Arwen-Undomiel.com
https://arwen-undomiel.com/forum/

Baker Street Irregulars (Sherlock Holmes)
https://arwen-undomiel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=20989		 Page 1 of 3
Author:  Nurrantiel Mashiara [ November 8th, 2010, 1:36 pm ]
Post subject:  Baker Street Irregulars (Sherlock Holmes)
As requesting for clubs is rather slowed stopped right now, I figure we can have a good Sherlockian discussion right here.

"Once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." -Sherlock Holmes (not Spock)

"You see, but you do not observe." -Sherlock Holmes


I know waaaaaay back when I read the Sherlock Holmes stories, those were two quotes that I remembered and have loved. I love the characters, I love the intrigue, I love the deductions, and I love mystery. Others do too. So, whether we talk about the old Jeremy Brett, Basil Rathbone or Ronald Howard series, or talk about the new Robert Downey, Jr or Benedict Cumberbatch, let's talk!
Author:  Johnny's Fan [ November 8th, 2010, 11:51 pm ]
Post subject: 
Yeah, I'm still waiting for my Broadway/Musicals club. :-(

I really love Sherlock Holmes. I was raised on the Basil Rathbone films (must have been 4 or 5 when I saw my first one) and then after seeing Jeremy Brett on TV, defected to him. :P Love Robert Downey Jr's take on him, and haven't seen any other versions as of yet. Although I did see the Peter Cushing film, The Hound of the Baskervilles and I think there's another one I might have seen as well, but I can't think who played him. :teehee: Jeremy Brett is my Holmes though without a doubt. To think I walked down the Baker Street set all those times, loving it because it was something to do with Sherlock Holmes, and yet it was not until many years later I saw the show the set was made for. Ah, to go back and lean on the same lampost JB leant against. *sigh*

And let's not forget Dr. John H Watson! I'll always have a special place in my heart for Nigel Bruce, but David Burke/Edward Hardwicke are the best two Watsons I have seen. Although I think Edward Hardwicke definitely has the edge as of late. :drool:
Author:  Nurrantiel Mashiara [ November 9th, 2010, 12:12 am ]
Post subject: 
I grew up reading the stories. To this day, when I think of "curling up with a book" I think of sitting with our collection of Holmes stories. My dad has the Ronald Howard series, but I never really identified with any actors. I always identified with the illustrations. It's odd, I know, but there you have it. I haven't really seen much of Jeremy Brett or Basil Rathbone, which I know I need to. As far as Watson goes, Jude Law was the first one I saw as a true Watson.

However, this is all up until this past month when I've been able to watch Sherlock. They did such a fantastic adaption that I might have found my portrayals (besides illustrations).
Author:  Johnny's Fan [ November 9th, 2010, 12:16 am ]
Post subject: 
:jawdrop:

I was so sure you had seen the TV series and the Rathbone films! You MUST see them, if only to point and laugh and say "the book is better". I actually haven't read all the books, so I'm the complete opposite of you. :D
Author:  Taurquende [ November 9th, 2010, 2:32 am ]
Post subject: 
My introduction to the Sherlock Holmes was only about a year and a half ago, when I dug out my dad's old annotated version. I absolutely loved them! I would sit and read through them literally the whole day, and when I finished them I started again. At some point I discovered the Jeremy Brett series on the internet, and it was the most fun in the world to finish a story and then immediately go watch the episode of it. Sometimes they'd follow it practically word for word, which was great, and they'd even model shots after and make costumes based on Sidney Paget's illustrations.

My favorite Holmes I think is still Jeremy Brett, although Benedict Cumberbatch is fast catching up. Certainly in "Study in Pink" he was really terrific, though in the other two he's gotten perhaps a shade too silly. Basil Rathbone is very good in his own way, though they don't really explore Holmes' quirks and deductions in those films. Peter Cushing isn't bad at all, either. I didn't like the 1950's Hound of the Baskervilles that he was in, but the few episodes I've seen of the BBC version he did a few years later was a little better. Both suffered more from bad writing and production value, I think, than from his portrayal.
Ha, I didn't think anyone else had ever heard of the Ronald Howard version. :P They're not great... mostly just your stereo-typical Holmes, pipe and cape and all. Mostly I just watched them because I love Leslie Howard so much I'd even watch his son in anything. :teehee:
I'm a little like Nurr, though, in that I've always found the illustrations the best portrayals. It may sound strange, but I find it quite easy to sort of animate the illustrations in my mind, and see the action unfold in them, so I don't really need an actor to do it for me. I really enjoy comparing and contrasting different actors' interpretations, though.

