• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

stupidest remake yet...Miss Marple, the hot babe!

Yeah, I really don't see the Victorian era as essential to the Holmes character. Well, it obviously is to the stories that Doyle wrote; but the basic concept of the character works just fine in any age. People have been dropping him into other settings for decades now. Indeed, the Basil Rathbone movies, which to a great extent defined Sherlock Holmes' image for the visual media age, had him fighting Nazis.
 
CaptainCanada said:
Yeah, I really don't see the Victorian era as essential to the Holmes character. Well, it obviously is to the stories that Doyle wrote; but the basic concept of the character works just fine in any age. People have been dropping him into other settings for decades now. Indeed, the Basil Rathbone movies, which to a great extent defined Sherlock Holmes' image for the visual media age, had him fighting Nazis.
Click to expand...

It's also worth noting that the original Holmes stories were not period pieces when they were written. They were contemporary detective stories, set in the same era in which they were published.

Nowadays, of course, gaslight London has acquired a quaint, nostalgic glow, but that was by no means Doyle's intent. The Holmes stories were never meant to be historical costumers.
 
Professor Zoom said:
then you would be also against a modern day Miss Marple or a Monk set in Russia.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I don't see the point of either.

Holmes being in the Victoria age is a location, but, I don't think essential to his character. Perhaps essential to the STORIES, but maybe not the character. YMMV
Click to expand...
A setting can be just as definitive to a character as anything else. Part of the appeal of the Miss Marple stories when they were first published was that older people were not that active or involved. Now we have people her age running in marathons.

CaptainCanada said:
Yeah, I really don't see the Victorian era as essential to the Holmes character. Well, it obviously is to the stories that Doyle wrote; but the basic concept of the character works just fine in any age. People have been dropping him into other settings for decades now. Indeed, the Basil Rathbone movies, which to a great extent defined Sherlock Holmes' image for the visual media age, had him fighting Nazis.
Click to expand...
That was done when the franchise moved to another studio and was not the smartest decision, in my opinion. But even then the time period was only a few decades removed from Holmes's original setting and mostly retained the atmosphere-- the new series is more than a century removed and makes no sense whatsoever.

Greg Cox said:
It's also worth noting that the original Holmes stories were not period pieces when they were written. They were contemporary detective stories, set in the same era in which they were published.
Click to expand...
I don't see what difference that makes. If anything, that makes the stories more a part and parcel of the times.

My point is, if you're going to make that many significant changes to a character-- why not just create a new character?
 
Also important to Holmes is his bringing the field we know as forensics to a level that is far beyond that used by the police force around him. Taking him out of that period and into our world makes his skills rather redundant.
 
Asbo Zaprudder said:
Gov Kodos said:
Also important to Holmes is his bringing the field we know as forensics to a level that is far beyond that used by the police force around him. Taking him out of that period and into our world makes his skills rather redundant.
Click to expand...

I don't know. The plods are still pretty stupid despite everything else.
Click to expand...
Even so, it is not the stupidity of Lestrade which is the point, Holmes often notes other officers who are quite good at their job, more important is the use of vast amounts of forensic, psychological, and chemical knowledge that the police don't make use of that sets Holmes apart from everyone else. What he does routinely is done today very regularly, if not as well. I really can't stand the making people around Holmes looking stupid format. The folks around him were operating quite to the norm of the time, Holmes is simply operating at a level far above those around him when it comes to criminal investigation. Partially through intellect, and partially through his arsenal of criminal science skills, which are uniquely advanced for the period he is in. Take him out of that period and he is just another CSI TV character in need of a set of sunglasses.
 
Gov Kodos said:
Asbo Zaprudder said:
Gov Kodos said:
Also important to Holmes is his bringing the field we know as forensics to a level that is far beyond that used by the police force around him. Taking him out of that period and into our world makes his skills rather redundant.
Click to expand...

I don't know. The plods are still pretty stupid despite everything else.
Click to expand...
Even so, it is not the stupidity of Lestrade which is the point, Holmes often notes other officers who are quite good at their job, more important is the use of vast amounts of forensic, psychological, and chemical knowledge that the police don't make use of that sets Holmes apart from everyone else. What he does routinely is done today very regularly, if not as well. I really can't stand the making people around Holmes looking stupid format. The folks around him were operating quite to the norm of the time, Holmes is simply operating at a level far above those around him when it comes to criminal investigation. Partially through intellect, and partially through his arsenal of criminal science skills, which are uniquely advanced for the period he is in. Take him out of that period and he is just another CSI TV character in need of a set of sunglasses.
Click to expand...

