Yes It's A Lot Of Fun, But...
Jan. 2nd, 2014 10:40 amForget about Sherlock's death dive that wasn't, what I want to know is how the bad guys managed to build Watson into a bonfire in a London Square without anybody noticing and- again- how Sherlock managed to persuade a couple of strangers to cede him their motor scooter and- again- why the North Koreans would have any interest in blowing up the Palace of Westminster. I could go on. Every bloody thing that happens in this bloody show is implausible.
The laws of time and space- and common sense and political reality- are bent this way and that as narrative requires. This isn't proper drama; in real drama the world pushes back against the protagonist- gives him some resistance- but here the opposition is so much wet cardboard- to be punched through with the twitch of a superpower or eluded with a jump cut. There's no real emotion either- just a tacky vein of bromantic sentimentality. Sherlock is an affectless calculating machine except that he wuvs John. Oh God, everything in this universe is so easy.
Conan Doyle was a realist. His Sherlock operates out of the muddy, foggy world of late Victorian London- dealing mostly with small time crime- fraud, thievery, blackmail, domestic murder. His world constrains him. If he needs to get somewhere in a hurry he hails a cab or catches a train. The fate of nations is rarely in the balance. There are no hair's breadth escapes, no ticking bombs. Guns are rarely fired. With the exception of Moriarty- who has an active role in a single story- there are no super villains. Moffat and Gattis are credited with bringing Holmes into the 21st century but that's not at all what they've done; what they've done is translate him to fairyland.
The laws of time and space- and common sense and political reality- are bent this way and that as narrative requires. This isn't proper drama; in real drama the world pushes back against the protagonist- gives him some resistance- but here the opposition is so much wet cardboard- to be punched through with the twitch of a superpower or eluded with a jump cut. There's no real emotion either- just a tacky vein of bromantic sentimentality. Sherlock is an affectless calculating machine except that he wuvs John. Oh God, everything in this universe is so easy.
Conan Doyle was a realist. His Sherlock operates out of the muddy, foggy world of late Victorian London- dealing mostly with small time crime- fraud, thievery, blackmail, domestic murder. His world constrains him. If he needs to get somewhere in a hurry he hails a cab or catches a train. The fate of nations is rarely in the balance. There are no hair's breadth escapes, no ticking bombs. Guns are rarely fired. With the exception of Moriarty- who has an active role in a single story- there are no super villains. Moffat and Gattis are credited with bringing Holmes into the 21st century but that's not at all what they've done; what they've done is translate him to fairyland.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-02 11:06 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-02 11:24 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-02 01:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-02 02:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-02 03:29 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-02 03:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-02 03:35 pm (UTC)Maybe I am being too hard on him, maybe he's trying for an Avengers sort of thing (Patrick McNee Avengers, not the comic book, for the uninitiated). But if so even that isn't working.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-02 03:45 pm (UTC)(Wherein my husband gave me a Look, which I interpreted after 20 years of companionship as 'And we are watching this why?') -_-
no subject
Date: 2014-01-02 04:29 pm (UTC)I really don't feel I need to have everything spelled out for me in previous little scenes, you know?
no subject
Date: 2014-01-02 05:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-02 05:45 pm (UTC)I liked the first two seasons. Either I was mistaken about them or the show has suddenly became a whole lot stupider.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-02 05:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-02 07:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-02 07:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-02 09:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-02 11:29 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-03 04:38 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-03 06:03 am (UTC)I haven't watched 'Elementary' yet, the current US updated Sherlock, but the lack of 21st century-ness in the Gattis/Moffat one and the fact that in Elementary Dr Watson is played by Lucy Liu has made me plan to watch it.
(I do enjoy Sherlock a lot but I also haven't read Conan Doyle and I'm not really comparing it to anything except maybe recent Doctor Who, which it is quite similar to.)
no subject
Date: 2014-01-03 08:46 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-03 08:52 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-03 08:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-03 09:00 am (UTC)Sherlock and Dr Who seem to be on a collision course. I think Moffat has taken on too much- running both shows.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-03 02:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-03 03:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-03 05:49 pm (UTC)For me the definitive on-screen Holmes is Jeremy Brett.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-21 06:31 pm (UTC)And I didn't care. I was just so happy to see my old friends again and catch up with them. I also thought the wacko how-i-did-it theories played out as actual scenes was a hoot, especially the Holmes/Moriarty slash one. And I was so proud of Roy for watching it without squirming -- much.