Sherlock (Full Version)

All Forums >> [On Another Note...] >> Small Screen



Message


Monkeyshaver -> Sherlock (7/6/2009 6:31:56 PM)

Holmes is back! On the small screen. A 60 minute one off from Steven Moffat and Mark Gattis! Benedict Cumberbatch is playing Holmes & Martin Freeman is Watson. The problem is, this is set in the modern world. How Holmes will work in the age of DNA, forensics etc is problematic for me. Still, worth a look I suppose.





elab49 -> RE: Sherlock (7/6/2009 7:08:35 PM)

Interesting. Moffat of course is a draw - and Cumberbatch is a very good actor (and Freeman broke rather refreshingly out of his normal performance in Boy Meets Girl).

Which channel?




Lazy wolf eyes -> RE: Sherlock (7/6/2009 7:43:50 PM)

Mark Gatiss writing?  I'm sold! I always loved his Holmes-inspired Lucifer Box novels. 




Woger -> RE: Sherlock (7/6/2009 7:54:03 PM)

Don't we have House already?




Dirty Hartigan -> RE: Sherlock (7/6/2009 8:05:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

Interesting. Moffat of course is a draw - and Cumberbatch is a very good actor (and Freeman broke rather refreshingly out of his normal performance in Boy Meets Girl).

Which channel?


BBC1. Cumberbatch seems a bit young to play Holmes, but I guess it's a reworking rather than a straight adaptation so it'll work. I was under the impression this was a pilot for a series, if the ratings are good enough.




Peppermint -> RE: Sherlock (7/6/2009 8:14:18 PM)

It would also be helpful if Monkeyshaver said when it was going to be on.




elab49 -> RE: Sherlock (7/6/2009 10:04:23 PM)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/dec/22/sherlock-holmes-bbc-moffat-gatiss

I must have missed this with it being so close to Xmas. Or just completely forgot!




Amelie_Scotland -> RE: Sherlock (7/6/2009 11:25:23 PM)

You had me at Gatiss.




Monkeyshaver -> RE: Sherlock (8/6/2009 11:51:49 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dirty Hartigan

BBC1. Cumberbatch seems a bit young to play Holmes, but I guess it's a reworking rather than a straight adaptation so it'll work. I was under the impression this was a pilot for a series, if the ratings are good enough.

Its true that in most of the tv/movie adaptations Holmes has been portrayed as a middle-aged man. But the duo met in 1881 (A Study In Scarlet) & it is generally accepted by fans that Holmes was born in 1854, so he was only 27 when he started his detecting career with Watson!




Dirty Hartigan -> RE: Sherlock (8/6/2009 5:18:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Monkeyshaver


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dirty Hartigan

BBC1. Cumberbatch seems a bit young to play Holmes, but I guess it's a reworking rather than a straight adaptation so it'll work. I was under the impression this was a pilot for a series, if the ratings are good enough.

Its true that in most of the tv/movie adaptations Holmes has been portrayed as a middle-aged man. But the duo met in 1881 (A Study In Scarlet) & it is generally accepted by fans that Holmes was born in 1854, so he was only 27 when he started his detecting career with Watson!


I guess life expectancy was lower in those days, so you could argue he really was middle-aged then. [:D]




Timon -> RE: Sherlock (8/6/2009 5:21:36 PM)

Oh him! I remember him from Starter For 10. He could be quite good.
[image]http://www.sshf.com/UserFiles/benedict-cumberbtach.jpg[/image]
 
 
And I reckon Martin Freeman would be a great Watson in comparison. Colour me excited.




Dirty Hartigan -> RE: Sherlock (14/7/2009 12:35:34 PM)

A little tidbit of info - the pilot episode is apparently called A Touch of Pink. And the BBC have commissioned three 90 minute episodes to follow on from that.

http://www.broadcastnow.co.uk/news/commissioning/bbc1-unveils-new-dramas/5003543.article




Invader_Ace -> RE: Sherlock (15/7/2010 4:24:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Amelie_Scotland

You had me at Gatiss.


Lost me at "Modern Day Adaption".




Shifty Bench -> RE: Sherlock (15/7/2010 6:05:22 PM)

Ok, not long to go now, the first episode airs Sunday 26th July. Anyone still looking foward to this? 




matthewforan -> RE: Sherlock (15/7/2010 7:30:19 PM)

It's funny I heard that they have scratched the show. Is it still coming on the air?




Shifty Bench -> RE: Sherlock (15/7/2010 7:33:49 PM)

yup- http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/s129/sherlock/news/a244465/sherlock-to-play-down-drug-use.html [:)]




matthewforan -> RE: Sherlock (15/7/2010 7:44:41 PM)

Good looking forward to it. Would be cool if they followed a few of the short stories




elab49 -> RE: Sherlock (15/7/2010 7:46:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: matthewforan

It's funny I heard that they have scratched the show. Is it still coming on the air?


