. Weird hearing about a British TV programme from Americans.

Matt

#8 gigi

gigi

    ReMember

  • Member
  • 950 posts

Posted 26 July 2010 - 05:31 AM

Saw this last night. S'ok, nowt too special, but certainly fun entertainment for an otherwise dull Sun eve tv schedule. The title to this episode suggests towards the series' most 'radical' modern interpretation. Otherwise the 'interpretation' consists of translating diaries to blackberries, Sherlock having memorised the London traffic one-way system, and Dr Holmes' injuries being a consequence of the Afghan war. So far, Holmes makes for a much more interesting character and Martin Freeman does an ok job of balancing the light heartedness of the show with the suggestions towards a darker side of Holmes.

Have to say, it is nicely filmed though the sets feel a bit clinical. Particularly Baker St, which is a bit of a dissapointment.

#9 mrmando

mrmando

    Lassie, the Barbarian Musical Thinker

  • Member
  • 3,636 posts

Posted 26 July 2010 - 05:44 AM

Dr Holmes' injuries being a consequence of the Afghan war.

You mean Dr Watson?

Oddly enough, A Study in Scarlet reveals that the original Watson had also gone to Afghanistan with the British army. The more things change ...

#10 MattPage

MattPage

    Bible Films Geek.

  • Member
  • 4,194 posts

Posted 26 July 2010 - 10:05 AM

Only got as far as the first half hour, but I thought the most telling point in translation came when Holmes explained to Watson how he had made his deductions about him.

"Brilliant" says Watson (or words to that extent).
"That's not what they usually say" says Holmes.
"What do they usually say" asks Watson.
"Piss off".

I guess it's probably a love it or hate it line, but I'm in the former camp: whereas such rational brilliance was all the rage in Victorian/Edwardian London, all too often today there is a hatred of intelligence. Clever people abused as geeks or smartarses. The people we should really emulate are models and sportstars.

I suppose the enduring popularity of Holmes could be cited against such a point, but then look at how recent outings have dumbed things down.

Speaking of which I'm not sure what I think about the floating text when Holmes is sizing something up. It's a gimmick but so far I can of like it. Suspect it will feel overdone very very quickly (like the zooms through the body that became so tiresome in House).

Matt

#11 NBooth

NBooth

    Magpie of Ideas

  • Member
  • 2,897 posts

Posted 26 July 2010 - 10:39 AM

"Brilliant" says Watson (or words to that extent).
"That's not what they usually say" says Holmes.
"What do they usually say" asks Watson.
"Piss off".


:lol:

#12 MattPage

MattPage

    Bible Films Geek.

  • Member
  • 4,194 posts

Posted 26 July 2010 - 02:50 PM

Just seen the rest of it, and it's a thumbs up from me, except for the fact that the plot was
Spoiler
.

Promising for episode two so long as the solution isn't that the butler did it, or that they did it with mirrors...

Matt

#13 gigi

gigi

    ReMember

  • Member
  • 950 posts

Posted 26 July 2010 - 03:47 PM

Just seen the rest of it, and it's a thumbs up from me, except for the fact that the plot was

Spoiler
.



oooh! now there's another tv show that i was getting into, but then had a plane to catch to a different continent. You'll have to update me on what happened when I next see you. I haven't met anyone else that watched it.

Also, I should have said in my post that I missed the first 20 or so minutes which means that I missed the encounter you described above. Forshame.

Yes, Dr Watson, Dr Watson *writes it out 500 times on lined paper*

#14 MattPage

MattPage

    Bible Films Geek.

  • Member
  • 4,194 posts

Posted 09 August 2010 - 07:26 AM

Disappointed by episodes 2 and 3. It's still watchable, but by inventing new Holmes stories they've really lost the subtlety of the original stories just going for the more exaggerated characteristics. There, Holmes tackles a variety cases, relatively few are murders: here all 3 episodes have been about serial killers. There, Holmes does not always submit to social niceties, but he's always rude here - often deliberately so. Another example is with his, much laboured, lack of knowledge of the sun going round the earth. Doyle's Holmes was never quite that ignorant of popular knowledge.