My favorite Watson is probably Martin Freeman, though he's also not as good in the later episodes as in "Study in Pink." That's also the writers' fault: they've totally thrown out the character development of Watson as a soldier that they established in the first episode, and they've made him almost another lacky-like Watson whose barely keeping up! :( Admittedly I didn't totally like thrill-seeking Watson, but Martin made him still seem very sweet, so I thought I could deal with it. :confused:
Of the Granada Watsons, I think Edward Hardwicke was the better actor, but David Burke and Jeremy Brett had very good chemistry together. I may prefer Burke slightly more, even though he does annoy me sometimes. :P
Nigel Bruce's Watson was just a dear, which wasn't all of a bad thing. :happy:

*cough* I seemed to have rambled on a bit. :blush: I suppose I'll stop now... unless anyone wants to hear my take on Irene Adler. :teehee:
Author:  Johnny's Fan [ November 9th, 2010, 12:48 pm ]
Post subject: 
You see I am very surprised that you two talk so highly of the new Sherlock Holmes, in as much as, classing the actors in the same group as those who portrayed the Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson from the books. While the new Holmes and Watson may have similar characteristics of the original duo, to me, like with Downy Jr and Law, as much as I like them in their Sherlock Holmes, I couldn't honestly say they ARE Holmes and Watson, if you know what I mean. :P

Oh, and of course there were the two new Sherlock Holmes' a few years ago, both with Ian Hart as Dr. Watson (who was BRILLIANT) and Rupert Everet as the Holmes one time, and Richard Roxburgh the other time. They both had good casts and they looked good, but something was definitely lacking.
Author:  Nurrantiel Mashiara [ November 9th, 2010, 3:41 pm ]
Post subject: 
It may partially have to do with the fact that all the older movies/series, while good, were the typical Sherlock Holmes in a deerstalker cap with a pipe. And while Sherlock did have those things, there's so much more to his character. To see a portrayal of the whole of Sherlock is such a nice thing that it may color my viewing. I don't think so, though. I mean, as I said earlier, I never really watched the old stuff that much. Just Ronald Howard, which wasn't amazing or terrible, just a nice adaptation. For me, the illustrations and stories were always what Holmes and Watson were like.

Quote:
in the same group as those who portrayed the Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson from the books

But they DO! Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman are portraying the book characters. Just because they're doing it in modern-day London doesn't mean the characters are all that different. There's actually quite a bit about them that is put in that other adaptations didn't do. I applauded the description of Watson's cell phone in 'A Study in Pink' because it was so spot on with his description of the pocket watch from the stories. I think one of the happiest moments for me watching the Robert Downey Jr movie was him shooting the bullet holes in the wall - because it is taken directly from the stories. It's not something you'd see your "typical Holmes" do, but it's something that Holmes does.

Quote:
My favorite Watson is probably Martin Freeman, though he's also not as good in the later episodes as in "Study in Pink." That's also the writers' fault: they've totally thrown out the character development of Watson as a soldier that they established in the first episode, and they've made him almost another lacky-like Watson whose barely keeping up!

I love Freeman's Watson. True, he isn't as high up as Sherlock, but then again, who is? ;) I think they were trying to rectify it by having him working on the case for Mycroft in 'The Great Game'. I wish they hadn't had Holmes step in for that, and just had Watson figure it out on his own, but...well, we can't have everything.


I know I always prefer series to movies, though. Movies feel the need to have the great and terrible Moriarty guiding everything with an iron fist or whatever, instead of just letting us have crime. That was my main complaint in the BBC series. Moriarty everywhere. I'm glad they haven't put Irene Adler in yet though. The other "need" filmmakers seem to have. I'd love to hear your thoughts on her, Taur. :teehee:
Author:  Johnny's Fan [ November 9th, 2010, 4:44 pm ]
Post subject: 
Hmm. I just don't think you can ever get a true character potrayal if that character is taken out of his settings (Victorian London) and transplanted to another era. The amazing deductions and twitchy, lazy, then super hyper active behaviours may be there, but the language and the adventures have lost their original flavour. I'm not saying that it's bad, as I adore the new Sherlock Holmes movie and while true to the stories in many aspsets (I too loved the shooting holes in Mrs. Hudsons walls but it is actually a common thing they put into SH movies/TV shows. The dog was more special as they usually lose the dog) there are lots of things they take liberties with, and it worked within the film, do no doubt the same applies to the new TV series.

