So, we’ve seen the previews for the new “Sherlock Holmes” movie. (Note that we are not using the quotation marks in the previous sentence just to denote a movie title. No, we’re using them doubly in an ironic way, too, as “scare quotes.”)
For many years, we have thoroughly enjoyed reading Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s short stories and novels (novellas, whatever) regarding the remarkable detective, his powers of inference and deduction, and his faithful and observant sidekick, Dr. Watson. (Remember, it is the doctor who relays the occurrences, events, and facts of the cases.)
We also enjoyed various movies and shows featuring the detective, particular the PBS series starring the late, great Jeremy Brett. That series was extremely–though not completely–loyal to the original stories. That fidelity, along with the excellent cast, made many of those episodes some of the best in the history of television.
Sherlock Who?
Based upon the previews that we’ve seen it seems that other than (1) the names of the two main characters, (2) the late Victorian time period, and (3) the London location, there is little in the movie that was in Conan Doyle’s stories.
- Holmes handcuffed naked to a bed? No, we don’t remember that.
- Holmes in a version of late 19th century fight club? No, we don’t remember that, either.
- How about Watson punching Holmes in the nose while they sit in a coach because Holmes insults him? No, maybe its our bad memory, but we don’t remember that, either.
Perhaps the movie’s director(s) and producer(s) rewrote the stories because they believe that they are far more clever and entertaining than Conan Doyle.
If that’s the case, then based upon the evidence that we’ve seen, their theory doesn’t fit the facts. That bad taste isn’t criminal, but it is egregious.
P.S. We wonder if the sequel will be named Sherlock and Hooch or maybe Holmes and Scooby Doo Investigate the Haunted House?
