I suppose I'll start with, I began looking at Sherlock how we did Romeo & Juliet. What do we keep and what do we leave out to create a story based on Sherlock.
The primary things I've noticed now, after watching the episode of Elementary this week, is that the story is much more Sherlock when some form of abuse is included. Which I suppose makes Sherlock a big PG-13, but every version of Sherlock we've seen to date incorporates an element of substance abuse. Another thing is that Sherlock must be an abrasive arse for him to come across as himself. If he's not abrasive, it doesn't seem to work as well. It's self-explanatory that there must be a mystery to solve, and every great Sherlock must have a Watson of some sort.
Then I started thinking about which of these are fanfictions, which are parodies, and which are interpretations. I personally feel like every Sherlock we've watched or talked about has come off quite a lot like a fanfiction. Every story takes elements that the director or writer wants, and adds it in. Elementary is a cross between a fanfiction and an interpretation, and Robert Downey Jr.'s Sherlock movies are pretty much a straight fanfiction to me. BBC's Sherlock, though, has me debating. It's definitely part fanfiction, it deviates enough to have its own identity, but maintains the stories, which I suppose makes it an interpretation. I find that it leaves me with a bit of a sour taste in my mouth after an episode, though.
Now I'm wondering what else to think about, what else to talk about.
In London, when these stories were being published, I think I would have been one of the people walking about with a black armband after Sherlock was "killed". If his adventures were my form of stress relief, to have that taken away so abruptly would be a pretty big mood-killer. I empathize with them, as not only was Sherlock entertainment, but he was relatable, and an idol to most of his readers.
As we just watched Elementary though...
I also agree that this version of Watson is wonderful. I appreciate the fact that she is a strong willed and intelligent woman who does not inevitably end up in a relationship with her co-protagonist Sherlock, which as we discussed in class, would just ruin the whole thing. I'm also quite fond of how she isn't just constantly impressed/amazed with Holmes the way the original Watson is; makes her seem less like an easily impressed brown-noser, not to shit on our dear friend John Watson.
ReplyDeleteKaitlyn,
ReplyDeleteAs you and most other people have mentioned, portraying Dr. Watson as an empowering woman provided a refreshing and excellent take on the Watson character.
This also made me wonder how BBC's Sherlock would interpret Dr. Watson, as I've heard the episodes somewhat resemble Doyle's stories. While Watson was still in constant confusion/awe, he did act on his own accordance at times (whether or not to trust Sherlock Holmes and tracking him through the mobile phone). Doyle's Watson may have been as active in the later stories though... Great post!
LA
I 100% agree with you that Sherlock must be abrasive. Personally, I can't imagine a socially adept Sherlock - weirds me out. I think it's also part of why Watson is there. Watson points out if what Sherlock does or says is socially acceptable. I haven't seen any more of Elementary, but this is prevalent in both the RDJ movies and BBC's Sherlock.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with this Watson as a great character. I thought I wasn't going to like her because well, what other reason did the creator's gender switch her that to put her in a heterosexual relationship with Sherlock? It actually really bothered me to to point when my friend recommended the show, I was like, "Sure, eventually (never)." But after watching one episode I'm curious how her character develops and as Dr. MB said they don't end up together, I'm more willing to watch the series.
-Kirsten (don't mind the HowlingWindDragon name, I have no idea how to change it)