But I would not be able to say in all honesty, that Downey Jr and Law are Sherlock Holmes and Watson.

And TBH, the whole mobile phone thing kinda puts me off. It sounds like they were looking for a modern piece of equipment to cement the original story with the re-do together, and they thought that would fit the bill and be laudible. It sounds a bit... meh... to me.

I quite liked Irene Adler in the ITV series... I hate butt kicking females so I didn't like her in the new film.
Author:  MontanaBohemian [ November 9th, 2010, 6:37 pm ]
Post subject: 
Hurray!! Sherlock thread!

Mah JFishness, I agree that it is a sad, sad day that we don’t have a Broadway/Musicals club. I have no where to completely geek out theatre style. :lol:

(Curse my blasted computer – I had an entire post all typed out and it was actually well-worded and thought out, which is rare, and of course! my computer dies *HEADDESK*)

It has been a very, shamefully, long time since I have read any of the stories. And I feel a bit more embarrassed not being able to count myself among so many of you that seem so well-versed in all things Sherlock. As a child, I was most definitely what you’d call a hardcore book worm. And while I loved these stories, they were just part of the mass ensemble of books that I devoured. :P I can say, though, that these stories were very much a part of the foundation of my love for mysteries, and why it will always be my favourite genre.

I don’t really have a favourite story, except perhaps “Hound of the Baskervilles.” Which brings up the one adaptation that will always and forever stick with me as cherished and beloved.

WISHBONE. “The Slobbery Hound”
YES. I am not ashamed of that. I will never be ashamed of that. And now I need to go find it and watch it.
:roll:
Wishbone is the Almighty when it comes to classic literature. :happy:

As for the other adaptations, I can’t say I grew up with any. Well, few stick out in my mind – nothing against any of them, as a child, it wasn’t something I watched. I haven’t seen the recent film with Robert Downey Jr., so I can’t say anything on that except that I want to. :P

Obviously, I have found the BBC’s recent series. And obviously I love it. :P For me, it works. In a world in which we find ourselves so surrounded by Holmes-like characters, I think … sort of … updating Sherlock; putting him back in the modern world just fits his character, and what he does. It obviously works for every other “Sherlock” in television and movies, so why not for the actual Sherlock Holmes?

I get why the Victorian Sherlock is a bit harder to let go of in favour of a modern day one – I mean, the image that comes to mind to anyone who’s read or heard of Sherlock Holmes is just like Nurr said, the hat and pipe is quintessential Holmes. If someone wears that for a costume, you instantly know who they are. THAT image has been ingrained in so many peoples’ heads since birth … I don’t know where I’m going with this any more. *facepalm*

I dunno, it works either way for me. This new series is just so … radically different in the sense of style, period, etc., but NOT the characters. In anything, if it’s a good character, they can translate into any period, any era, in any place and for me, it has translated perfectly. And honestly, it kind of feels like a breath of fresh air in the whole Sherlock world.

And it doesn’t hurt that I get to oogle Cumberbatch and Freeman. Particularly Freeman. *facepalm* I adore his Watson. I can’t really nail down why, I just do. But I’ve always loved Watson, in all his incarnations. :P
Author:  Taurquende [ November 10th, 2010, 8:59 pm ]
Post subject: 
Johnny's Fan wrote:
Hmm. I just don't think you can ever get a true character potrayal if that character is taken out of his settings (Victorian London) and transplanted to another era. The amazing deductions and twitchy, lazy, then super hyper active behaviours may be there, but the language and the adventures have lost their original flavour. I'm not saying that it's bad, as I adore the new Sherlock Holmes movie and while true to the stories in many aspsets (I too loved the shooting holes in Mrs. Hudsons walls but it is actually a common thing they put into SH movies/TV shows. The dog was more special as they usually lose the dog) there are lots of things they take liberties with, and it worked within the film, do no doubt the same applies to the new TV series.

But I would not be able to say in all honesty, that Downey Jr and Law are Sherlock Holmes and Watson.

And TBH, the whole mobile phone thing kinda puts me off. It sounds like they were looking for a modern piece of equipment to cement the original story with the re-do together, and they thought that would fit the bill and be laudible. It sounds a bit... meh... to me.

