New 'Sherlock' series on BBC 1

Has anyone caught the new mini-series of updated Holmes stories on BBC TV? The first episode - A Study in Pink - was broadcast last weekend, two more to follow. Co-created by Mark Gatiss (from the League of Gentlemen) and Steven Moffat, it places Holmes and Watson firmly in the 21st. century. It is telling that, according to Gatiss, the two writers' favourite representations of the Great Detective were in the later, updated Basil Rathbone movies.

As a thriller, A Study in Pink wasn't bad but, of course, the problem for enthusiasts when looking at pastiches is whether they are entertained or irritated by the use of situations, objects, dialogue, etc. from the well known and much loved originals. I come down on the side of entertainment with this first episode. Most importantly, I thought that the writers demonstrated real liking and respect for the two main characters.

The story follows the plot of A Study in Scarlet reasonably closely, although it leaves out the Mormons. It begins with the first meeting of Watson and Holmes. Watson is an Army medic, retired after battle injury. As in Conan Doyle's time, Afghanistan is the most likely theatre of war in which he would have received his wounds, although Sherlock has to ask if it was Afghanistan or Iraq. Sherlock demonstrates his powers of observation and deduction using Watson's expensive mobile phone, rather than his watch (lifted from the Sign of Four). The case is scratched from being carelessly kept with coins and keys and there are scratches around the recharging socket rather than around the keyhole.

Three unrelated people are found dead, poisoned apparently at their own hands. I don't think that it could be considered a spoiler on this thread to say that, as in the original, a cab driver was responsible for the deaths, nor that he is living on borrowed time - the aneurysm being in his brain rather than his aorta. Motives (without the Mormons) and outcomes are changed and I think we have much less sympathy for the new cabbie than we did for poor Jefferson Hope. R-A-C-H-E is there, though not with quite the same meaning, Mrs. Hudson is "your landlady, NOT your housekeeper" and she looks at the two men telling them there is another bedroom upstair "if you need it." John Watson has swopped his army revolver for an automatic, which he somewhat improbably has hung onto. What bothered me most was that the cabbie has been allowed to keep his PSV licence with a diagnosed cerebral aneurysm.

Despite having a soft spot for Hansom cabs, fog, legal cocaine and handguns, and friends addressing each other by their surnames, I shall watch the remaining episodes with reasonable expectations.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00t4pgh

I loved it.
Of course, you're going to find the solution before the characters, but it's very entertaining to see Holmes figure it out.
The show does respect the characters and plays with their quirks rather well.
You have to see Sherlock pondering "It's a three-patch problem" while thinking. You're even going to like Lestrade and the dialogues are gold ("I'm a high-functioning sociopath"). Furthermore, the relationship between Holmes and Watson is at the center of the show and is wonderfully done.
Go watch it: even if it isn't perfect, it's fun, it's clever and, which is the most important point, it re-invents a universe we have come to know very well and shows us once again how unique and wonderful it is.

Oh, and the explanation for the mystery of Watson's wound is a pretty good one.

I thought as a contemporary mystery it was pretty good, and the actors were okay, and the lead actor had the right 'look', but it seemed to do what a lot of them do - slap on a lot of the superficial characteristics of Holmes (the drugs, the clutter) without getting to the heart of him. If you read the tales, you get a lot of insights into Holmes by what Watson says - this Holmes did not have 'a great heart as well as a great brain' and wasnt 'always a chivalrous opponent' - theres a character that is the source of the traits he has, but this seemed to concentrate only on the behavior. But thats just my opinion.
I only saw the first one, not interested enough to watch the second.

For Americans, the series is now airing on PBS Mystery! on Sunday nights. I misssed the first, but did see the second episode and can echo the comments of message 1. I enjoyed it and will watch more with "reasonable expectations."

I didn't care for the first episode, but decided to give it a second chance, and enjoyed the following episode better.

It's far better than that travesty of a movie that was released not too long ago.

Having seen them all, I agree with #1 in general.
It is by no means great television, and does little to extend the canon, but it offers some diversion. It's amusing to see how clever/contorted the writers must be to introduce some of the original plot and character points in the context of today's societal values and technologies.
I too (#2) think the main actors do a good job with the central relationship.
Having said that, from a purely originalist standpoint the third episode particularly is a bit of a mish-mash of multiple original stories with plot points from Bruce-Partington Plans, Study in Scarlet, Final Solution and others. Given that burn rate of source material I don't expect to see more than 8 of these produced.

