Kilts in new Sherlock Holmes

[creagdhubh]

I couldn't get through the first half hour of the first Downey film..I think I will give this one a miss too (though Stephen Fry as Mycroft is tempting..). I'm really excited for Steven Moffat's next instalment of "Sherlock". New Year's day can't come soon enough!

Congrats on the shilling SFCRick!

Sara
Retired member of the "Bootmakers of Toronto"

YES! I almost forgot about Moffat's BBC series, Sherlock. What a fantastic, modern approach to Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson. Well acted, and a sound plot.

[BoldHighlander]

Having read the entire canon several times and having watched a lot of folks try poorly to bring Holmes up to date (why on earth would anyone want to do that?) my absolute favourite portrayal was by Jeremy Brett in the television series. Vive Jeremy!

Indeed. I do miss Jeremy Brett & selfishly wish his health had endured a wee bit longer.

I also enjoy Basil Rathbone. Another that I enjoy is the film "Murder By Decree" starring Christopher Plummer as Holmes & James Mason as Watson. I love the chemistry between the two.

YES! I almost forgot about Moffat's BBC series, Sherlock. What a fantastic, modern approach to Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson. Well acted, and a sound plot.

I have to admit I'm very much a purist / traditionalist when it comes to my Holmes, I really do not like to see him messed with much (some of the Rathbone stories aside). However I find this new take on "Sherlock" to be simply brilliant!

[McClef]

Just about any rendition of Holmes is better than the "modernised" rubbish versions the BBC is currently putting out.l

(and I say that as an admirer of Benedict Cumberbatch who is playing him)

[OC Richard]

Just about any rendition of Holmes is better than the "modernised" rubbish versions the BBC is currently putting out.l

(and I say that as an admirer of Benedict Cumberbatch who is playing him)

I've not seen that, but several friends have been raving about how good it is.

[piperdbh]

I've not seen that, but several friends have been raving about how good it is.

I hope you consider the Mrs. and me as friends, Richard, because we really like that series, too. It's not meant to be a rehash of the canon; it's its own thing, something new.

[McClef]

It can be indeed hard to recognise the plots as being Conan-Doyle at all.

A name is used and made something entirely different (Baskerville is not a hall but a top secret testing establishment for example) and the massacre of the plot continues with the hound being some drug induced hallucination. Cringeworthy stuff IMHO and I wonder how many Holmesians would be that enthusiastic.

Perhaps I am just too big a fan of period dramas being kept in the period in which they were set.

[Paul Henry]

It can be indeed hard to recognise the plots as being Conan-Doyle at all.

A name is used and made something entirely different (Baskerville is not a hall but a top secret testing establishment for example) and the massacre of the plot continues with the hound being some drug induced hallucination. Cringeworthy stuff IMHO and I wonder how many Holmesians would be that enthusiastic.

Perhaps I am just too big a fan of period dramas being kept in the period in which they were set.

Well at least some in The "Sherlock Holmes Society " seem to have rather enjoyed it The District Messenger - sherlock holmes society Newsletter
And as to the plots, I would suggest they are indeed very much in the spirit of Doyle, sometimes it is good to see a period piece replayed in a different setting, it brings all sorts of new insights, you only have to think of the Shakespeare plays for example with Patrick Stewart to see how powerful and moving they still are

[Father Bill]

It can be indeed hard to recognise the plots as being Conan-Doyle at all.

A name is used and made something entirely different (Baskerville is not a hall but a top secret testing establishment for example) and the massacre of the plot continues with the hound being some drug induced hallucination. Cringeworthy stuff IMHO and I wonder how many Holmesians would be that enthusiastic.

Perhaps I am just too big a fan of period dramas being kept in the period in which they were set.

I confess - while not one of those who remembers every intimate detail of the canon (for which reason I have not allied myself with the new group of Holmes-lovers here at XMarks) I do like things left the way they were by original authors.

As a child and teen, I read the original Holmes canon many times, as much for the geographical and historical settings as for the characters, so I get a bit huffy when those are abandoned in the name of originality. In the mind of this former teacher of English in general and literature in particular, if one wishes to be original, then one should be able to write a new script without kidnapping unwilling characters. To do otherwise seems to me a lack of creative ability.

My tuppence!

[Paul Henry]

Just about any rendition of Holmes is better than the "modernised" rubbish versions the BBC is currently putting out.l

(and I say that as an admirer of Benedict Cumberbatch who is playing him)

I've seen both series so far, and thought they were really good, lots of clever nods to the original books, lots of witty lines, some very tongue in check ( like the deer stalker ones) comments, altogether a good series, and it has received many positive reviews, it might not be to everyone's taste, but certainly not rubbish.

[M. A. C. Newsome]

Just about any rendition of Holmes is better than the "modernised" rubbish versions the BBC is currently putting out.l

(and I say that as an admirer of Benedict Cumberbatch who is playing him)

The first few episodes are available on Netflix here in the US, and my wife and I have watched them, and enjoyed them. Of course I was expecting a modern remake "in the Holmsian tradition" rather than anything else. I enjoyed what I saw and am looking forward to more episodes becoming available over here.