Wednesday, August 11, 2010

Yet Another Sherlock Holmes

Once, when I was very young, I fell in love with Sherlock Holmes. No, not the crabby drug addict from Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's books. The sweet, smart detective in the TV series who was played by Ronald Howard. (Not Ron Howard, the creepy anti-Catholic director; his father, Ronald.) But I have yet to find another Sherlock that satisfies me. Since I don't watch PG-13 comedies, I missed out on the Robert Downey, Jr. version of Sherlock Holmes that came out last year. Besides, I didn't want to see a movie with Sherlock as some sort of street fighter. (What is up with that, anyway?!) But! Masterpiece Theatre has a new series coming this November called Sherlock. The famous detective has now been transposed to the twenty-first century, along with his sidekick Dr. Watson and the ever-annoyed Inspector Lestrade. This could be really good (new and exciting) or really bad (updated with a lot of unnecessary sleaze). However, for what it's worth, here is the trailer on Masterpiece Theatre's website.
Penned by at precisely
Clues:

3 comments:

  1. BethanyAugust 23, 2010 at 5:48 PM

    Enjoyed looking around on your blog...but can't agree with you here.

    I think because Sherlock Holmes is a Sir Arthur Conan Doyle creation he should be as close to the real Holmes as possible.
    I loved all the books to death.

    I haven't seen the TV Sherlock Holmes, but I heard his character wasn't very close.

    The new movie doesn't do everything perfectly, but it certainly keeps with the spirit.

    I'm curious why you call it a comedy? It is funny, but I didn't know why it would be classified as such.

    Thanks for the blog and awesome posts!
    Miss Pickwickian

    ReplyDelete
  2. HydraAugust 24, 2010 at 6:52 AM

    Thanks for commenting! Well, I called the new movie a comedy because all I've seen are the commercials - which were filled with comedic moments. Plus, everything I've heard about it is that "it was funny" or "it wasn't that funny." So I assumed it was a comedy. I'm glad it stuck to the spirit of the books, though.

    In general, I agree with you that adaptations should stick as closely to the books as possible, especially when the books are classics like Sherlock Holmes. However, I do make exceptions for things I think are improvements. (Sorry if I'm stepping on someone's toes here.) I consider it an improvement if, like in the TV series, Holmes is a little nicer than he is in the stories. The original Sherlock Holmes (one might say the *real* Sherlock Holmes) seems rather too, ah, atheistic and unfeeling for my taste.
    ~Hydra

    ReplyDelete
  3. BethanyAugust 26, 2010 at 3:39 PM

    Thanks for commenting back. :-)

    I would call the 2009 Sherlock Holmes an action, thriller, adventure, crime, mystery. There are some light-hearted elements, but it doesn't really resemble a comedy. It is actually pretty dark.

    I just think *ideally* that a character should be like the character its creator made. If someone once to change that character to much they should make their own up. :-)

    Of course, this is all based on the fact that I think the Doyle's Sherlock Holmes an amazing character. He seems fully drawn, realistic, and (I think) very lovable with all his flaws. :-)

    So obviously I'm biased.

    Thanks for replying.
    Miss Pickwickian

    ReplyDelete

All comments on this blog must be approved by me before they are published for general viewing. Please refrain from using foul language. You may disagree with me or another commenter, but overtly hostile posts will not be published. Thank you.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)