Freedom Reborn

Community Forums => Film, Television, Video and Music Discussion => Topic started by: Uncle Yuan on October 03, 2011, 02:46:46 AM

Title: Sherlock
Post by: Uncle Yuan on October 03, 2011, 02:46:46 AM
I just took a chance on a new series - "Sherlock."  I was quite impressed!  It's a resetting of Sherlock Holmes into modern London, featuring Martin Freeman as Dr. John Watson, an Army doctor suffering from PTSD after a traumatic tour in Afghanistan (a beautiful synchronicity in history if ever there was one).  I knew I was in good hands all of three seconds into the show when the credits informed me that it was written and produced by Steven Moffat!

Frustratingly, like most BBC shows there are only a few episodes per "season."  I will definitely be keeping an eye out for more!
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: Glitch Girl on October 03, 2011, 02:55:00 AM
I caught it when they aired it on PBS, not knowing about the ending cliffhanger.  I was all ready for the next episode... only there was none [NOOOOOOOO!!!]

I agree, they managed to make the reset really really work and the two leads are amazing. 

Want more.  Want more now.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on October 03, 2011, 03:02:42 AM
Fear not, there are three more in the works, based on some of the most popular Holmes stories of all time.  In this case, A Scandal in Bohemia, The Hound of the Baskervilles and The Final Problem will become A Scandal in Belgravia, The Hounds of Baskerville and The Reichenbach Fall, all coming to you next year.

And I agree, very good interpretation.  Lots of references to classic stories, clever modern reimmaginings of classic scenes, and actors that feel right for the original characters.  I liked the big movie version okay, but after seeing these, I realized that wasn't the real Holmes, this was, forget the time period.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: Uncle Yuan on October 03, 2011, 03:11:27 AM
Quote from: catwhowalksbyhimself on October 03, 2011, 03:02:42 AM
Fear not, there are three more in the works, based on some of the most popular Holmes stories of all time.  In this case, A Scandal in Bohemia, The Hound of the Baskervilles and The Final Problem will become A Scandal in Belgravia, The Hounds of Baskerville and The Reichenbach Fall, all coming to you next year.

And I agree, very good interpretation.  Lots of references to classic stories, clever modern reimmaginings of classic scenes, and actors that feel right for the original characters.  I liked the big movie version okay, but after seeing these, I realized that wasn't the real Holmes, this was, forget the time period.

It's an interesting contrast, isn't it?  While I enjoyed Downey and Law, their characters felt VERY 21st century.  I agree, this series seems very emotionally true to the originals.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: doctorchallenger on October 03, 2011, 12:26:13 PM
Who ever takes over for Nolan on the Batman franchise should play the Riddler like they played Moriarty in Episode 3. Excellent series.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: B A D on October 04, 2011, 11:39:01 PM
Since Freeman is Bilbo and Cumberbatch is voicing Smaug we may have a bit of a wait
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: Figure Fan on October 04, 2011, 11:54:01 PM
I enjoyed Sherlock much more than the Downey movie version. The TV Version is so much fun to watch.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: Talavar on October 05, 2011, 12:49:17 AM
Quote from: B A D on October 04, 2011, 11:39:01 PM
Since Freeman is Bilbo and Cumberbatch is voicing Smaug we may have a bit of a wait

More Sherlock is coming in 2012.  It's part of the reason the next season of Doctor Who is being delayed.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on October 05, 2011, 01:39:50 AM
Actually, Moffat said that is not true and the two things have nothing to do with each other.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: Talavar on October 05, 2011, 03:21:34 AM
Quote from: catwhowalksbyhimself on October 05, 2011, 01:39:50 AM
Actually, Moffat said that is not true and the two things have nothing to do with each other.

True enough - I was doing some looking around the internets, and found that they've actually finished filming for the second series already.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: B A D on October 05, 2011, 03:32:25 PM
Rule #1: Moffat lies.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: RTTingle on October 16, 2011, 09:53:14 PM
I enjoy both Sherlocks immensely.  Like Batman, I feel as if the character can handle different takes very well.  I found the movie with RDjr very entertaining and true to the spirit and formula of the source material.  Caught the BBC series a few months back on my local PBS station and anxiously awaiting the next season.  The BBC series does the same and pulls off the modern setting seamlessly.  Yes, the small seasons are incredibly frustrating, but I'll take quality over quantity any day.

