It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Oh, BTW, something good and something bad happened to Amanda Abbington (Mary Morstan-Watson) the other day at the Emmies :
radiotimes.com/news/2016-09-19/sherlocks-amanda-abbington-had-her-purse-stolen-as-she-collected-her-emmy
Now, that was a nasty thing to do !
I hate the Holmes character in this. He's nothing like the character in the books, whereas Jeremy Brett managed to remain faithful while embellishing it with his sometimes unusual but nearly always superbly judged line readings and mannerisms. The greatest compliment I can pay is that he improved upon the character in the books.
Holmes was not the selfish, nasty, character he is in this one. Holmes of the books had a brilliant insight into human nature and their feelings. He was a gentleman. Yes he could be brusque, did not brook foolishness, but at the end of the day cared about his client's welfare (particularly women) deeply.
This one can't understand how people feel, doesn't care. Has no respect for Watson. Nothing like the character in the books.
And the plots..... well they are awful. People rave about Mark Gatiss and suggest him for Bond....
The show is so smug about it's own apparent cleverness and success. They incorporate fan fic in their episodes, and laugh at the shows' fans who actually want a proper answer to how Sherlock survived, instead of the garbage non answer they provided. If that was the real solution, it' still garbage.
The setting is the modern day, so of course Irene Adler now has to be a 'dominatrix', and Watson's wife has to be assassin. Laughably clichéd exercise in feminist box ticking. There was even an episode where the solution was a dream about a feminist revenge society. I mean, bloody hell!
I still love the show and couldn´t care less wether it´s faithful or not. Nobody said it is or has to be. It uses the source material to great benefit.
If I want faithful, I read Doyle´s books. Who by the way had a much more ignorant solution for Holmes´ survival.
If I watch a show, I want it to make sense in its own framework, and there´s hardly any tv show on the whole planet that does that better.
@Comte_de_Bleuchamp, did you care to watch the show past the first episode's twenty minute start? It's like we've seen a different program.
I would suggest going back to the source for a little light reading if you think Benedict's Holmes isn't up to snuff with the original literary incarnation. Holmes is a complex character, and in the books was a gentleman in some instances and edgy and quite quick to outburst the next, as in the show. He could be kind and invested in a client's plight, sure, but he also often lashed out at Watson cruelly and spun into tirades about how he fails him as a biographer with his romanticization of their cases.
The BBC Sherlock has all the original's genius, Bohemian-nature, dark humor, sarcasm/biting wit, loyalty and love for Watson (developed over time, as in the text), and scores of other traits, in addition to the darkness of his drug use and possible asexuality, while also playing with the idea of him being an Asperger's sufferer. None of this is a far cry from what we can learn from Doyle's original text.
Obviously the Granada series was more faithful, it was developed as a period piece program that adapted the stories meticulously to the very lines of dialogue spoken. BBC's Sherlock is updating to a modern climate, changing details where they don't correlate from the originals, but largely keeping the same feeling and "voices" of the characters alive. There's many instances in fact where the show has improved on Doyle's own work, who wasn't one for continuity or using his great characters to full effect.
I don´t know what you mean by your second sentence, since despite all his nastiness and sociopathy Cumberbatch´s Sherlock is in effect at times more kind, human and civil toward his friends than other people. Or at the very least develops such traits throughout the series.
As for old-fashioned, in a world full of tv series´you can hardly deduct sufficiently fashionable traits from one single character.
He absolutely has some nasty moments, but as I said, he's undeniably Sherlock Holmes.
So much of that nastiness is rather manufactured on his part, however, and I like that the show has peeled away some of those features of him over time as John shows him the proper way to act, reigniting his sense of caring. It's still quite clear, however, how he feels about John, Mrs. Hudson, Lestrade, Molly and all the rest of the people in his small circle that earn his respect.
Like the literary Holmes, Watson's intervention has made him a much greater person, less reclusive, more open-hearted and understanding.
I must say, Comte, that I find it amusing you are describing the attributes of kindness and humanity as old-fashioned in relation to a British character that thrived in a time of disgusting imperialism. No time period owns specific traits, and certainly not that age of savage expansion far removed from anything resembling kindness or a respect for humanity.
Sherlock will return in The Six Thatchers on January 1, 2017.
I am so looking forward to seeing Sherlock back on our Tv screens on New Years Day. :-bd
On that subject, I've heard PBS censors things out of the episodes. Is this true?
I avoid PBS all together and watch each episode the moment they release on the BBC iplayer with an app on my laptop that makes the site think I'm watching from the UK so that I get all the episodes with no funny business.
And listen to Cumberbatch: “It might be the end of an era, It feels like the end of an era, to be honest. [Season 4] goes to a place where it will be pretty hard to follow on immediately.”
http://www.ew.com/article/2016/12/09/sherlock-season-4-theaters
Is this the end of Sherlock? :(
Try to find as many references as possible. You have to admit it's hilarious, no ?
radiotimes.com/news/2016-12-12/john-and-mary-watson-reveal-name-of-their-baby-in-sherlock-birth-announcement
On the other hand, I just noticed "The Hollow Crown: The Wars of the Roses" on PBS, with Cumberbatch and many others. Shakespeare--now there's good writing and character studies! (Executive Producer is Sam Mendes, and Judi Dench co-stars.)
I think the show has captured their dynamic perfectly, and the chemistry between Benedict and Martin is still the show's greatest asset. I agree that last season was a far cry from the best of the program, with an over-reliance on things that took the show away from an earnest narrative with Holmes solving cases (which there was a distinct lack of in the latest set of episodes). Hopefully the next series, coming in just a couple weeks is a return to the first two series which had great characters and cases with Holmes and Watson facing some seriously monumental threats.
I don't expect the show to ever reach the heights of Scandal in Belgravia or The Reichenbach Fall (the "peak" episodes), but it can still aim to rise above series 3.
What Holmes and Watson have is just really beautiful. I could get emotional every time I read the paragraph that Watson writes in memoriam to Holmes in The Final Problem, just as I could every time I read about the doctor describing what connection his partner and Irene Adler had as the detective admires her photograph. There's never been a character created as fascinating as Holmes to me, the man who thinks he's a robot, but who over time realizes the value of love and friendship above all things.
One thing I will say is that you will find that minor characters who now appear to be hugely popular in the modern age (Irene, Mycroft, Moriarty, Lestrade) aren't a big feature in the stories to the extent you'd expect. Irene appears once with slight mentions here and there, Moriarty was invented only to "kill" Holmes with little significance outside his story and Lestrade is an infrequent part of the action, with other inspectors of the Yard appearing where he doesn't.
But like I said, the stories are a real treat. The fact that Doyle isn't respected as a serious literary mind up there with the so-called "greats" is disgraceful. I've seldom read writing so passionate, imaginative and viscerally transportive as his when he's really at it. He created one of the most human characters of all time (my favorite one as well), and the quintessential everyman of fiction in Watson, who is just as wonderful to study as the detective for his bravery, big heart and wonderfully sentimental and caring way. The pair of them have enriched my life so much on the page and screen that they have stopped feeling like characters to me and have become more like living, breathing presences.