Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Warning: This movie is not a period piece Sherlock Holmes mystery, as advertised.

It is simply a celebration of political correctness.

1 posted on 01/14/2016 4:42:36 PM PST by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: marktwain

Basil and Nigel please...


2 posted on 01/14/2016 4:47:01 PM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: marktwain

I don’t know what it was intended to be, but it was not like the earlier shows with the same actors... It was horrible and I gave up 2/3rds the way through.


3 posted on 01/14/2016 4:48:43 PM PST by csivils
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: marktwain

Sir John Gielgud and Sir Ralph Richardson are my Holmes/Watson on radio.


4 posted on 01/14/2016 4:48:50 PM PST by MUDDOG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: marktwain

The TV episode was a special after-Christmas gift to the many regular viewers of the three Sherlock seasons so far. It would not be understood well enough by occasional or once-only viewers such as Dean Weingarten, who is way over his head reviewing this particular incredibly-well-scripted episode of Sherlock.


5 posted on 01/14/2016 4:51:32 PM PST by Resettozero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: marktwain

I believe Sherlock used quite a bit of cocaine in the original books.


6 posted on 01/14/2016 4:53:07 PM PST by Don Hernando de Las Casas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: marktwain

IT STUNK ON ICE !
And I am a fan of the usual series, modern though they made; it made sense. This POS? NO !


8 posted on 01/14/2016 4:57:22 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: marktwain

I have been a Sherlock Holmes fan for many years.

I liked the old Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce movies tho they were not high quality productions. I will say that Nigel Bruce did a remarkable rendition of “Loch Lomand” in one of the movies.

I guess the Jeremy Brett series was the best I have seen. It did stick pretty closely to the original stories.

I really wish that Rathbone and Bruce had been able to star in high quality productions which stuck to the original plots. They were really good actors.


9 posted on 01/14/2016 4:58:28 PM PST by yarddog (Romans 8:38-39, For I am persuaded.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: marktwain

This is not, and never has been a true rendering of the classic. It’s all been very modern and I have watched every show. This was not a bait and switch in the least. Even the weird P.C. speech he gave about women voting was a bit out of character for this Sherlock. He basically lacks any empathy at all, so that was odd, but throughout the story it was mentioned that many of the thoughts came from John Watson’s stories and descriptions of Sherlock. So. I liked it, but will have to watch it again.


14 posted on 01/14/2016 5:02:12 PM PST by Marie Antoinette (:)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: marktwain

The long-thought “lost” film starring William Gillette as Sherlock, from 1915, was recently found and released on dvd. I always thought he was credited with a lot of the characteristics later associated with Holmes, as he made a career out of the character on stage. First portraying him in 1899, if I’m recalling correctly. But the film itself is a bit stiff and stagey.

I’m rather partial to Rathbone and Bruce.


28 posted on 01/14/2016 5:31:30 PM PST by greene66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: marktwain

And speaking of Holmes, has anyone else ever read any of the other early, famous fictional detectives, like Craig Kennedy or Nick Carter?


29 posted on 01/14/2016 5:32:58 PM PST by greene66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: marktwain

John Watson: Crime Doctor!

Okay, any takers on the movie that's from?

35 posted on 01/14/2016 5:41:34 PM PST by BlueLancer (Once is happenstance. Twice is circumstance. Three times is enemy action.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: marktwain

I have had the EXACT same criticism of other “updated” Sherlock Holmes stories. For that matter Holmes would have seen through Irene Adler disguise, especially when she ventured to speak to him.


38 posted on 01/14/2016 5:46:19 PM PST by TalBlack (Evil doesn't have a day job...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: marktwain

I haven’t seen the new special you spoke about, but I’ve seen all the other shows in this BBC series. I never thought it intended to be a “classic” Holmes and Watson series. It’s a “cheeky” (to use a Brit term) look at Holmes and Watson and I find it fun to watch.

The BBC has done some outstanding “retelling” of some classic literature. One of the best, for Jane Austen fans, was “Lost in Austen”...is it true to the regular story, no, but it’s a delightfully fun look at the book through a different view.


39 posted on 01/14/2016 5:46:33 PM PST by Dawn53Fl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: marktwain

I ADORE the ‘new’ version of Sherlock and am SALIVATING for more episodes!

There’s a young man that works at my local grocer. He is the spitting IMAGE of the actor that plays Moriarty; I’m sure he wonders why this middle-aged woman STARES at him when she’s buying groceries; I’m just making sure he’s not going to KILL us all while we shop, LOL!

You all can say what you want - I LOVE this series. Not much on Free Government TV these days makes me actually sit up and take notice, but I love this series. (I won’t pay for cable TV and I use my Library for movies for the most part; may as well get some use out of SOME of my Tax Dollars!)

Ruin it for yourselves with your hypersensitivity. I would pay to watch Benedict Cumberbatch read the phone book. Maybe THAT should be the next episode? ;)


41 posted on 01/14/2016 5:48:03 PM PST by Diana in Wisconsin (I don't have 'Hobbies.' I'm developing a robust Post-Apocalyptic skill set...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: marktwain

Wow, thanks for the heads up.

I too love the series.

BC has become more and more of a leftist loon.

I read somewhere that he was doing a play and at the end he came out and begged everyone to let in more terrorists and rapist from the Middle East.


44 posted on 01/14/2016 6:07:20 PM PST by ChinaGotTheGoodsOnClinton (Go Egypt on 0bama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: marktwain

This episode was a one-off that, as near as I can tell, was supposed to be a drug fantasy of the current-day Holmes set in the late 19th century. It was scripted by Stephen Moffat, who produces the BBC’s Dr. Who. It shared characteristics of the current Dr. Who stories — convoluted, self-referential, PC, and too clever by half.


45 posted on 01/14/2016 6:34:12 PM PST by Demiurge2 (Define your terms!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: marktwain

It's abominabubbabbubble!

49 posted on 01/15/2016 11:03:51 AM PST by uglybiker (nuh-nuh-nuh-nuh-nuh-nuh-nuh-nuh-nuh-nuh-nuh-nuh-nuh-nuh-nuh-nuh-BATMAN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson