Scifi Fans: Are we watching Sherlock?

[Admiral_Young]

At first I thought it was going to be just another crime series as well but then got hooked the first ten minutes. This is Sherlock Holmes don't be put off by the modernization of it. I didn't think it would work either when I first read about it but having watched both episodes and anticipating tonight's finale I enjoyed it as much if not more than the film last winter. Speaking of that I'm planning to write a crossover between the Ritchie Holmes and the Moffat Holmes at some point. I've got scenes and dialogue pierced together...just in the midst of coming up with a plot.

 

[Technobuilder]

I was a bit cautious at first shall we say, but I had faith in Moffat's ability to spin a tale and after just the first 5-10 minutes of the episode, I was drawn in for the remainder.

I was really happy when I guessed correctly concerning the guy in the warehouse.

These stories may be updated in setting, but all the little story elements and details are there.

 

[RJDiogenes]

ever heard of Ulysses?

Yes. It's not about Ulysses.

For a better comparison, what about James Bond? One could easily argue that the original novels and films are very much rooted in the world of the 1950s and 60s, and yet the character is re-modernized with each successive film. To varying degrees of success, of course, but it's a similar concept: he's always a suave, intelligent British superspy, regardless of the year.

To a degree, that's true; but Bond is still not so far from his roots as an international spy and action hero-- and he's more generic than Holmes in any case, therefore more adaptable.

 

[Bob The Skutter]

Well it's been a fantastic series, anyone not watching are the ones missing out.

 

[Captain Pike]

Is it sf/f?

Anyway, I'll just rent old DVDs of the Jeremy Brett show. He's the definitive Sherlock and I see no purpose to any further remakes.

Brett's very good, but I still prefer Basil Rathbone..

 

[Nerys Myk]

ever heard of Ulysses?

Yes. It's not about Ulysses.

For a better comparison, what about James Bond? One could easily argue that the original novels and films are very much rooted in the world of the 1950s and 60s, and yet the character is re-modernized with each successive film. To varying degrees of success, of course, but it's a similar concept: he's always a suave, intelligent British superspy, regardless of the year.

To a degree, that's true; but Bond is still not so far from his roots as an international spy and action hero-- and he's more generic than Holmes in any case, therefore more adaptable.

And Holmes is still a brilliant and irritating consulting detective solving cases that stump the police He still dashes around London in cabs. Other than the cabs having motors, not much is different. For me its about Holmes, his personality and methods rather than the setting. Why should it matter if the lamps are electric, not gas or Holmes reads website rather than a newspaper? Does that change who he is or what he does?

 

[Admiral_Young]

I thought the last episode was sheer brilliance and demand more. Everything that has been said about this series is true where it concerns traditional Sherlock Holmes. Moffat and Gatiss have stated that they believe that all Holmes stories are canon or at least all Doyle Holmes stories are canon and have been taking from the source material. Last night's episode sort of was a good example of that. You just have to see it. Trust me I was skeptical as anyone might be but as I stated in my previous post I was hooked in the first ten minutes.

 

[Gaith]

For me its about Holmes, his personality and methods rather than the setting.

The literary Holmes was very much defined by his Victorian England era: he was stoic, repressed most shows of emotion and never betrayed having any sort of erotic instinct. One can write a modern-day character with similarities to Holmes, but it just isn't Holmes. To have a Holmes grow up in the post-sexual revolution, post-rock-and-roll era is to create a different character, plain and simple.

Additionally, if one buys into Nicholas Meyer's theories as to why Holmes is the way he is (interpretations which I wholeheartedly accept), a modern Holmes makes even less sense. Holmes lived in the last pre-psychological, pre-modernist era. The Bond comparison is therefore a weak one, as the overall urban cultural mindset hasn't significantly shifted in the past forty or fifty years.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Did we see Holmes "grow up" or do we meet him fully formed?

 

[RJDiogenes]

Brett's very good, but I still prefer Basil Rathbone..

I grew up watching Basil Rathbone, and I have to say that Jeremy Brett is his equal at playing Holmes; he was really good.

And Holmes is still a brilliant and irritating consulting detective solving cases that stump the police He still dashes around London in cabs. Other than the cabs having motors, not much is different. For me its about Holmes, his personality and methods rather than the setting. Why should it matter if the lamps are electric, not gas or Holmes reads website rather than a newspaper? Does that change who he is or what he does?

Of course it does. Holmes was the product of his society, just as anyone else is. In the late 1800s, he was far ahead of his time, using, inventing and developing the forensic approach to crime investigation that is the norm now; he was also the world's first consulting detective. Much of what has become commonplace in police and detective work is rooted in Holmes. He would not and could not be the same person if he grew up in the late 20th Century. Also, from an artistic point of view, setting and atmosphere are often just as much characters in a story as the ones that walk and talk, or are intrinsic to the character's presentation.

 

[Gaith]

Did we see Holmes "grow up" or do we meet him fully formed?

We met the literary Holmes fully formed, though his original boorish disinterest in virtually any subject apart from crime and the violin was gradually retconned into his being a gentleman of diverse and well-rounded intellectual interests.

