Elementary - UK Pace - No Spoilers Please
Heavenly
Posts: 31,915
Forum Member
✭✭✭
Contemporary twist on Sherlock Holmes.
Jonny Lee Miller and Lucy Liu star.
Tuesday, 22 October - 9pm - Sky Living HD
Jonny Lee Miller and Lucy Liu star.
Tuesday, 22 October - 9pm - Sky Living HD
0
Comments
9pm Sky Living HD
More House than Holmes..... a procedural crime drama.
Ok but nothing special.
^This^
As a life long fan of Sherlock Holmes, I must say Elementary is shaping up to be the definitive modern interpretation of the classic. It narrative feels much closer to classic Holmes than the BBC's 'Sherlock', which whilst good, is far too reliant on deus ex machina story endings and aside from the characters names doesn't feel related to the classic in terms of style or substance.
I would say that it was more Lie to Me, than House personally.
the Holmes character was a lot like Tim Roth's character in that show (Dr. Carl Lightman) with all of the quick deducements about a person's character I felt.
I think the best way to watch this is to forget all about the original and see it as a new show.
Exactly right. Anyone who's read the stories will enjoy picking up the many (some subtle, some more obvious) references in Sherlock to the characters, dialogue, events and other situations that are straight out of Conan Doyle. It's fantastic research, knowledge and writing on the part of Moffatt and Gattiss.
Elementary has none of that. I get the impression that whoever is writing it probably has never read any of the stories, and has just decided to write a TV series based around an updated version of an eccentric detective called Holmes and a medical sidekick called Watson, probably from what they've seen in previous Sherlock Holmes films and TV and dumped them in NY.
I've enjoyed the first two episodes of this a lot. I also love Sherlock.
I've never read (nor do I particularly care to) the books, so I don't know about what's closer to them.
Then you have the wrong impression. The creator of Elementary is a big fan of the Conan Doyle stories. His show is simply designed as an adaptation of the CHARACTER of Sherlock Holmes to modern times, not a retelling of the original stories with modern twists, and Jonny Lee Miller's character certainly has the attributes of Conan Doyle's character. Did Moffat and Gatiss slavishly reproduce what Conan Doyle wrote? No, they made changes. Elementary makes changes too, but more of them. The idea that some changes are okay but more changes constitute an outrage won't wash. If you want to be a "purist" then condemn the BBC Sherlock too (in fact, quite a few purists do condemn it). And weren't Moffat and his supporters up in arms about the prospect that Elementary would just be a copy of Sherlock? Now that Elementary has proven to be a very different sort of adaptation of Conan Doyle, rather than one imitating Moffat, one might've expected the supporters of Moffat to be happy.
But two episodes in with Jonny Lee Miller's Holmes, and I'm Hooked.
Agreed - felt like I had seen it all before
Nor would I expect literary Watson to be the one who found the key clue. Holmes did little. The body of the murderer was found by the postman. Even the phone would probably have been found eventually. I'm also not sure how much of Holmes' deduction stands up. He'd been told Watson's name in advance, and he said he'd googled her to find out about her parents, so presumably he also got the information about her being a surgeon the same way, and merely pretended to deduce it. He's lied at least once, claiming to be more brilliant than he is.
Basically, for me, these are not much like the literary characters at all. (Which doesn't make it a bad show, as I said earlier. Just forget any connection with the books.)
Elementary is not a US version of a UK show.
+1
The Moffat version isn't and shouldn't be expected to be the only TV adaptation of Sherlock Holmes.
Did I say that they did? No
In your opinion. And I'm not talking about changes, I'm talking about a complete lack of references to the original. There is nothing from the original stories in anything to do with the series except their names, professions and the quirkiness of his characterisation. Sherlock is a much more intelligent and informed reworking.
I don't. I could ask you to point out where I said I did, but that would embarrass you, so don't bother
And by the way, I like it.
When people write things, they don't just "say," they "imply," okay? I addressed a couple of things that I believe were implied in the comment I responded to.
And the "references" to the stories ARE the things you say -- names, professions, quirks of characterization. Those are the references the producer chose to limit himself to, as he didn't want to reference any plot points in stories. You haven't explained what is wrong with that. And if you say you like the show, then I don't get the complaining tone. And I agree with you that Sherlock is a more intelligent reworking (I don't know about "informed," because the producer may know every bit as much about the source material as Moffat and Gatiss; he simply chose to incorporate less of the original material in his adaptation).