One of the episodes is named Reichenbach Falls?  Very interesting considering how that location ties into the Sherlock Holmes mythos.

Speaking of Holmes, I'm a HUGE fan of Edgar Allan Poe and until we see more of Sherlock Holmes on either screen... [url]The Raven[/url=http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/independent/theraven/] will hold me over just fine.  I always adored the stories that had Poe as the hero and so happy to see one finally brought to the screen (BTW, Poe Must Die is simply - awesome... FIND IT!).  I love, love, love Poe and think the man is sold all too short as being the writer of creepy short stories and poems, folks do yourself a favor and read everything from the man.  There is a reason why Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Jules Verne & H. G. Wells talk highly of the man, his "hoaxes" were incredibly science fiction.

As if the Poe movie isn't awesome enough, I can't wait to see the Nevermore haunted house at Universal Studios in Orlando for Halloween Horror Nights that is supposed to be walking into the nightmares of Poe.  In two weeks... I'm so there!

Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on October 16, 2011, 11:35:02 PM
Indeed, Poe is often considered to have invented at least 2 major genres still popular today--science fiction and detective fiction.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: Talavar on October 17, 2011, 01:44:23 PM
Quote from: catwhowalksbyhimself on October 16, 2011, 11:35:02 PM
Indeed, Poe is often considered to have invented at least 2 major genres still popular today--science fiction and detective fiction.

Detective fiction yes; science fiction no.  He was one of the early writers to work in science fiction, but definitely not the first.  Apart from a number of debatable entries from the 16 - 1700s, Frankenstein was published when Poe was a child.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on October 17, 2011, 09:00:28 PM
Here's where it gets a bit fuzzy.  Some people don't consider Frankenstein to be scifi and some do and there are other authors.  I myself don't have an opinion here, which is why I said he is considered to have invented, 'cause it largely depends on who you ask.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: Talavar on October 18, 2011, 12:40:44 AM
I don't see how Frankenstein couldn't be considered science fiction - not only is it one of the earliest examples of what is clearly science creating a beyond-normal event, it also has the archetypal science fiction theme: the abilities of the scientist have outstripped his moral capacity, and science runs amok.  It's also gothic horror, but it's hardly the first story to fit into more than one genre.

There are other early science fiction-ish writers, mostly in short fiction, but those are all earlier than Poe as well.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: Reepicheep on October 18, 2011, 10:55:59 AM
Frankenstein can be considered science fiction retrospectively. With nothing (or little) of its kind to compare it to or categorise with, it wouldn't have been able to invent the genre of science fiction. Cat is right in the regard that it could be considered Poe's work that actually gave it the banner.

Also, I personally have very mixed feelings about the Robert Downey Jr. Film. It was exciting and fun, but I just don't think it did Holmes much justice. He is amongst my favourite fictional characters. And if you haven't already some time in your life, try and watch the Jeremy Brett ones - unbeatable.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on October 18, 2011, 09:03:30 PM
Quote from: Reepicheep on October 18, 2011, 10:55:59 AM
Cat is right in the regard that it could be considered Poe's work that actually gave it the banner.

I would like to point out, again, that I never said anything of the sort, I merely paraphrased an extremely common opinion.  I have yet to state my own views on the matter, primarily because I haven't read Poe science fictiony stuff and thus can't comment much on them.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: Reepicheep on October 19, 2011, 09:20:24 AM
Quote from: catwhowalksbyhimself on October 16, 2011, 11:35:02 PM
Indeed, Poe is often considered to have invented at least 2 major genres still popular today--science fiction and detective fiction.

Isn't that something of the sort? Seems something of the sort to me...
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: catwhowalksbyhimself on October 19, 2011, 09:57:52 AM
note the words "is often considered"
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: Reepicheep on October 19, 2011, 10:17:40 AM
Ok, I'll rephrase.