And so many of the deductions could have alternative explanations. A wedding ring that been taken off = an adulterer? Maybe they just play sport. etc. And does the audience really need to be pandered to quite this much? In episode 2 Holmes has to
Spoiler
- and even then he needs help. Likewise in episode 3 if he really knew, straight away, what happened to the
Spoiler
(who is a ridiculous caricature).

Yes there's good stuff too, and lots of people (who don't know much about Holmes) have enjoyed it, but I was hoping it was going to be so much better.

Matt

PS The opening to part 3 finds Holmes correcting the English of a man trying to speak. Again rude to an extent that Doyle's Holmes never was, but also when he corrects the man's English doesn't he get it wrong the first time?

Man: She's always getting at me saying I weren't a real man
Holmes: Wasn't. Wasn't a real man

Shouldn't this be "I'm not a real man"?

#15 NBooth

NBooth

    Magpie of Ideas

  • Member
  • 2,897 posts

Posted 28 August 2010 - 10:41 AM

Sherlock is returning next autumn. For three more episodes. Story here.

I'm in the U.S. so I shouldn't have any comments until October 24. I've heard good things, though, especially about the ways elements from Study in Scarlet are re-appropriated for "Study in Pink." So color me excited.

Edited by NBooth, 28 August 2010 - 10:43 AM.


#16 NBooth

NBooth

    Magpie of Ideas

  • Member
  • 2,897 posts

Posted 25 October 2010 - 12:29 PM

I think I'm a fan. No, scratch that. I know I'm a fan. "A Study in Pink" just gets so much right; it follows the source novel incredibly closely, even though the end product is nothing like the book--repurposing such essential clues as the wedding ring and the dying message, and (joy of joys!) Watson's pocket-watch so that they make sense in the updated time period. (Sure, there are alternate explanations for all the clues, but Holmes in the stories once deduced that a man was intelligent because he had a big head. It's not like he was really an iron-clad master of logic when you get down to it). Cumberbatch as Holmes is terrific. He's more rude than the Holmes of, say, "A Case of Identity" but that's a post-Irene Adler Holmes, yes? At least, according to my copy of the "Annotated." As far as I can tell, Cumberbatch's portrayal maps perfectly onto the Holmes of A Study in Scarlet and The Sign of Four. And Martin Freeman is an ideal Watson.

The, um, solution is disappointing, though (and from what I hear the final revelation of you-know-who's involvement doesn't get proper payoff). The killer in the novel is interesting because Doyle bothers to give him a sympathetic motive; there's a pass made at that here, but it's really hampered by the fact that the actor in question just isn't terribly charismatic. Still, I'm looking forward to see more Cumberbatch and Freeman. At its worst, this Sherlock wipes the floor with the most recent big-screen effort (which I did like).

BTW, for those of us in the U.S. who missed the airing last night, the episode is up on the Mystery Masterpiece website. The next episode airs November 1.

Edited by NBooth, 25 October 2010 - 12:31 PM.


#17 MattPage

MattPage

    Bible Films Geek.

  • Member
  • 4,194 posts

Posted 27 October 2010 - 02:01 PM

I'd reserve stating your opinion until you've seen parts 2 and 3. I was a fan after part 1...

Matt

#18 BethR

BethR

    Getting medieval on media

  • Member
  • 2,859 posts

Posted 29 October 2010 - 10:01 AM

I'd reserve stating your opinion until you've seen parts 2 and 3. I was a fan after part 1...

Matt

Oh no--does this mean you changed your mind after part 2 and/or 3? Now I'm worried! But I'll be watching, in any case. Definitely promising on the first outing.

#19 MattPage

MattPage

    Bible Films Geek.

  • Member
  • 4,194 posts

Posted 31 October 2010 - 05:38 PM

yeah, though it's not until part 3 that I, um, put all the pieces together. See my comments above.

I'll still watch series 2 on iplayer though - at least at the start.

Matt

#20 J.A.A. Purves

J.A.A. Purves

    Chestertonian, Rabelaisian, Thomist, Christian

  • Member
  • 3,130 posts

Posted 02 November 2010 - 10:19 PM

ok, I'm a fan

Edited to add: What the hell, there are only 3 episodes??? Who makes a TV show with only 3 episodes damn it? I ended Part 1 suddenly looking forward to a whole fantastic season.

Edited by Persiflage, 02 November 2010 - 10:21 PM.






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Sherlock Holmes, Mark Gatiss, Steven Moffat