I understand your skepticism, JF. :) Personally, I adore Victorian England. If I had a time machine it'd be the first place I'd go, and it is a big reason why I love the stories so much. But Sherlock does an amazing job of distilling the essence of the stories and transposing it into modern day London. And it still feels very familiar, especially if you know the Jeremy Brett version. The layout of their flat is almost exactly the same, for instance. The windows and the fireplace and all the doors are in the same place, so to me it felt like 221B, even though the color and the furniture is entirely different. The mobile phone thing would feel cheap reference, if they weren't constantly drawing on the stories in other ways. Sherlock deductions about Watson when they first meet are the same, as well as the way they meet and the even the place they meet. There's also Holmes' experiment of hitting a corpse with a riding crop there, as well as Waston's limp (in the first episode, at least), and Holmes' disregard of knowledge of the solar system, plus a thousand other little things. (In fact, I've been thinking they should slow down before they use up all their references!) They're much better than the references the Robert Downy Jr. movie made, which, if I may say so, were cheaply trying to cement a glitzy action movie to the original stories, IMO. :closedeyes: Anyway, there's a lot there, just updated, like the mobile phone. Personally I loved that bit, because it made me think of how similar our cell phones are to pocket watches. I mean, they're both really personal items that people keep close at hand, they vary in quality and upkeep, and most people pull them out to know the time all the time (almost no one I know wears a watch these days). It gave me a wonderful, tangible connection to Victorian England that I loved. :) They also keep Sherlock in suits and long coats, so there's still a little bit of the Victorian formality and professionalism there. (Could you imagine if he ran around solving mysteries in like sweats or jeans?! That'd be totally bizarre. :P) The only thing that might take some getting used to is the texting, but then I think the idea is that the "real" Sherlock Holmes would love texting, because it requires minimal social contact.

Nurrantiel Mashiara wrote:
I love Freeman's Watson. True, he isn't as high up as Sherlock, but then again, who is? ;) I think they were trying to rectify it by having him working on the case for Mycroft in 'The Great Game'. I wish they hadn't had Holmes step in for that, and just had Watson figure it out on his own, but...well, we can't have everything.

I know I always prefer series to movies, though. Movies feel the need to have the great and terrible Moriarty guiding everything with an iron fist or whatever, instead of just letting us have crime. That was my main complaint in the BBC series. Moriarty everywhere. I'm glad they haven't put Irene Adler in yet though. The other "need" filmmakers seem to have. I'd love to hear your thoughts on her, Taur. :teehee:


Yes, "The Great Game" was a little better, but it just breaks my heart when he thinks he's onto something and it turns out he's totally wrong! :P The cat, for instance, I thought was a brilliant idea! But no, Sherlock had already thought of that. :duh: And why didn't they let him kill the Golem?! Even Sherlock got the last shots at him then! It's just a little maddening to see how he comes so close to be the hero before epically failing. I mean, I know Sherlock's suppose to be the hero, but I love Watson and I want him to be the hero, too! :teehee:

Okay so, here's my semi-rant about Irene Adler. ;) Far be it from me to demean the only strong female character in the stories, but I don't think she deserves this reputation as the only person to out-smart Holmes. Yes, she managed to see through his disguise, but then she fled the country to get away from him. And she was totally ignorant of the fact that he witnessed her wedding without her even suspecting! So the way I see it Holmes still comes out on top in this one. I say bravo to Irene Adler for keeping up with him and foiling his plot, but that doesn't mean she gets to be elevated to this "Cat-woman" like character. :P
And as for a Holmes/Adler romance... Pfft, forget it! :tongue:

I hear they're planning to put in her at some point, though! It'll be interesting to see what they do. I wonder if she'll still be an opera singer, or if they'll make her into a pop star or something. I've actually had this crazy idea that Molly from the morgue will morph into Irene Adler. Maybe her frustration with Sherlock will cause her to snap, and she'll adopt a pseudonym and start blackmailing people or something. :teehee: Anyway, I like her character and I hope she keeps coming back in this recurring role. :)

Yeah, maybe we'll have a little less Moriarty in the next season. :confused: What was with Moriarty, anyway?! I don't understand why they made him so... loopy!

MontanaBohemian wrote:
I don’t really have a favourite story, except perhaps “Hound of the Baskervilles.” Which brings up the one adaptation that will always and forever stick with me as cherished and beloved.

