About Modern Day Sherlock, Were You Convinced?

[Undead Medic]

I have to confess to having had a mixed reaction when it surfaced that Sherlock was to be in a contemporary setting. I did find myself wondering whether it would still feel like the same characters.

 

What are your views on this, Do you like the contemporary feel or are you more of a traditionalist?

 

My own personal feeling now is that it worked incredibly well, because the stories were never meant to be dusty old period relics, but contemporary tales set in the times in which they were created.

 

Your thoughts?

[aely]

I adored they idea that 2 fans of ACD - whose work I love and respect - were essentially essentially saying "look, *this* is what Sherlock Holmes is about, the characters and the cases... the rest is just packaging" and they did just what Holmes needed - not just a modern day retelling but bringing it into the harsh light of the present day and proving to lots of other people that the Sherlock Holmes stories aren't just about the setting.

 

When I first saw 'modern day retelling' I thought, that could be interesting. Then I saw who was involved in the writing and I thought that *will* be interesting. I was right.

 

So, initially undecided I think but very quickly warming to the idea.

Edited March 5, 2012 by aely

[Banshee]

At the time, I was very much undecided. I did wonder how much Victorian England could be taken out of Sherlock Holmes before it stopped being, well, Sherlock Holmes. I needn't have worried, really. Because Moffat and Gatiss didn't try to "refresh" Sherlock Holmes into a modern setting, but rather tried to make Sherlock was it was when it was published: contemporary. Slight difference, I know, but it made a huge difference to the result, I think.

 

Plus it's Moffat and Gatiss, and so far, they haven't disappointed!

[subtle science]

I was undecided--but intrigued because of the Moffat connection (and, later, I found out that Gatiss would be involved as well): I figured that, surely, the stories and characters must be in good hands....

 

I agree that one of the key components is that the original stories were written to be cutting edge: Holmes, according to Doyle, is all about new scientific methods. That emphasis tallies beautifully with placing Holmes in the world of modern forensics--it's what the 1880s character was already doing.

 

Plus, Moffat and Gatiss kept London as one of the main characters: Victorian or 21st century--doesn't matter; what matters is the flavor and tone of that iconic city.

[Banshee]

Plus, Moffat and Gatiss kept London as one of the main characters: Victorian or 21st century--doesn't matter; what matters is the flavor and tone of that iconic city.

 

Indeed!

[believeinsherlock]

I was definitely a "no" person. Being a lifelong Sherlock fan I was really sceptical about doing a modern Sherlock and I didn't watch any of the first series when it was actually on. It's my parents fault I'm now completley Sherlocked because when Belgravia came out on New Year's Day I was round at their house and they made me watch it! And I totally fell in love with it although it was only after Reichenbach when I'd been unable to sleep for 2 nights thinking of theories that I realised I was totally obsessed. Then I went back and watched the first series. Now I feel stupid for ever having doubted that it could work - it's obvious! And I honestly think Cumberbatch has it spot on - that's exactly what a modern Sherlock would be like. Also, love the fact that I have the same phone as Sherlock....

[Sherlocked]

I just love Sherlock Holmes in any shape or form (seriously, next to Cumberbatch and Freeman, my favourite interpretation is Disney's The Great Mouse Detective), so I wasn't wholly worried. But I did have my reservations, like Banshee said I wondered how much they could take Sherlock out of the Victorian setting without it completely failing.

 

But they got it so right.

So, so right. And I think that it is down to the writing - they manage to keep so much canon/actual lines from the books in and it just works.

 

All hail Moffat and Gatiss!

 

 

What do you guys think about Elementary? I don't see how a female John (Joan - eww) will work. The whole Watson-Holmes relationship is basically built up on sexual tension/bromance. To make Watson a girl will just change the whole dynamic of the story.

Edited March 20, 2012 by Sherlocked

[Undead Medic]

What do you guys think about Elementary? I don't see how a female John (Joan - eww) will work. The whole Watson-Holmes relationship is basically built up on sexual tension/bromance. To make Watson a girl will just change the whole dynamic of the story.

 

We have a topic on that abomination idea, Here.

[Dexter]

There are so many films in the original time.

Transfering Sherlock into modern times is brilliant. You may not like it of course because it is different. But that's exactly what makes it interesting and not just another film. Compare to the recent movies with Downey Jr / Law. They also tried to bring the stuff in kind of modern fashion but I think the result is just average.

[InGenHarborMaster]

I was slightly skeptical about it but I was very happy to see them take the world of Sherlock into our modern era. It turned out to be quite brilliant !!

[Carol the Dabbler]

... Moffat and Gatiss didn't try to "refresh" Sherlock Holmes into a modern setting, but rather tried to make Sherlock was it was when it was published: contemporary....

"

 

Right -- it isn't "Sherlock Holmes in modern dress," the way Shakespeare is sometimes done. It's speculative fiction: "What if Sherlock Holmes and John Watson had been born in the 1970's?"

 

I didn't vote in the poll, because I had heard absolutely nothing about Sherlock before watching it. My husband and I were visiting a friend, and she had the TV on, and we happened to arrive just as "A Study in Pink" began. All three of us were completely charmed by it, of course!

[besleybean]

I voted undecided.

But to be honest, it was more that I didn't really think about it.

I saw the trailer and just thought it looked brilliant.

[Kathi]

When I first heard, what they were going to do, I thought: "This can't be good!" I imagined a Sherlock listening to Hiphop in his pimped-up car and sleeping with hordes of women. Back then, I didn't know who was behind the project and I think I hadn't noticed that is was a British show, not an American version. When I finally watched the first episode and the first scene came on screen, I thought: "Okay, probably, it will be a way too serious show, without lovable characters." Honestly, I don 't know what made me think that. I just remember thinking that.

