About a month ago I started reading the first Sherlock Holmes book, A Study in Scarlet. On Saturday I saw that BBC had made a new Sherlock Holmes series, aptly named Sherlock, starting on Sunday night. The book is only short, but I struggle to finish any kind of book, be it The Hungry Caterpillar or The Count of Monte Cristo (I’m about 10 pages in). However, Sunday’s episode was called A Study in Pink, it’s probably exactly 100% the same as the book I thought, and I didn’t want to ruin it, so I spent my Sunday persevering and somehow managed to finish the book with hours to spare.
I didn’t really need to. Save for a few details, the plot was changed completely. Written by Coupling and Dr Who writer Steven Moffat and League of Gentleman weird man Mark Gatiss, this was written superbly as you would now expect from these two. Though I have only read one book thus far, it is still clear that both Moffat and Gatiss are huge fans of Holmes and gave it the love and care it deserves.
Benedict Cumberbatch (best name ever) is cast perfectly as Sherlock Holmes, and delivers his lines quickly and effortlessly. There is an element of Dr Who about him, but there was also an element of Sherlock Holmes about Matt Smith’s Dr Who, so it could just be that, or the fact that they are both written by Moffat. Either way, the comparison is unavoidable, but I can live with it.
It would all be for nothing if they couldn’t find a good Dr Watson, but fortunately the ever affable Martin Freeman plays him brilliantly, mixing a slightly darker side into the role that we have not seen from him before. I never watch British mystery dramas because the characters are always damp, cold and two dimensional, though Moffat has a skill in creating vibrant characters, and the chemistry between the two leads makes for an infinitely more enjoyable show.
The plot was the weakest part of the show, and wasn’t as smart as you would expect. It contained elements of the book, but completely removed what was so compelling, and changed it for something that didn’t really make sense. It was focused more on creating a story arc than a stand alone mystery, and while the series as a whole might prosper, the individual episodes will suffer. (*OBLIGATORY SPOILER ALERT*)They are clearly gearing towards a confrontation between Holmes and Moriarty, but it didn’t make sense why Moriarty would hire a demented Roger Daltrey-esque cab driver to go on a random murdering spree, assumingly in an attempt to cajole Holmes into a devious trap or something.
As for the contemporary setting, it was hit and miss. London will always be dark and gritty, and will give something to the series in any time period, even if it is mainly filmed in Cardiff. The use of mobile phones was used a bit too much, and it looked like one of those Orange ads you see at the cinema, and I would rather not see Holmes solve every case with a phone.
Despite these drawbacks, it was still better than that crock of shit Guy Ritchie made, and still has a chance to improve. Cumberbatch and Freeman are a far superior duo than the smarmy bastards Robert Downey, Jr. and Jude Law are. Cumberbatch plays Holmes with much more restraint than the clown Downey, Jr. plays, and dog shit is more likeable than Jude Law, so Freeman is a colossal improvement. You could suggest (and I will) that because House is inspired so much by Holmes, that you would need to mention Hugh Laurie here, and yes, if you are comparing all three, then Laurie would win hands down, as he combines genius and bastard better than anyone.
I love the fact that we are seeing more and more protagonists who are genius bastards, and hopefully Sherlock will keep this trend going. The quality of British television is slowly rising (as other aspects of it are plummeting - turn on ITV or BBC3), and Sherlock looks like it will be another hit, and if Moffat and Gatiss are kind to us, will run for a very long time (as long as it doesn't turn out to be awful).
No comments:
Post a Comment