 |
| Jonny Lee Miller and Lucy Liu as Sherlock Holmes and Joan Watson in Elementary |
I have been having an interesting conversation about the CBS show with James C. O'Leary.
I decided to post my thoughts about this discussion as a separate post, so that other readers can join the discussion as well. Here is a screenshot of James' comment:
I agree with James that I am expressing my thoughts about Elementary, based on what I expect from an adaptation, irrespective of whether it is based on the Canon or just the characters.
Miller and Liu do make a good Holmes-Watson. I like the sense of humor that Miller brings to his performance. That is very much Canonical in nature and something common to all of my favorite Holmes actors (Vasily Livanov, Basil Rathbone, Peter Cushing and Arthur Wontner). I also like the smarter than your average Watson as portrayed by Liu.
Miller and Liu do make a good Holmes-Watson. I like the sense of humor that Miller brings to his performance. That is very much Canonical in nature and something common to all of my favorite Holmes actors (Vasily Livanov, Basil Rathbone, Peter Cushing and Arthur Wontner). I also like the smarter than your average Watson as portrayed by Liu.
 |
| Jonny Lee Miller as Sherlock Holmes in CBS Elementary |
It is the characterization and the
writing in general that leave a lot to be desired. Out of the 17 episodes so
far, only 3 have managed to hold my interest from start to finish: Child Predator, M and The Deductionist. That means Elementary is successful only 17% of the time.
Not an impressive statistic for a show based on Sherlock Holmes in its very
first season.
There are certain quintessential Sherlockian traits that I look forward to in any onscreen representation of Holmes: his aversion to women being one of them. This is what is missing in Elementary and the Robert Downey Jr movies as well. Cumberbatch's version also walked the thin line and came out relatively unscathed. When I see an adaptation that has Holmes having intimate encounters/relationships with women, that is a big turnoff for me.
James gave the example of The Adventure of the Charles Augustus Milverton, where Holmes gets engaged to Charles’ maid Alice. I believe the engagement was forced on Holmes by Alice and he just played along to get the information, he needed to help his client. Holmes uses Social Engineering tactics many times in the Canon to solve cases and I believe this is just another instance.
There are certain quintessential Sherlockian traits that I look forward to in any onscreen representation of Holmes: his aversion to women being one of them. This is what is missing in Elementary and the Robert Downey Jr movies as well. Cumberbatch's version also walked the thin line and came out relatively unscathed. When I see an adaptation that has Holmes having intimate encounters/relationships with women, that is a big turnoff for me.
James gave the example of The Adventure of the Charles Augustus Milverton, where Holmes gets engaged to Charles’ maid Alice. I believe the engagement was forced on Holmes by Alice and he just played along to get the information, he needed to help his client. Holmes uses Social Engineering tactics many times in the Canon to solve cases and I believe this is just another instance.
As James pointed out, Holmes after
retirement may have let "the softer passions" play a more active role
in his life. I would cite the movie The Seven-Per-Cent Solution as
a good example of portraying this probable development in Holmes’ personal
life. The ending scene suggests this possibility in a subtle and nuanced
manner. The movie by the way is amazing.
James then discusses about Arthur Conan Doyle’s interest in writing the Sherlock Holmes stories only for monetary incentives.
There is always the financial motive that makes people do many of the things they do and Arthur Conan Doyle was no exception. Yes, Doyle wrote most part of the Canon for money.
Conan Doyle had a strong disdain towards his creation. He could not wait to wash his hands of Holmes.
But what he gave us is one of the enduring classics of literature and a character who will stand the test of time as the archetype of fictional detectives.
Unlike Doyle, I however am a fan of Holmes and expect a good level of fun quotient in an adaptation of my all-time favorite literary character.
James then discusses about Arthur Conan Doyle’s interest in writing the Sherlock Holmes stories only for monetary incentives.
There is always the financial motive that makes people do many of the things they do and Arthur Conan Doyle was no exception. Yes, Doyle wrote most part of the Canon for money.
Conan Doyle had a strong disdain towards his creation. He could not wait to wash his hands of Holmes.
