On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 2:32 AM, Michael <[email protected]> wrote:
> Two installments in, and I can say that the Steven Moffat-Mark Gatiss > "Sherlock" series on the BBC is a distinct pleasure - and, despite > modern tech trappings, much closer to the source material than last > year's Victorian Era-meets-"The Wild Wild West" popcorn-muncher > directed by Guy "Mr. Madonna" Ritchie with Robt. Downey and Jude Law > as Holmes and Watson. I will admit to enjoying the Holmes movie and > the characterizations by Downey and Law as pure entertainment, but > Benedict Cumberbatch's Holmes and Martin Freeman's Watson are much > more engaging, multi-layered, and vulnerable. (SNIP) > Well, this summer's film is a pretty low bar (I didn't hate it as a summer film, but I did make my son go read the actual short stories after so he could see what Holmes was actually like - which he did, and really dug, so all's well that ends well with that). I would like to repeat my response to "Sherlock", which is not that it can't be good (I can see how it might be very good), and not even that it is impossible to capture the spirit of the original in a contemporary setting (though that is quite a bit more difficult). My response was to the quote, I think by Moffat, that the Victorian setting had nothing to do with what made Holmes, Holmes. The Victorian setting had everything to do with that character and those stories, and my position (which has to be provisional until I actually see "Sherlock", which of course I will) is that anybody who wants to capture the original Holmes character in a 21st century setting will have to think deeply and creatively about how to make the proper transpositions. Otherwise you will just have a quirky, really smart and adventuresome detective story. I love stories like that, but the vast majority of those are not Sherlock Holmes. It is possible that Moffat has make the creative transpositions, even if only at an implicit level. It is also possible that he has not, but still made a really entertaining and substantive set of detective stories, which I would be happy with, even if a little irritated that he called it Sherlock and not just something else. -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
