So after some consideration I am really not impressed with ELEMENTARY, mainly because it doesn't "feel" like a Sherlock Holmes story the way that the BBC's SHERLOCK does. In many way, despite it being updated to modern times, SHERLOCK feels more authentic than, say, Guy Ritchie's big screen adaptation with Robert Downey Jr as Holmes. Even that version felt more authentic than ELEMENTARY does.
ELEMENTARY is just another US mystery/procedural. Nothing special about it. If this is Sherlock Holmes, then there really needs to be something special about him and there really isn't. Recovering addict? Meh. Seen it. The potential for sexual tension between the two leads? Obvious and old hat.
The mystery itself was a cheat. Conan Doyle's Holmes mysteries give you all the clues. If you're clever you could figure it out. The first episode cheated. The one vital clue was kept hidden until nearly the end.
Also Holmes' deductive capabilities seemed to range from elementary (pardon the pun) to supernatural. He overlooked the one vital clue that solved the mystery, but Watson spotted it. One observation that could have been deducible he admitted that he learned it from Google. Conversely his deductions about how the baseball game will turn out... sorry, bullshit unless you're psychic.
ELEMENTARY has a very high bar set for it by the BBC. I know it's only the first one out of the gate, but I'm afraid this US version doesn't come close, nor does it seem to even be trying hard enough.
I've been here and there. I've drawn a lot of pictures. I've written a bit, too. I'm not good at this self-promotion thing. Look, you want to know about me? just visit these websites. Okay?
www.mdjacksonart.weebly.com
http://mdjackson.deviantart.com
http://community.imaginefx.com/fxpose/mdjacksons%5Fportfolio
6 comments:
I was puzzled by the scene in the preview were he first meets Watson and starts talking about "love at first sight" only to unpause the TV and hear the same spiel. I don't consider being able to predict hack soap opera dialogue as a show of deductive reasoning.
I forgot about that! Yeah, I was singularly unimpressed with that. I can predict cheesy dialogue. It's not really a skill you want to show off.
And his ambivalence towards sex, yet preference for kinky encounters? I don't buy it.
The commercials definitely rung "CSI" more than "Sherlock" to me, but the way you describe the deliberate absence of clues makes me think I'm better off sticking with "Scooby-Doo" for a detective show that I can play along with at home.
I recorded it, but haven't seen it yet. I hope I don't like it, because I don't want to dedicate more of my life to TV. I watch too much already! Thanks for the info though...
Actually, Conan-Doyle was big on leaving out the one big clue which would give the reader the solution. Right up to his dramatic disclosure only Holmes had all the clues.
Yep, this isn't an english-feeling Holmes, but they transplanted him to 21st century New York presumably to attract an American audience. But they lost this American. Half-way through my summation was "Huh. 'Monk' ".
But I did like the allusion to bee-keeping.
This one still frustrates me because it got to me and no one wanted to hate it more. It's the show that can be gone the instant that it let's me down.
Post a Comment