The trailer has been on a few times recently (or is it part of another general trailer?). [:)]




demoncleaner -> RE: Sherlock (15/7/2010 8:41:37 PM)

Gattis registered on Twitter as recent as last week.  He tweeted his excitement about this (a screen shot is his background and I actually thought it might be a still from a Lucifer Box adventure). Speaking of which he did say L B would be coming to the screen.  Tom Hardy for Box, that'd be my ideal choice.  Was never much of a Holmes fan, but will be checking this out for the pedigree, chums.




Blunderbuss -> RE: Sherlock (16/7/2010 10:50:52 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: matthewforan

It's funny I heard that they have scratched the show. Is it still coming on the air?


They scratched the original pilot episode, which will now not air, but kept the following three episodes.  Apparently between recording the pilot and the follow-up episode they made numerous changes to look and feel of the show.  Tweaking the pilot to bring it in-line with the following eps would have been prohibitively expensive so they binned it entirely.

This happens regularly in the US where Pilots are used to test concepts and sell a show to the networks but often never get aired even if a season order is secured because of subsequent recasting and tweaking of the original concept.  Its less common in the UK.

I'll probably give the show a whirl but it concerns me that, considering the people involved, they've decided to air it in the summer, traditionally the TV graveyard of repeats and reality shows.  Suggests a lack of confidence from the Beeb, n'est pas?




Brobe -> RE: Sherlock (16/7/2010 11:37:36 AM)

I saw a few twitter bits from Moffat and Gatiss, having forgotten that this was happening, surprised it's gonna be on so soon as I'd not really seen much about it, however a little search on youtube the other day and someone had posted a 'Pitch' video that had a 2m30 trailer and a 2m30 bit with some talking heads, however I then tried to find it again and it seems to have been taken down confirmed here.




Dirty Hartigan -> RE: Sherlock (16/7/2010 5:28:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: matthewforan

It's funny I heard that they have scratched the show. Is it still coming on the air?


The original hour long pilot got scrapped and reshot as a 90 minute version, which is probably where the confusion comes from.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brobe

I saw a few twitter bits from Moffat and Gatiss, having forgotten that this was happening, surprised it's gonna be on so soon as I'd not really seen much about it, however a little search on youtube the other day and someone had posted a 'Pitch' video that had a 2m30 trailer and a 2m30 bit with some talking heads, however I then tried to find it again and it seems to have been taken down confirmed here.


The official trailer is now available (clicky).




elab49 -> RE: Sherlock (16/7/2010 5:45:23 PM)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/tv/2010/wk30/unplaced.shtml#unplaced_sherlock

Starts on the 25th. Be careful clicking - the press pack often has a detailed precis of the epi.




spark1 -> RE: Sherlock (21/7/2010 1:12:58 PM)

a doubter questions the need for a modern holmes-


http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/features/sherlock-holmes-why-mess-with-the-fabulous-baker-street-boys-2031144.html
 
 




Lazy wolf eyes -> RE: Sherlock (21/7/2010 8:04:20 PM)

My guess would be that it would be far more costly to set it in the Victorian era and perhaps it was easier to get it commissioned if set in modern times.




elab49 -> RE: Sherlock (21/7/2010 8:19:42 PM)

Moffat's point in the RT interview is that Conan-Doyle was writing fast-paced detective stories - there was virtually no period detail in his writing. Just the obvious impact of the world he was writing in, but he didn't devote much prose to it. The story was the thing.




spark1 -> RE: Sherlock (22/7/2010 12:00:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

Moffat's point in the RT interview is that Conan-Doyle was writing fast-paced detective stories - there was virtually no period detail in his writing. Just the obvious impact of the world he was writing in, but he didn't devote much prose to it. The story was the thing.


and the game's afoot!


am looking forward to this on sunday.

gattis mentioned in observer that moriarty and that hound will make appearance.




Dirty Hartigan -> RE: Sherlock (23/7/2010 2:43:13 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lazy wolf eyes

My guess would be that it would be far more costly to set it in the Victorian era and perhaps it was easier to get it commissioned if set in modern times.


The BBC have done period adaptations of Holmes relatively recently as well - I'd say giving it a new spin is more of a factor for them than cost.




From_Hell -> RE: Sherlock (23/7/2010 8:20:16 AM)

I've seen a couple of trailers for this on BBC and it looks promising. I'll definitely take a look on Sunday.

I take it that this is a new spin and Holmes is 'modern', and there isn't some contrivance whereby a Victorian Holmes is somehow transported to modern times?




Your Funny Uncle -> RE: Sherlock (23/7/2010 8:41:28 AM)

Set this to record, seems like it's worth a look.




Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.125