I only caught last night's episode - having missed the first two. I liked it, and it was a bit refreshing to see a modern version that was not catering to the masses as much as the Robert Downey Jr. movie (though I liked that more than I expected to).

But the ending! What a cliffhanger!
Wonder how long we will have to wait until the next ones are televised.

7> Three more have been commissioned. They are due to be broadcast in the UK next Fall (Autumn 2011).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-11124783

Thanks!

Is there any YouTube video of the episodes at some point? I cannot access UK videos from UK channels' websites, as the viewing is completely off-limits for non-UK residents.

10> There are some trailers there I think, try searching for "Sherlock 2010", but there are also a lot of fan videos to wade through.
I'm not sure if BBC blocks their content in France (they do block content for the US).

In the US, it is available on PBS.org. My wife and I watched the first two episodes here:

http://video.pbs.org/video/1565831820/

It was posted in another forum that it will be available in the States until 12/7 on their site:

http://www.librarything.com/topic/101310#2294678

i was only able to see the latest episode, but i quite liked it. a FAR better 'revisioning' of the Great Detective than that thoroughly disposable movie from last year!

i like the way they salt the story with classic Sherlock-isms without just gratuitously plopping them out there.

yeah, good stuff imo.

I have a confession to make, fellow readers. Despite my fairly advanced age, I went all fangirl on this one - so no objectivity here! I loved the stories, willing to overlook flaws, loved the music, the cinematography, and above all ADORED the actors. More than a few of us are hopelessly hooked and waiting on pins and needles for the next installments!

I thought the 1st episode was just great, the second was a big letdown, and the final episode was just okay.

They'd better get cracking filming season two though, since 'Watson' is playing Bilbo Baggins in the two Hobbit movies he'll probably be stuck in New Zealand for two years ;-)

Rich

>14 quirkyspirit:

Me too! I didn't watch 'Sherlock' expecting it to be an exact replica of the stories - I think that would be rather unimaginative. What I got instead was completely new, fresh and extremely entertaining. I haven't had so much fun watching a TV show since Lost ended. Very much looking forward to the rest.

I watched all three eps in the span of two days and loved it. I ended up using a gift card that I've had sitting around a while to buy a copy of the Complete Sherlock Holmes since I couldn't find the books I thought I had, and have been watching all the stuff available through Netflix. I rather enjoyed the 2009 movie and am looking forward to the next, though I've always been a fan of the eccentric genius interpretation of Holmes more than the high society stuffy boy version.

Given, I haven't actually read any of the stories in years, so I might nit pick it more once I've read the stories over and rewatched Sherlock, but some of the unnecessary little changes bugged me a bit. Changing "the game is afoot!" to "the game is on!" I forget if Holmes actually says it in the stories or not (I know "Elementary my dear Watson" is kind of the Holmesian equivalent of "Beam me up Scotty!" in that both have entered common parlance, but never actually appeared in the source material) but it irked me that they changed it, as its probably his second most recognizable catch-phrase.

The modern Holmes is very much a creature of the 21st Century, and not many people use the word afoot anymore. I've been very pleased on the whole with the new interpretation, and I got delighted chills when I realized that the statement "You have been in Afghanistan, I presume" had become relevant again--though Holmes having to ask "Iraq or Afghanistan?" is a sad statement of the times, in that endless desert wars tend to run together.

I hope they do more exploration of what happened to John. The modern Watson as an adrenaline-junkie is fascinating.

Just received first and second seasons dvd sets and am enjoying them immensely. The third season won't be filmed till late 2013 and won't be out in the U.S. for at least another year. Watson may be Bilbo, but Holmes is the voice of Smaug and plays the character of the Necromancer in the Hobbit films.

As an aside, in the OP I expressed surprise that Watson had hung on to his handgun. Recently in the UK there has been a much publicised case of a former SAS sergeant who brought an automatic pistol home with him from Afghanistan. He was jailed at a court martial until press publicity and public opinion got the sentence susupended. He didn't keep the gun!

Yes, its difficult blending Doyle's fiction with contemporary reality. Doyle's Watson frequently carried his service revolver, but wouldn't have used it without knowing for certain that it was absolutely necessary to fire. Writing Holmes scripts or stories is difficult, as Doyle himself said. Each story requires the full detail and creativity of a novel, but has to be packed into a small package. I think the creators' greatest challenge is presenting scientific detective work as a unique trait of Holmes in a world in which forensic science is a given.

By the way, on the observation that Watson seems to be portrayed as an adrenaline junkie, many soldiers who have been dismissed from service due to their wounds feel an intense unsatisfied need to go back and finish the job and take vengence. They often can't wait to go back and when released from re-hab are disappointed they are being released from service. I think Sherlock's Watson is an example of this. Hence his introduction as having flashbacks to Afghanistan and receiving psychiatric counseling......

Sherlock has won a single award from a possible three nominations at the Broadcasting Press Guild Awards at a ceremony in Central London this lunchtime, with Benedict Cumberbatch winning for Best Actor.

The series featured in three categories - Best Drama Series, Best Actor (Benedict Cumberbatch) and the BPG Writer's Award (Steven Moffat).

Benedict's nomination and win was for both Sherlock and Parade's End, which led the pack with a total of five nominations across all categories. The World War I drama series took away four awards itself - Best Drama Series, Best Actor (Benedict Cumberbatch), Best Actress (Rebecca Hall) and the BPG Writer's Award (Tom Stoppard).

Just now got around to watching series two and looking forward to watching series three.

I enjoy watching this series and seeing how the original has been changed for the 21st Century.

I think it deserves every award. I'm a old stickler for the original stories. The Jeremy Brett series, for a true-to-original period production, can hardly be excelled.

When I heard the new series would be set in the modern day, I groaned. But I loved everything they've done with it. The writers are brilliant.

What's amazed me is the extent to which they've made see more in the original stories than I remembered at all. Like that Watson was in Afganistan. Yeah, and we're still in the same war!

Every detail, however outrageously modernized, is traceable to what was in the original stories. Which we're now realizing were more rich than we even appreciated.

Yes, if Sherlock were a young man today, he would be on the net. And Watson would have a blog. No question. I can't speak for Conan Doyle, but it's my suspicion that he'd be tickled.

Can't wait for the next one.

Am so looking forward to seeing how Holmes reintroduces himself to Watson in Sherlock and the third cinema Holmes film, coming out shortly. Watson fainting dead away, as in Doyle's original treatment, was used as evidence that Watson was female and his wife back in the 50's.

Could Watson's reaction to Holmes return have been handled better? Did you scream with laughter? Did we not say, bravo, Watson!

But Watson's wife turning out to be a ... Well I think that was going toooo far.

But it's still so rich; not only can you enjoy the re-runs. You have to watch the re-runs several times to get it all!

That has been the joy and strength of this series of films. There are many layers of hidden gems in each installment, that require frequent revisitation to catch. I suspect the writers have far more fun with the show than any of us have :-).

What did eveyone think of series 4?

Ep2 was quite good, but 1 and especially 3 seemed very odd. 3 seemed completely off canon, which is much unlike the rest. There were a few short story references, but the main plot seemed invented. Didn't much like.

I'll tell you when it gets released on Netflix.

>31 reading_fox: I do agree about episode 3. I suppose it is OK for enthusiasts to think about an explanatory back story to account for Sherlock's personality but I consider that an essentially private matter not to be thrust upon an eager public.

>33 abbottthomas: Episode 3 almost seemed like a final finale at the end especially with all the family members Freeman's wife, Cumberpatch's mum and dad. Moffat says he and Gatiss have plotted a 5th season however.

>31 reading_fox:

If the phrase "Jumped the Shark" hadn't previously existed, we would have had to invent it to describe Series 4.

https://www.tor.com/2017/01/16/emotional-context-sherlock-the-final-problem/

Seems like a good takedown.

>35 cpg: Yes absolutely.
>33 abbottthomas: Interesting that it's plotted. Apparently the actors/bbc have no plans as yet, so it will be at least 'two weeks' until it's made.