Holmes could still make most people look relatively stupid. I hadn't considered it until now, but he, Mycroft, and Moriarty are really superheroes of cerebral power.
 
Temis the Vorta said:
Captaindemotion said:
I'm going to pitch a new version of Philip Marlowe, but he will be a teenaged boy working the mean streets of Eastbourne.
Click to expand...

Philip Marlowe, teen vampire/detective.

Send me 15% of your profits.
Click to expand...

Captaindemotion said:
^ Deal.
Click to expand...

"It was 3AM, and I was tired. The last bloodpack did nothing for me, and Lacrymosa was still out there, hunting. I had to stop her. I threw down the skateboard, hopped on, and began a gentle roll onto Sunset Boulevard."

There's your opener. You're welcome.
 
Greg Cox said:
It's also worth noting that the original Holmes stories were not period pieces when they were written. They were contemporary detective stories, set in the same era in which they were published.

Nowadays, of course, gaslight London has acquired a quaint, nostalgic glow, but that was by no means Doyle's intent. The Holmes stories were never meant to be historical costumers.
Click to expand...

Which is why he works so well outside his "original" time period. The Basil Rathbone movies that saw Holmes fighting the Nazis, for example, and of course Moffat's Sherlock series. If Doyle were alive today he'd probably be a staff writer for CSI.

If a story has strong, sound characters, there's no reason why it can't be easily updated. That's why updating Shakespeare often works so well - there's another one that was never really intended to be "historical costumers" (except for the purely historical plays, I guess, but stuff like Romeo and Juliet were modern-day stories in Bill S's time. If he were alive today he'd probably have shopped the story around and got it made as an episode of Gossip Girl or something or published as one of those potboiler teen novels). They could probably do a version of Anne of Green Gables set in the 2010s if they wanted to.

But the key is the characters have to remain true to how they were created. The appeal of Miss Marple is that she's an elderly lady who solves crimes. She's not a cross-breeding of Sydney Bristow and Nancy Drew, which is what I see this new film being.

That said, I am interested in seeing Jennifer Garner doing a character part. I hope they don't just make Marple a Bristow clone.

Alex
 
RJDiogenes said:
My point is, if you're going to make that many significant changes to a character-- why not just create a new character?
Click to expand...

This is where you an I disagree. I don't see a change of location or time period as necessarily a change of character. For example, modern dress versions of Shakespeare. They are changing the time period, and in some ways making it easier for us to relate to, but I don't think the characters are changed.
 
Professor Zoom said:
RJDiogenes said:
My point is, if you're going to make that many significant changes to a character-- why not just create a new character?
Click to expand...

This is where you an I disagree. I don't see a change of location or time period as necessarily a change of character. For example, modern dress versions of Shakespeare. They are changing the time period, and in some ways making it easier for us to relate to, but I don't think the characters are changed.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I've seen A Midsummer Night's Dream staged as a high school musical, and Macbeth set in the Old West, etc. It can be a really interesting way to reinterpret an old chestnut.

But the plots and characters are the same.
 
23skidoo said:
They could probably do a version of Anne of Green Gables set in the 2010s if they wanted to.
Click to expand...
Yeah, there's nothing that would make a setting update of Anne difficult (well, obviously the mechanics of Anne's adoption by the Cuthberts would be slightly different, but that's a minor thing).

The premise of Sherlock Holmes is that he's the world's greatest detective and solves crimes with his incredible intellect (while accompanied by Dr. Watson). The rest is just background, and so he translates so well into any age.
 
If you wanted to frak around with a character and take him or her out of their original context, then why not be a little creative about it? Why just do the dumb and obvious thing - Miss Marple's a hot babe in a contemporary setting. Literally anything would be more interesting than that.

Instead, keep her an old lady but transport her to some historical time and place, anyplace where sleuthing might fit in and make for good stories. She's servant in the Ming Dynasty royal court who uncovers intrigues and conspiracies. She's a peasant woman during the Russian Revolution, working for justice while trying to keep alive during the turmoil. She's a madame of a brothel in gold rush San Francisco who has a detective agency on the side. She's a time traveller and she's taken on all those roles and more. It wouldn't be Miss Marple but at least it might be fun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top