• 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!

Spoilers WATSON: New Sherlock Holmes-based series on CBS

CBS's next procedural will be Moriarty, about a former criminal who serves his time and becomes a police consultant after getting out. And his partner Lestrade will be a woman so they can do the will they-won't they.

Irony is dead:

The team said Moriarty will be a “modern reinvention of the crime procedural, based on the most famous villain in all of detective fiction.” Moriarty is a Professor of Criminal Psychology at Durham University but leads a secret double life as the mastermind behind every crime of sophistication in the North of England. When a rival criminal begins an assault on his underground empire, Moriarty will have only one choice: to join the police as a consultant, using the law as a weapon to dismantle his foe while keeping his true identity hidden from the police. Paired with Detective Imogen Burrows, a stoic Yorkshire detective, they’ll form a fearsome team, but Moriarty will soon realize that the real threat isn’t the rival criminal faction he’s dismantling.

It's not attached to a network yet, but you weren't far off.
 
Loved the Granada Brett series, I have a making of/behind the scenes book about that one. Man, those two stuntmen that actually jumped off the real Reichenbach Falls for that show! Bonkers. I've also been checking out the Russian Sherlock Holmes films/series (79-83) which is pretty decent. And I have a manga collection called Young Miss Holmes that is really great, kinda wish that would get an anime or a LA film/series. I'm not so fond of the modern times Holmes series like Watson though. I get why they do them, but I still prefer the period stuff better.
 
I'm not so fond of the modern times Holmes series like Watson though. I get why they do them, but I still prefer the period stuff better.

As I mentioned in the early days of this thread, most Holmes adaptations in the first half of the 20th century were set in the then-present day rather than period pieces, with only a few exceptions like the first two Rathbone-Bruce films. After all, the Doyle stories were still coming out until the late 1920s, so it made sense that people at the time and for a while thereafter saw Holmes as a contemporary character rather than a period character. But every adaptation I know of between c. 1950 and 2010 was a period piece (or had a Victorian-era Holmes science-fictionally preserved or transported into the present/future). I always wondered why that was, and I recently learned the answer: because the Doyle heirs who had control of the property during that time insisted that all adaptations had to be period pieces. Now that different people are in control of the property, that ban has been lifted.
 
I recently learned the answer: because the Doyle heirs who had control of the property during that time insisted that all adaptations had to be period pieces. Now that different people are in control of the property, that ban has been lifted.

Seriously? I had no idea! That's ... wow. Mind you, I remember hearing a story that the Doyle estate tried to sue someone (was it the makers of the Enola Holmes films?) for depicting Sherlock with emotions, which they insisted he didn't have until the later still copyrighted stories (or somesuch nonsense). But I just reread Scandal in Bohemia, one of the early short stories, and Holmes walks into Baker Street and bursts out laughing because he's just been involved in Irene Adler's marriage. So yeah, I guess that tracks.
 
Seriously? I had no idea! That's ... wow. Mind you, I remember hearing a story that the Doyle estate tried to sue someone (was it the makers of the Enola Holmes films?) for depicting Sherlock with emotions, which they insisted he didn't have until the later still copyrighted stories (or somesuch nonsense). But I just reread Scandal in Bohemia, one of the early short stories, and Holmes walks into Baker Street and bursts out laughing because he's just been involved in Irene Adler's marriage. So yeah, I guess that tracks.

Indeed. The last time I read through the canon, I was struck by how much emotion Holmes showed -- playful humor, deep empathy for victims, cold fury at injustice, and of course brotherly affection for Watson. He didn't let emotion interfere with his reasoning, but that didn't mean he lacked it. If anything, his reserve was fairly typical of British gentlemen of the era.

If anything, having just seen Enola Holmes 3 last night, I'd say its Sherlock is less emotional, or at least more outwardly reserved, than many other screen versions. Ronald Howard's Holmes in the 1950s TV series was warm and genial with an impish sense of humor. Jeremy Brett's Holmes was flamboyantly mercurial in his moods, and you could say much the same of Jonny Lee Miller's Holmes in Elementary. Indeed, Enola 3 made it an ongoing theme that Enola's open emotionalism made her distinct from Sherlock.
 
Indeed, Enola 3 made it an ongoing theme that Enola's open emotionalism made her distinct from Sherlock.

Which is funny, because in the Enola books whilst arguing with Mycroft, Sherlock blurts out that yes of course he's being emotional with regards to their sister. Didn't realise the third film was out already.
 
We watched it last night. I thought it was pretty decent and ended with the hint that there would be more down the road.

It was okay, but it bugged me that
the confrontations with Moriarty were so physical, rather than intellectual. She just came off as a generic villain rather than a criminal genius. I mean, Sherlock is no slouch with the fisticuffs, but we come to these stories to see battles of wits.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top