Sherlock (2010)- BBC

Finally!

Sherlock, a 2010 series created for the BBC is now being shown in America on PBS (under the Mystery! label) and it's been well worth the wait. After only seeing the very first episode ("A Study in Pink"), I feel I can safely say that this is the best "reimagining" of the Holmes canon ever. Under the loving guidance of Steven Moffat (who revamped, reimagined and revitalized Dr. Who) this brings Holmes into the 21st century with the appropiate updating of social mores and technology. Benedict Cumberbatch is Sherlock and Martin Freeman (from the Office-BBC!) is Dr. Watson.

The first episode repurposes the "origin story" with some nice twists and turns. Technology takes a role in the story as well but never diminishes the role of the Great Detective. There is inventive use of texting and GPS (so simply and eloquently utlized one wonders why no one has do it in this manner before.) Some pastiches, quotes and motivations from other stories make their way into this modernization, but it never feels hamhanded or forced. Lestrade is more confident and competent though other doubters are brought to cast asperisations on Holmes' sanity.

I was able to guess (I know, it's destructive to the logical faculty) the character twist at the end of the episode fairly early on, but otherwise I was immensely impressed by this show and I cannot reccommend it enough.

A nice, smart exchange that could have been in the canon as well:

WATSON: That was the most ridiculous thing I've ever done.

HOLMES: And you invaded Afghanistan.

This series is playing now on PBS, but the DVD set is available for purchase.

Slightly Off-topic

I don't play Sherlock Holmes games. Especially video-games. Those tend to be fancy picture-searches and I hate those. This clip from YouTube helps support my disdain even though it is hilarious:

Sherlock Holmes (2009, from Asylum Prod.)

I should have waited a few months and it would be full year since I updated.

Let's take a look. I still haven't seen the Sherlock Holmes from 2009 starring Robert Downey Jr. BUT, I have seen the other Sherlock Holmes movie that was released in 2009. It was a straight-to-video release from Asylum Productions, creators of such fine fare as Transmorphers and The Terminators. They go a little crazy by having Holmes fight some dinosaurs (which is weird since England is about 4o degrees colder than dinosaurs would be able to survive... I think they would probably get cold, sleepy and then fall over dead. Anyway...)

Sadly, even though they upped the ante by adding various thunder lizards they also thought it would be prudent to use the Guy Ritchie model* and made Holmes a young, dashing, cad more than the brilliant gentleman of canon. It's frustrating. Just like the big-budget version, this does little more than lip-service to the Great Detective and just trades on the name. The trailer is fun however.

Murder by Decree

This 1979 movie has a great pedigree. I was especially excited while watching it as I seemed to remember various scenes from my childhood. This film must one of those on a tight turn-around on Saturday afternoons and late night network fillers. And there's a great reason for that.... it's great!

Murder by Decree has Christopher Plummer, James Mason and Donald Sutherland! It features Sherlock Holmes pitted against Jack the Ripper (again!) I will strive to not spoil anything in case you haven't seen it yet, but I think the very title reveals almost too much! I mean, who gets to make "decrees"?!

Plummer does a fun turn as Holmes. Not very stuffy and much more a man of action without betraying the character of the Great Detective. Much more of note is James Mason. He does a fantastic job as Watson and only took the part if he could rewrite or add a few scenes that give the good doctor dignity and intelligence; here is a man worthy of being the partner of the Worlds Greatest Detective. There is an absolutely delightful and telling scene with just Holmes, Watson and the case of the last pea:

The basic premise/conceit of the movie is the same as From Hell so it might seem a mite familiar. The ending could never be done today. Not the plot, but pretty much Holmes has a meeting with three officials and debates with them for about 10 minutes. And then the credits. Weird, but satisfying to me. I liked this movie very much. It is available on Netflix.

Sherlock Holmes vs. Dracula

The full title is "Sherlock Holmes vs. Dracula: The Adventure of the Sanguinary Court." The book is well written, fully aping both Doyle's and Stoker's mannerisms and atmosphere. Some of the scenes are quite effective, but ultimately this book fails to live up to the title! Here, Sherlock Holmes, the world's greatest detective is relegated to third banana.. he is seemingly always playing catch-up to Harker, the protagonist from the Dracula novel.

Estleman is so reverent to the Dracula novel that Holmes is irrelevant and inconsequential to the story. It's similar to the trend in publishing today; just dropping in bits of horror into literary classics like Pride & Prejudice & Zombies..) The reader, along with Holmes, must make a giant leap over the supernatural hurdle ("The world is big enough for us. No ghosts need apply.") and the book doesn't make the jump or make it worthwhile.

The Return of Moriarty

John Gardner has written a trilogy dealing with Professor Moriarty (The Return of..., The Revenge of..., and simply, Moriarty (which came out this year.))

While I do enjoy his attention to details and reading about the details of the Napoleon of Crime and his empire, all three rely on one simple thing; Sherlock Holmes' forbearance.

Set almost immediately after The Adventure of the Empty House, "The Return of Moriarty" states that the Professor and the Great Detective had entered into "an understanding" where they will not engage each other. That doesn't sit well with me. From the canon we understand that Holmes would perish gladly if he could be sure that Moriarty was destroyed, but a few years later he's okay with a criminal empire being run in England? I might understand if the agreement kept Moriarty out of Great Britain, but not for this seeming acceptance by Holmes of Moriarty's evil.

Sherlock Holmes' passion for justice, and not the law, was always a major part of the character to me and this condonation seems anathema.

So, sadly, I have to give all three books a thumbs down. I didn't like them. (though I did read all three and what does that say about me?)

7% Solution

The Seven-Per-Cent Solution by Nicholas Meyer.

It’s a fun, quick read and probably the first “major” Sherlock Holmes historical team-up. It was made into a rather successful movie starring Nicol Williamson and Robert Duvall as Holmes and Watson, respectively. The book has Watson discovering that Holmes is in severe addiction throes and decides to trick his friend into seeing a new specialist in Vienna. With Dr. Freud’s help, Sherlock remembers and confronts a secret from his past and then they solve a crime.

It’s one of the better non-canon reads and deserves the reputation it has. It is interesting to note that Nicholas Meyer wrote this book when he was only 28. He would later direct another historical fiction, the movie Time After Time, where H.G. Welles chases Jack the Ripper into the 20^th century.

The book was quite popular so you should be able to find it used for very cheap and then movie is on Netflix and pops up on cable once in a while.