Sorry, I should have been more clear. This is what I get for typing quickly. Short answer -- The 2001 "Elementary" wasn't by Rob Doherty. It was by Josh Friedman. CBS has been soliciting scripts and pitches for a present-day Holmes from producers going back to 2000, only they kept passing on the scripts until Sherlock showed that the format worked and they bought Doherty's pitch.
Yeah I have to admit, I was sceptical but Elementary is really good fun. I don't think it has anywhere near the heft of Sherlock but I really do like it.
I gave up half way through season 1 and watched the yawntastic season 1 finale and season 2 opener. Beautifully shot? Boringly shot. Uncreative, TV of the week kind of shooting. Beautifully shot is what 'Sherlock' is. Characters in Elementary are (to me) boring and plot arcs are dragged out over a very long season. The Moriarty arc in season 1 went on and on. One character after another was thought to be Moriarty until they died and the supposedly real Moriarty showed up until they died. Didn't TV do boring shit like this in the 80s and 90s when it was at least fresh storytelling.
Elementary starts out slow, but it won me over. It's basically the tortoise to Sherlock's hare, advancing slowly, steadily, and unflamboyantly while its counterpart has brief, frenetic bursts of attention-grabbing activity with vast amounts of downtime in between. Ah, that's what I figured. Was it actually called Elementary that far back, though? Funny, I think it has more heft. Sherlock is stylistically bold and striking and innovative, but it's more flash than substance, more about shock value and big, bold set pieces than nuanced character development. It's more like the Robert Downey, Jr. Holmes movies, a big, frantic blockbuster about larger-than-life people and events, but without a great deal of depth -- typical of Moffat's work in general. Elementary, simply by virtue of having more episodes, is able to give its characters more depth, nuance, and growth and add more impact to events. It's certainly fleshed out its supporting cast better. And it does a lot better with gender, racial, and sexual diversity.
No, not really. It's an entertaining show that doesn't tread over the same ground in the same way. The thing about well-known public domain characters - Holmes, Dracula, Frankenstein et al - is that there's likely as not to be one or two versions floating around at any given time. In the case of Holmes there've been three of note in the last couple of years. I have some friends working on Elementary and I like to see the show do well. That said, there's nothing special about it; it's just one more hour of American procedural drama with a couple of character threads tying the show together. Any excursion they do with the familiar characters tends to be trite (gender-switching Watson, for example, is purely demo-driven and formulaic in its treatment, completely uninspired) and the writing is pedestrian. If anything the so-called mysteries are even more strained and gimmicky than Sherlock can sometimes be.
Three Emmys for Sherlock. Outstanding Lead Actor In A Miniseries Or A Movie Benedict Cumberbatch as Sherlock Holmes Sherlock: His Last Vow (Masterpiece) • PBS • Hartswood West for BBC/Cymru Wales in co-production with Masterpiece Outstanding Supporting Actor In A Miniseries Or A Movie Martin Freeman as John Watson Sherlock: His Last Vow (Masterpiece) • PBS • Hartswood West for BBC/Cymru Wales in co-production with Masterpiece Outstanding Writing For A Miniseries, Movie Or A Dramatic Special Sherlock: His Last Vow (Masterpiece) PBS • Hartswood West for BBC/Cymru Wales in co-production with Masterpiece Steven Moffat, Written by I didn't even know they were eligible since Sherlock isn't a first-run American production. A brief article about the Emmy win and what to expect in series 4.
Sherlock actually won 7 Emmys. The other four were in the creative category. http://www.buzzfeed.com/adambvary/sherlock-biggest-emmy-winner#33c4dh9
Been burning through season 2 over the last couple of days and it feels like a big step up over the already solid first season. Its well worth a watch and Holmes is a little more social in this one but it does keep homages to the source material.
I have to say that overall Sherlock is one of my favorite shows and I absolutely loved series 3. I really enjoyed the character moments and I didn't feel like it lacked detective work all that much. I'm sure I'll be pilloried for saying this, but personally I feel the only episode that has been bad was the season 2 finale, "The Reichenbach Fall." There was some good acting in that one, but I didn't buy the plot for a minute. All the way from the police arresting Sherlock with no evidence to the finale which seemed basically impossible, that plot was just full of holes. Moriarty's plan was ludicrous. I was hoping they would give an explanation in series 3 that would make that episode make sense, but the pretty much just jerked your chain for 3 episodes. At this point it's probably best that they just forget that fall happened as there is no real way to logically explain it.
Since Moriarty seems to be still alive and a minor or even major plot point in series 4, maybe they retcon, ahem, explain the Rise in that series? Anyway, since we have to wait till 2016 or later, we still have Line Of Duty to fill some time. Or Luther. Or EastEnders.