The popular opinion that Cat pointed out (though not necessarily his own) is right in the regard that it could be considered Poe's work that actually gave it the banner.


This is why I'm more of a dog person.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: Previsionary on October 19, 2011, 02:08:25 PM
Quote from: Reepicheep on October 19, 2011, 10:17:40 AM
Ok, I'll rephrase.

The popular opinion that Cat pointed out (though not necessarily his own) is right in the regard that it could be considered Poe's work that actually gave it the banner.


This is why I'm more of a dog person.

I thought it was because a gang of cats attacked you on your way home from the bakery?
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: Tomato on October 19, 2011, 07:38:11 PM
We all know you orchestrated that prem, don't lie.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: Cardmaster on October 20, 2011, 05:11:13 PM
Quote from: B A D on October 05, 2011, 03:32:25 PM
Rule #1: Moffat lies.

I doff my cap to you, sir. Well played.

*finger steeple*

Well.... played.....
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: Reepicheep on October 20, 2011, 10:52:43 PM
Quote from: Tomato on October 19, 2011, 07:38:11 PM
We all know you orchestrated that prem, don't lie.

This is why I'm more of a premonitioner person.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: Tomato on January 02, 2012, 03:26:22 PM
Resurrecting this thread rather than making a new one.

So, Sherlock just came back for its second season... and wow, what a way to come back. 85 minutes of awesome (yes, I know it's 90 minutes long, but the first five go from recap to a rather odd scene that completely deflated the cliffhanger from season 1. So, 85  :P ) I don't want to go too deep into it because I wouldn't want to give too many spoilers, but suffice it to say that this series has, in my mind, completely supplanted the Downey Holmes stories as the best "modern" adaption of the character, and only a month after the second film.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: B A D on January 04, 2012, 05:16:53 PM
Man I missed this. Was this PBS again? or BBC America?
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: Glitch Girl on January 04, 2012, 05:18:13 PM
BBC America.  I don't have it either so us PBS folks gotta wait until May or dig online.  :(
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: Tomato on January 05, 2012, 03:48:28 AM
I don't know how much this helps, but apparently there will be a dvd release of season 2 late January. Might be easier to get your hands on then waiting for it to filter to pbs
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: RTTingle on January 06, 2012, 07:11:46 AM
Here you go...

http://suckertv.com/sherlock-season-2-episode-1-a-scandal-in-belgravia?a=watchnow

Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: Talavar on January 06, 2012, 05:40:39 PM
My, that was delightful.  Here's looking forward to Hound of the Baskervilles this weekend!
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: XStream on January 11, 2012, 11:42:19 PM
Noticed this is on Netflix (Yeah, I am one of the few that didn't cancel) the other day, and added it to Que.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: Tomato on January 11, 2012, 11:56:42 PM
Great second episode. I'll admit I have almost zero interest in horror stories in general, but this was presented in a way that was both entertaining and mysterious... And really, the idea of a government base as the new haunted house was great.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: Reepicheep on January 12, 2012, 08:27:49 AM
This is my favourite Sherlock Holmes novel (as, I'm sure, is true for many fans). I think they did it terrific justice, in their own way. Very exciting episode.


But next is The Final Problem which was just an awesome short story. I recommend anyone read it before it airs, because there is absolutely no doubt it is going to either have a phenomenal plot twist or a great cliff hanger.


Spoiler
I'm a bit unclear of how they're handling Holmes' cocaine addiction. They obviously don't want to say it out loud, but I can't tell if they've just replaced it with a smoking habit or if they're just being hush-hush.

Jeremy Brett (himself, not the director) actually opted for Holmes to drop his Cocaine addiction since he was such an idol to kids.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: Tomato on January 12, 2012, 09:35:38 PM
Spoiler
I think it's more or less replaced with the smoking habit, but they've alluded several times to the fact that Holmes has done cocaine in the past (the drug bust, the "perhaps something 7% stronger" remark in this last episode while he was struggling with nicotine withdrawl, etc.). But unless it comes up in one of the cases, I doubt it will play a huge role regardless.