WISHBONE. “The Slobbery Hound”
YES. I am not ashamed of that. I will never be ashamed of that. And now I need to go find it and watch it.
:roll:
Wishbone is the Almighty when it comes to classic literature. :happy:


Oh my gosh, Wishbone! :lol: That's a blast from the past! You made me look it up on YouTube. ;) I couldn't find any full episodes, but I found the opening titles which featured adorable pictures of the puppy in a deerstalker cap. :teehee:

You know, it's funny, but I don't really have a favorite story either! Some are better than others but none really stand out as the best to me.

Johnny's Fan wrote:
I quite liked Irene Adler in the ITV series... I hate butt kicking females so I didn't like her in the new film.

I did, too. :yes: (You're talking about the Jeremy Brett version, right?) The only thing that was weird about that episode was the fact that her husband was a jerk. I actually wonder whether they were trying to victimize her as "that girl who always falls for the wrong guy." And I like usually Rachel McAddams okay, but I couldn't stand Irene Adler in the new film! That had a lot to do with why I wasn't crazy about the film in general. :)

EDIT: Ha! Nurr, we seemed to have posted at the same time. :P
Author:  Nurrantiel Mashiara [ November 10th, 2010, 8:59 pm ]
Post subject: 
^See, this is why we need to desperately meet up.

Quote:
WISHBONE. “The Slobbery Hound”
YES. I am not ashamed of that. I will never be ashamed of that. And now I need to go find it and watch it.
:roll:
Wishbone is the Almighty when it comes to classic literature.

And THIS is why it will be epic. Oh man, Wishbone.

Well, I guess this is where agreeing to disagree comes in. :teehee: I think the characters can be transplanted, and the BBC series does a great job of it.

Quote:
but the language and the adventures have lost their original flavour.

The language may be a bit outdated now, but in a way I think the new versions have brought about a new life to the adventure. They have a new original air, as opposed to what they've been pigeonholed as.
Author:  Johnny's Fan [ September 13th, 2011, 10:57 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Baker Street Irregulars (Sherlock Holmes)
Couldn't find a topic for the new Sherlock so here it goes.

I know I am considered the oddball Brit for not watching the shows that seem to generate hyperventilating, drooling and all other bodily functions when they cross the seas and oceans and invade other countries, so here is a newsflash for you-

I just saw Sherlock and am now suffering from withdrawel symtoms.

When Britain makes good TV shows (excluding DW obviously :whistle:), damn we make 'em good.
Author:  Nurrantiel Mashiara [ September 13th, 2011, 11:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Baker Street Irregulars (Sherlock Holmes)
Mwahahaha, we've got you, eh? :teehee: Sherlock is good. Now we just need to get you to become a Whovian....

Quote:
I hear they're planning to put in her at some point, though! It'll be interesting to see what they do. I wonder if she'll still be an opera singer, or if they'll make her into a pop star or something. I've actually had this crazy idea that Molly from the morgue will morph into Irene Adler. Maybe her frustration with Sherlock will cause her to snap, and she'll adopt a pseudonym and start blackmailing people or something. :teehee: Anyway, I like her character and I hope she keeps coming back in this recurring role. :)

Yeah, maybe we'll have a little less Moriarty in the next season. :confused: What was with Moriarty, anyway?! I don't understand why they made him so... loopy!


Aw, I wouldn't really like that. Molly as Irene. I like her, but I wouldn't want Irene to come from an established character. I'd want her to be someone new.

Oh, Moriarty. He is my biggest disappointment with Sherlock. The voice, the fanboy-ness....I hope that it was all a mistake, and that that guy was just filling in for the real Moriarty. Or that was all an act. Or something. He bothered me and I don't want Moriarty, leader of all that is crime, dark terror in the night, the only man who can effectively and consistently foil Holmes, to be Jim from the lab. No. Just, please. No.
Author:  MontanaBohemian [ September 14th, 2011, 10:23 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Baker Street Irregulars (Sherlock Holmes)
Johnny's Fan wrote:
I just saw Sherlock and am now suffering from withdrawel symtoms.


WHAT IS THIS MADNESS?!!!!!

:-o

WHO ARE YOU?!

Johnny's Fan wrote:
When Britain makes good TV shows (excluding DW obviously :whistle:), damn we make 'em good.


I can't believe you're just realizing this NOW. ;) Because, exactly. DAMN.