Nicholas Meyer's wonderful 1974 novel "The Seven-Per-Cent Solution" ventures to describe the moment and circumstances in which Holmes' emotional growth was permanently stunted.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Holmes is a product of Doyle's imagination and experience. I'm not sure any society could produce someone exactly like Holmes. Well they're doing a fine job on Sherlock in capturing the Holmes character and keeping him identifiably such. What makes Holmes Holmes? What parts are uniquely and untransferabley 19th Century?

How much of the Holmes stories are dependent on that "setting and atmosphere"? Been ages since I've read one.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Did we see Holmes "grow up" or do we meet him fully formed?

We met the literary Holmes fully formed, though his original boorish disinterest in virtually any subject apart from crime and the violin was gradually retconned into his being a gentleman of diverse and well-rounded intellectual interests.

Nicholas Meyer's wonderful 1974 novel "The Seven-Per-Cent Solution" ventures to describe the moment and circumstances in which Holmes' emotional growth was permanently stunted.

Read it, loved it and saw the movie. In fact I reread it and it's sequels a few months ago. Of course it being written nearly a century after Doyle, by someone who isn't Doyle and attempting to examining a fictional character through the lense of psychoanalysis would discount anything it has to say as far as "authenticity" goes. (As entertaining as it was). If its part of your "personal canon" for Holmes, thats fine.

At this point in Sherlock, Holmes is very much the boorish man we meet in the early stories.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

I'm a huge Holmes fan, and I'll be watching it when it comes to the States or is released on DVD over here. Sound intriguing.

 

[Canadave]

How much of the Holmes stories are dependent on that "setting and atmosphere"? Been ages since I've read one.

Ones that pop to mind are things like The Speckled Band and, of course, The Hound of the Baskervilles. But that's more to do with general spookiness than anything to do with the Victorian era, IMO.

 

[Bob The Skutter]

Well I thought the series was fantastic and people should watch it before judging, because you're missing out on a very well done show for no other reason than not believing it can be done well.
Sherlock will be on PBS in October I believe. It was a Masterpiece co-production.

 

[Gaith]

The three Meyer novels are very much part of my personal canon. Which means, incidentally, that at least six of Doyle's own stories are not!

I love Meyer's novels so much, in fact, then when I directed a Sherlock Holmes play of my own adaptation in college, I briefed my actors on Meyer's discoveries and told them to consider them authentic for the purposes of their performances.

Nicholas Meyer's wonderful 1974 novel "The Seven-Per-Cent Solution" ventures to describe the moment and circumstances in which Holmes' emotional growth was permanently stunted.

Read it, loved it and saw the movie.

Then you understand why a post-Freudian, post-psychoanalysis, post-sexual revolution Holmes makes no sense (apart from not being able to meet Freud in person!) - Watson very specifically states that medicine hasn't yet figured out a way to cure him of his permanent injury, which to my mind makes him a tragic giant even greater than what Doyle ever intended.

Again, you can invent some new guy and call him Holmes, but it will always be a totally different character.

How much of the Holmes stories are dependent on that "setting and atmosphere"? Been ages since I've read one.

Ones that pop to mind are things like The Speckled Band and, of course, The Hound of the Baskervilles. But that's more to do with general spookiness than anything to do with the Victorian era, IMO.

- "A Study in Scarlet" (first-ever Holmes story) - a key character lived part of the early Mormon frontier history

- "The Sign of Four" (second-ever Holmes story) - a key character lived through the Indian Mutiny

- Holmes meets Queen Victoria, and spies for England in the lead-up to WWI.

And, every single story contains elements of society, culture, history and behavior unique to the times.

 

[LOKAI of CHERON]

I thought the last episode was sheer brilliance and demand more.

I'm literally listening to Steven Moffat on BBC Radio 5 Live now - he stated the consolidated viewing figures were around 9 million per episode. He also said he was going straight into a meeting following the interview reference the series being recommissioned, and when prompted, replied; "of course it will." Good news!

 

[RJDiogenes]

Holmes is a product of Doyle's imagination and experience. I'm not sure any society could produce someone exactly like Holmes. Well they're doing a fine job on Sherlock in capturing the Holmes character and keeping him identifiably such. What makes Holmes Holmes? What parts are uniquely and untransferabley 19th Century?

How much of the Holmes stories are dependent on that "setting and atmosphere"? Been ages since I've read one.

All of them. Doyle also lived in the 19th Century. Holmes the character and the stories themselves were all products of their time, as I described above and others have added to. Start with the name: How likely is it in the late 20th Century that someone would name their kid Sherlock?

 

[Bob The Skutter]

Holmes is a product of Doyle's imagination and experience. I'm not sure any society could produce someone exactly like Holmes. Well they're doing a fine job on Sherlock in capturing the Holmes character and keeping him identifiably such. What makes Holmes Holmes? What parts are uniquely and untransferabley 19th Century?

How much of the Holmes stories are dependent on that "setting and atmosphere"? Been ages since I've read one.

All of them. Doyle also lived in the 19th Century. Holmes the character and the stories themselves were all products of their time, as I described above and others have added to. Start with the name: How likely is it in the late 20th Century that someone would name their kid Sherlock?

How likely is it that someone would be call their son Benedict Timothy Carlton Cumberbatch in 1976? I don't know but they did and he's playing Sherlock.