I have to admit though, while I am perhaps most excited for the Sherlock/"Jim" rematch, I'm most afraid for that one as well. Whereas episodes 1 and 2 of this season were written by Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss respectfully (Gatiss also portrays Mycroft Holmes, for those not aware) who have already written stellar episodes of both Sherlock and Doctor Who, "The Reichenbach Fall" will be written by Steve Thompson, whose main accomplishments in television have been "The Blind Banker" from last season of Sherlock, and "The Curse of the Black Spot" from Doctor Who. IMHO, both of those were perhaps the worst episodes from their perspective seasons, and I'm just not sure putting your worst writer on the Sherlock finale is a great plan.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: Reepicheep on January 30, 2012, 02:51:35 AM
Spoiler
I'm semi-disappointed. I think I get most of how he did it, and it was interesting to work out. But throughout the episode, there just wasn't the chance for Sherlock/Cumberbatch to shine in the way he usually does ever so dynamically. Instead, Sherlock just seemed a bit dim and dumbfounded at points (even I didn't believe the computer code that opened any door shinazzle, and it definitely wasn't going to be a dozen or so numbers of binary). There was just no intellect behind how the plot let him be clever, except where ideas were taken from the original novels. Moriarty's plan was... artistic and theatrical rather than clever. Which I guess works to the effect desired. Altogether, I suppose I feel like Holmes just didn't put up much of a fight in this, and the story itself wasn't particularly intelligent - maybe a little too actiony.

I did appreciate, however, that we were left with a solvable mystery, and not so much a cliffhanger.

Next spoiler for my theories

Spoiler

Working backwards through the episode, its pretty clear that Molly was involved to announce Sherlock dead, since she works in a Morgue. So that ground is covered.

Watson was knocked to the ground by a person on a bike, who cycles on remorselessly. Who was he? Will call him Person A.

Before that, Sherlock jumps from the rooftop. We can be sure that is him. If it isn't Sherlock on the ground, however, it is made to look very similar to him.

Before that, Sherlock tells Watson exactly where to stand. Like, exactly. Which just so happens to be where the view is obscured by another rooftop.

(I don't get why Moriarty shot himself. That desperate to make Holmes commit suicide? Nah. If thats it, then... blergh to Thompson and his writing. That being said, Moriarty does die in the similar novel, so it may be an element of having to keep true to the book.)

Sherlock says the words "I am you". Possibly some connection with "I O U"? Other repeated lines I think might be important at this point are "You're on the side of the angels."

On the rooftop, Moriarty looks down at the ground and says "You have a spectator." or something similar. Why is that person brought to our attention? Will call him Person B.

Going back a little further, John receives a call from someone telling him to go back to Baker Street. This can't be part of Moriarty's plan, because Moriarty's gunman was ready at the hospital. More likely to be Holmes getting John into position. Who called him? Person C, for now.

It was Holmes who invited Moriarty to the rooftop. Not the other way around. At this point, Holmes must have known for sure that Moriarty planned on having Holmes commit suicide.

Part of me reckons that Holmes didn't need the so-called key, but he did need an adequate guess in order to con Moriarty into being honest about it.

Think back even further. The girl screams at Holmes. Ignoring the possibility that Holmes is actually guilty, somehow someone has managed to replicate Holme's image perfectly. Could be a double, could be a costume, could be a lot of things. The fact is, we know that it is definitely possible. I suppose that Holmes used the same technique in faking his death. Could Person B be involved in that?

Slightly before that, while trying to locate the warehouse the two kids are captive in, Holmes idly mentions that his homeless people network is more efficient than the police. I think this is the final clue. Its true to the books too. Holmes has an enormous army in his pocket at his disposal. Could they be people A, B and C?