But what he gave us is one of the enduring classics of literature and a character who will stand the test of time as the archetype of fictional detectives.
Unlike Doyle, I however am a fan of Holmes and expect a good level of fun quotient in an adaptation of my all-time favorite literary character.
 |
| Arthur Wontner and Basil Rathbone as Sherlock Holmes |
Yes, there have been instances where
more than one Sherlock Holmes adaptations competed at the same time for
viewer’s attention (and wallets). Arthur Wontner’s movie Silver Blaze (released
in the UK in 1937) was renamed Murder at the Baskervilles and
released in the US in 1941 to cash in on the popularity of the 1939 adaptation
starring Basil Rathbone.
Both Wontner and Rathbone gave two of the best performances ever.
Coming back to CBS Elementary - Yes, it is cheaper for CBS to make their series in the US. My personal and humble opinion is that there is no reason for the show to exist in the first place.
Both the Downey Jr movies and the BBC series have been well received internationally. Downey Jr’s version brought a blockbuster flavor to the legendary detective. Cumberbatch’s version places him in the 21st century with all the modern gadgets and technology at his disposal.
Both Wontner and Rathbone gave two of the best performances ever.
Coming back to CBS Elementary - Yes, it is cheaper for CBS to make their series in the US. My personal and humble opinion is that there is no reason for the show to exist in the first place.
Both the Downey Jr movies and the BBC series have been well received internationally. Downey Jr’s version brought a blockbuster flavor to the legendary detective. Cumberbatch’s version places him in the 21st century with all the modern gadgets and technology at his disposal.
 | |
|
Both these adaptations are not 100%
Canonical takes by any stretch of the imagination. What they do have is a sense
of humor and have been made by people with a good understanding and knowledge
of the original stories. This is especially true of the BBC series.
Elementary does not bring anything new to the table that has not already been covered by the BBC series and the Downey Jr movies (not to mention countless ones before).
On the contrary, Elementary has Holmes doing things that are patently not Sherlockian. I am referring to his habit of having “fun” with random women in nearly every other episode. They might as well call him and Watson by some other name and drop the few Canonical nods that crop up now and then. The Canonical nods and the character’s names are the show’s only tenuous links to the Canon.
I expect at least some semblance of resemblance to the Canon and a sense of fun in an adaptation of Sherlock Holmes. I personally find both of these lacking in Elementary.
The attempts at humor in Elementary often fall flat. A good example would be the Pink Panther style attacks conducted by Holmes on Joan in Episode # 16 - Details.
Elementary does not bring anything new to the table that has not already been covered by the BBC series and the Downey Jr movies (not to mention countless ones before).
On the contrary, Elementary has Holmes doing things that are patently not Sherlockian. I am referring to his habit of having “fun” with random women in nearly every other episode. They might as well call him and Watson by some other name and drop the few Canonical nods that crop up now and then. The Canonical nods and the character’s names are the show’s only tenuous links to the Canon.
I expect at least some semblance of resemblance to the Canon and a sense of fun in an adaptation of Sherlock Holmes. I personally find both of these lacking in Elementary.
The attempts at humor in Elementary often fall flat. A good example would be the Pink Panther style attacks conducted by Holmes on Joan in Episode # 16 - Details.
 |
| Jonny Lee Miller and Lucy Liu as Sherlock Holmes and Joan Watson in CBS Elementary |
I can understand people who are
unfamiliar with the original stories, taking a liking to the CBS show.
Miller and Liu are doubtless charismatic performers, who are a joy to
watch on the screen. I am sure that the show will turn a decent profit
for CBS. I am just not sure if Elementary will attain a cult
status among fans of Arthur Conan Doyle’s original stories.
Click here and here to read the reviews of season finale episodes "The Woman" and "Heroine". Click here to read all my posts about CBS Elementary. If you enjoyed this post, please subscribe to this blog by clicking here. Image Source: CBS |
You might also like:
 |
| Vasily Livanov as Sherlock Holmes |
 |
| Canonical References in BBC Sherlock |
.jpg "Jonny Lee Miller as Sherlock Holmes in CBS Elementary Episode 17 Possibility Two")