Nurrantiel Mashiara wrote:
Mwahahaha, we've got you, eh? :teehee: Sherlock is good. Now we just need to get you to become a Whovian....


If she were to ever become a Whovian, I swear to you now, that will be a sign that the world is ending. Unless she's secretly a crazed Whovian fangirl. ;) But I doubt it.
Author:  Johnny's Fan [ September 14th, 2011, 11:16 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Baker Street Irregulars (Sherlock Holmes)
Well I like the music and I do like the Daleks because I did see the Peter Cushing DW film a few times when I was a kid and they are villainious so you know, that had to happen. But that is as far as I will go concerning DW. Ever. Mainly because a) I really hate sci-fi (I think I've seen maybe 5 sci-fi films in total and that doesn't include Star Wars because it's a fantasty that happens to be set in space *cough*) and b) thanks to the combined efforts of the BBC and the Radio Times (TV listing magazine) that insist on splashing DW all over the TV/front cover when anyone has a bowel movement on the show that doesn't conform with previous bowel movements, I am totally prejudiced in this instance and I ain't going to lie about it. But honestly it's not my thing at all, and if it hadn't been for the advertising campaign that clearly wants to make people think there is nothing else on TV (I almost had an accident when Downton Abbey was on the RT cover this week), I would just be disinterested. As it is now I glare, chomp at the bit and snort whenever I see an advert.

Which just goes to show how much I love all my DW loving buddies, because apart from the odd sly dig, I try not to let rip with any rants that will cause offence. :-)

@ Monty - Hahah. Now to be fair to me, the main reason I never saw Sherlock was because it was never recommended to me by either my mum or brother. Some of the best shows I have ever seen have been due to their recommendations and I heard diddly squat about it. Only when the re-runs appeared a few weeks ago did my mum pipe up "you'd like that". Yeah, thanks. I know everyone on here was raving about it... but then you guys rave about a lot of stuff I don't like or am not bothered about. :teehee:

Well we do make a lot of crap as well. :yes: Period dramas yes, comedies noooooooo.

Moriarty. Muhauhauhauhauha. Oh, the similarities with the Joker. I was half expectecting him to say when Sherlock was asking why he didn't just kill him "I don't want to kill you, what would I do without you, you complete me". The script fell a little short of that, but it was oh, so close. Pyschos with odd mannerisms and voices YES! When he walked through the door I could not believe it, and I admit it took a few minutes to realise "Ok, this is how they've gone with Moriarty", but I guess I wouldn't be me, if I didn't have an open mind for a different take on an old villain. Bit sad that he obviously was messing around with Molly just to create his character. :-(
Author:  Tinker Bell [ September 14th, 2011, 11:34 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Baker Street Irregulars (Sherlock Holmes)
YES!!! A Sherlock thread!! A place for me to talk and not put people to sleep!!! Hopefully.....
Anyway, I've been a Sherlock nerd since I saw Wishbone's adaptation of 'Hound of the Baskervilles'. Wishbone is awesome! So I've been a Sherlockian for at least 12 years. My favorite Holmes is Jeremy Brett, when I read the stories his portrayal is exactly the way I imagined Holmes to be, for the most part. When he was in between cases and was a wreck I saw him more as Downey Jr. played him.
Speaking of which, I love the new movies, I think its a different take on the character, and it brings out some of the qualities and quirks that seem to be overlooked by the character. I nearly jumped for joy in the theater when I saw the little things they sneaked in from the stories, like Holmes shooting holes in the wall, Watson's reference to the drug Holmes had that was meant for eye surgery, and when Holmes told Watson he had the grand gift of silence, that made him quite invaluable as a companion. The only thing that I didn't really like was Irene Adlers character, and I'm having problems working out if it was because it messed with Doyle's original character, or if was her relationship with Downey's Holmes...
But anyway, Jeremy Brett is Holmes, in my mind. I haven't seen more than bits and pieces of Basil's interpretation, admittedly. And I am very, very, very, insanely and crazily picky when it comes to actors portrayals of Holmes and pretty much anything to do with Holmes, so the idea of putting the character in modern times just didnt click right in my head. I watched the first 10 minutes of the show when it aired over here, but that was it. Sorry y'all, but I just couldn't do it. (now give me the new Robin Hood show they made just a few years ago and I can watch that for hours :drool: ) I just read an article that said they were bringing a modern Holmes tv series to CBS here in America, I think its supposed to be a whole new show, not the British one.
Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/