After the
wait is before the wait.
That is
certainly true if you are fan of BBC Sherlock. Season One started in
2010. Since then us fans had to wait two years for three more
episodes. Which is a long time, but somehow it hasn't dampened the
enthusiasm for the show. On the contrary, people seem as Sherlocked
as they have ever been, as the BBC proofed once more when over 8
million viewers chose to sit down for the long awaited Christmas
special, which aired on January 1st.
What a way
to start the new year with! While I had mixed emotions about season
three – too much slapstick, Sherlock was too cruel and especially
episode two was more like a bad fan fiction than most bad fan fiction
out there – I loved The Abominable Bride.
I don't
want to give anything away. If you haven't watched it, make up your
own mind. All I'm saying is that the special looked fantastic, the
actors seemed to have fun with the Victorian counterparts of their
roles, the story was twisted and full of surprises. There were many
nods to what so-called serious Sherlock Holmes enthusiasts call 'the
canon' as well as references to prior Sherlock Holmes TV productions,
mainly the Granada production of the 1980s and 90s.
So far, so
good.
What
irritates the hell out of me is the fact that people seem to feel the
need to dis Sherlock and its actors simply because they are not like
this and this actor or that other show.
Why do I
have to chose? Why shouldn't I be allowed to like Benedict
Cumberbatch as Sherlock because I loved Jeremy Brett in the same
role? I still love the Granada production but since then there have
been many great (and even more not so great) portrayals of the great
detective. Hell, I even enjoyed the Guy Ritchy films! Now there's Sir
Ian McKellen in Mr Holmes, who takes a totally different approach to
both. It's slow-paced and contemplative and miles away from
Benedict's spitfire deductions and Robert Downing Jr.'s seedy
Victorian playboy.
Don't get
me wrong, I'm not uncritical. I have my personal favourites. But
that's what they should be: personal favourites. Yes, you are allowed
not to like Sherlock or Elementary or Game of Shadows, just like not
everybody these days has the patience to watch the much slower cut
Basil Rathbone films, which by the way have much more in common with
the current BBC production than that has with the Granada one.
Granada aimed for a word-by-word adaptation of the canon and this
included an authentic Victorian look. Sherlock never aimed for that.
They re-invented Holmes for the present day. Same sharp mind, same
obnoxious moods, same set of characters but different. Updated, if
you like. What people forget is that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle didn't
write cosy stories set in ancient history, he wrote cutting edge
stuff which was as modern as anything in the 1890s. Holmes talks
about fingerprinting decades before the first fingerprint office was
set up at Scotland Yard. Telegraphs, the underground, even the
railways and Holmes' beloved Bradshaw were all fairly new inventions.
So it makes sense to put Holmes into that context, make him cutting
edge again. This is what the screenwriters did with Basil Rathbone's
Holmes: he was placed in the present day, the 1940s, wore the suits
and worked as a secret agent for King and country (and against the
Nazi's of course). Yes, there are tons of differences between those
films and the BBC production but the basic idea is the same: take
inspiration from the source material and place it within a
contemporary context. I think it works well.
Having
said all that, I think we should stop fighting amongst ourselves
about who the best Holmes is or was or will be. There isn't ONE
Holmes. There possibly never was, at least since Sidney Padget used
his brother as a model to draw the famous detective for his
illustrations in the Strand Magazine. I think it's great that Sir
Arthur Conan Doyle's source material still inspires so many creative
people to work on their version of Holmes. And who knows how many
young fans who grow up watching Sherlock get inspired to read the
original stories? That surly is not bad for a fictional character,
whose author wanted him to stay dead when he penned The Final
Problem.