 

How wrong I was!

 

From the second scene of the first episode to the last scene of "Reichenbach" I was hooked and I've been ever since. I love everything about it. I love every single character. I think they did a perfect job in modernising the original stories. It's dramatic, and funny, and heart-warming, and unnerving, and smart, and surprising, ... I could go on and on.

[Carol the Dabbler]

... When I finally watched the first episode and the first scene came on screen, I thought: "Okay, probably, it will be a way too serious show, without lovable characters." Honestly, I don 't know what made me think that....

Well, I can see how John Watson's Technicolor_TM nightmares might give a person that sort of an impression!

 

 

How wrong I was!

Yup!

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

I was uncertain at the time. Regular American tv tried it twice. Once in 1984 and again in 1994 and both times they bombed, badly. You can catch these on Youtube. Both have the title "The Return of Sherlock Holmes". Just type in one of the two dates.

 

I thought it a possibility because Sherlock Holmes of the Victorian era was very much a modern man using every modern convenience and technological advancement available at the time. When I heard British TV was going to give it a go, I was a little more hopeful and they didn't disappoint. I wasn't able to catch the full series on Channel 12 but I watched what I could and was impressed. Even more so when I was able to send for the full series on DVD. I never get tired of watching them at all.

[besleybean]

Essential viewing and listening!

[SolitaryCyclist]

I was skeptical that Holmes would be translated to the 21st century with his personality intact. Was afraid that producers and writers would figure 'a new angle' on Sherlock and murder him in the process. Mofitss and company have found a new angle, but in all the positive ways one could hope for! Holmes was a bohemian in the Victorian/Edwardian era, which made him edgy and intolerant of social convention. This modern Sherlock is certainly all of that, and as noted before, uses all the cutting edge tech available to him, just as he did in 1895.

 

The respect that everyone involved has for the original canon is evident in every episode. It is a pure joy to watch. Skeptic no longer!

[RichardBrook]

I think Jeremy Jahns said it best (if you frequent YouTube then you *might* know who I'm referring to): Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock stories were contemporary stories set in the contemporary era of his time. And this series more so than the abysmal Elementary does it perfectly. I caught the series on Netflix and after the first episode I was hooked. Sorry for my tardiness!

[Carol the Dabbler]

Hooray for Netflix!  And welcome to Sherlock Forum, RichardBrook!  

 

If you ever get the DVD and watch the documentaries thereon, you'll find that Sherlock co-creators Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss have that same "contemporary stories set in the contemporary era" opinion of the ACD stories, so no wonder you like the show!

 

[T.o.b.y]

I never thought of Sherlock Holmes as belonging specifically to the late Victorian Era. There's nothing "period" about the original stories (except for the later allusions to international tension in the years before World War I - and I don't like Holmes being used for propagating patriotism at all) and the main characters are perfectly timeless.

 

Still, when I first heard "Sherlock Holmes in the 21st century on television", I wanted nothing to do with it. I was convinced nobody could get the character "right" and an adaptation would just grate on me with the image I had inside my head. Then somebody told me "Freeman is in it and the acting is really good", and the modern setting actually encouraged me to have a peek because I thought it would help to just forget about the source and pretend these were totally different characters who just happen to have the same names and place of residence.

 

It's fascinating to me how reminiscent the show is of Doyle's world and still completely lacking in anachronisms. Neither the people nor the cases seem misplaced. Sherlock does come across as a little "not of this world" and he has his own vocabulary and style that do not seem strictly contemporary, but it's not old-fashioned, either. It rather accentuates his timelessness and being unique.

 

The characters are very thoroughly based on the originals, but they are not the same. I don't see Sherlock before my eyes when I read Doyle's Holmes now. They are different people whom I like for different reasons.

[Ruthyone]

When I first heard about the new programme about Sherlock Holmes, I thought I'd give it a whirl and I loved it from the very first story. Loved the modern day twist,  the shots of London and of course - the brilliant acting.

[TeylaHolmes]

Yeah I think it went well 

[Ruthyone]

I think it did - look at the way 'Sherlock' has hit the world!

 

I wonder if Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat realised what they'd unleashed! :brit:

 

          

[mangopony]

I voted "yes" but then remembered how I was first introduced to it....

 

I'm a teacher and a pupil did a presentation on it in class and I remember being intrigued but I worried it might be too cheesy and lose the charm of the stories.

 

Then I watched Elementary and lost faith in the idea of a modern Sherlock (sorry, I know some people like it but it did nowt for me!)

 

Then, one day by chance I saw Sherlock series 1 was repeated on digital channel Alibi so I set it to series link thinking I'd give it a whirl. If for no other reason to prove myself "right" that modern Sherlock was preposterous.

 

O. M. G!!!! I was rather wrong about that....

 

I didn't know it was only 3 episodes and I actually cried at the end of TGG when I realised there were no more episodes set to record! (Loser!)

 

And now, as everyone else here is - I'm addicted. As in actually addicted. Seriously. I need help...

 

 

 

 

[Janie]

I have to admit that I knew very little about Sherlock Holmes before I started watching this show. Well, I knew that this character existed and that his companion was someone called Watson but that was about it. Then I saw the films with Downey jr. and thought I quite liked it and became interested in Sherlock a bit more. When I was looking for something with Martin Freeman in it (I kind of fell in love with him when I saw The Hobbit) I found BBC Sherlock but I was a bit sceptical when I found out that it was set in 21st century. But I gave it a go and... well, here I am!