Altogether, it seems to me that Holmes could use Person B to manage some sort of Switcheroo to make it seem like he landed, even though he had doctored the rooftop and the area to allow himself a safe landing. He had a whole night to do so, since he spoke to Molly as she was leaving the night before and it was daytime when he met Moriarty. It is possible that the body is him, or he used the same trick as Moriarty to recreate his image. He bought himself time by positioning John - the only person he really needed to deceive - exactly where he wanted and then, maybe, knocking him over with a bike. Finally, Molly faked his death on the paperwork, and Holmes is now officially dead.

I've read a few other ideas, one thing that helps my theory is that a disposal truck (driven by a homeless guy?) shoots past as Holmes falls, possibly allowing a soft landing and a quick getaway.

What I do not get is the motif IOU. If it really is "I owe you a fall", then I'm a bit 'meh'. Seems a little bit pointless, especially to call those letters 'the final problem' and then spraypaint them everywhere. I might need to watch the episode again to get it, if there is anything to get.

Another thing I noticed - did the gunman pointing at John look a lot like Sherlock to you? It was dark and I might be mistaken.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: Tomato on January 30, 2012, 03:14:00 AM
Spoiler

I can see where you're coming from with most of this, but having just watched everything a second time, I thought I might correct you on a few minor points

Quote(I don't get why Moriarty shot himself. That desperate to make Holmes commit suicide? Nah. If thats it, then... blergh to Thompson and his writing. That being said, Moriarty does die in the similar novel, so it may be an element of having to keep true to the book.)

I saw it more as Moriarty just being petty. He saw that he couldn't beat Holmes the way he wanted to, so he took his own life... and by doing so, he presumably doomed Holmes and/or everything he loved.

QuoteOn the rooftop, Moriarty looks down at the ground and says "You have a spectator." or something similar. Why is that person brought to our attention? Will call him Person B.

You misread the scene... what actually happens here is that a bus pulls up to the side of the building (not clear because the bus is already there when we first look down) and people start filing out... Moriarty sees this and says something like "Now we've even got witnesses" or sommat. It doesn't rule out your theory, but the scene does not point out one person in particular.

QuoteAnother thing I noticed - did the gunman pointing at John look a lot like Sherlock to you? It was dark and I might be mistaken.

I thought something similar, so I watched him closely the second time. It was clearly NOT Sherlock, nor was it really a decent lookalike.
Title: Re: Sherlock
Post by: bredon7777 on February 05, 2012, 01:54:39 PM
Spoiler

Quote from: Reepicheep on January 30, 2012, 02:51:35 AM

Spoiler

Working backwards through the episode, its pretty clear that Molly was involved to announce Sherlock dead, since she works in a Morgue. So that ground is covered.
Correct.

Quote
Before that, Sherlock jumps from the rooftop. We can be sure that is him.

No, we can't.  Our POV character for this scene is Watson, and I'm pretty sure we cant trust his perceptions. My money is on Sherlock dosing him with the HOUND drug, to render him suggestible.

Quote
(I don't get why Moriarty shot himself. That desperate to make Holmes commit suicide? Nah. If thats it, then... blergh to Thompson and his writing. That being said, Moriarty does die in the similar novel, so it may be an element of having to keep true to the book.)

Moriarty had been looking for an excuse to kill himself for ages.  That's why he kept talking about the "final problem", i.e. "Why should I stay alive in this boring world?".  The only reason he's stayed alive is because he's always won. When Sherlock demonstrated that he both could and would torture the hit call off code out of Moriarity, meaning Moriarity would lose, he gave Moriarity the excuse he'd been looking for to kill himself. That's why he thanked Sherlock so profusely.

Quote
Going back a little further, John receives a call from someone telling him to go back to Baker Street. This can't be part of Moriarty's plan, because Moriarty's gunman was ready atthe hospital. More likely to be Holmes getting John into position.

Not so much him getting John into position as getting him out of the way, but basically yes.

Quote
Think back even further. The girl screams at Holmes. Ignoring the possibility that Holmes is actually guilty, somehow someone has managed to replicate Holme's image perfectly.


You're overcomplicating.  Try this instead: "I came and got you once in the middle of the night. If you don't scream your head off every time you see this man, I'll come and do it again. And this time, you WON'T survive."