Sherlock

[clarion]

Hmm, yes - Matt Smith would have made an excellent Sherlock. And Benedict Cumberbatch a fine Doctor Who.

d.

I thought that Benedict Cumberbatch was a character played by Matt Smith.  I may yet be proved correct.

[Mr Larrington]

And I'm surprised nobody has said ' <a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/TUee1WvtQZU&rel=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/TUee1WvtQZU&rel=1</a>' yet?

Quite.  Dr. Watson had already fallen victim to one of the classic blunders - the most famous of which is "never get involved in a land war in Asia".

[geraldc]

The poisoned pill featured in the original study in scarlet, so it wasn't really referencing the Princess Bride.

I think Noodley should write to points of view!

[TimO]

I just watched it, whilst eating breakfast, and it seems like good escapist fun.

I guessed that Mycroft was he right at the start, and even knew that the scriptwriters would do the "It upsets Mother so" type thing, because it's just too clichéd a line not to use!  They couldn't bring Moriarty in quite so early (as an actual physical character), so it had to be something designed to fool the audience (and I've never read the books, so don't know if this was done similarly in the original story).

The sarcastic comments directed at Anderson and the sergeant as Holmes arrived at the crime scene, did almost make me spit out my cereal!  That was not something that I think could have been done in the original story, but seemed very in keeping with the character.

I'll certainly watch the next episode.

[citoyen]

Moriarty doesn't appear until quite late in the books - in fact, his first appearance is also his last, when he and Holmes apparently both plunge to their deaths at Reichenbach Falls in The Final Problem. Conan Doyle wrote this story as a way of killing off the character who had become a burden to him - he wanted to branch out and write other stuff - but later brought him back by popular demand (and because he needed the money). Moriarty was never mentioned before The Final Problem and all subsequent mentions are in flashback - the only other story he actually appears in is The Valley Of Fear, which is set before The Final Problem but was written later.

(I've gleaned most of the above from reading Julian Barnes's Arthur & George rather than the Conan Doyle SH books.)

d.

[andyoxon]

Hmm, yes - Matt Smith would have made an excellent Sherlock. And Benedict Cumberbatch a fine Doctor Who.

SH & Dr Who are quite similar characters in some ways.  BTW googlefight has Dr Who as hands down winner. 

[GruB]

Andy,

What is googlefight?

[her_welshness]

Oooh that was rather good. Probably developing a crush on Sherlock. 

The Gatiss and Moffat combination is working well 

[andyoxon]

Andy,

What is googlefight?

 http://www.googlefight.com/   

[citoyen]

Well, I thought that was even better than last week's episode. Thoroughly enjoyable. 

d.

[Mr Larrington]

I'd have enjoyed that more had my PVR not omitted to record the first eighteen minutes

[mattc]

I liked it apart from the sound.  Could be because we get our TV via a cable, but in parts it was very difficult to make out what the actors were saying.  Obviously, turning it up helped, but then it'd switch to the next scene and our ear drums would be imploding.

I thought so too.  I had had my finger on the volume control for most of the programme.     Why do they do this?  If you want to hear the dialogue, your neighbours get the music basting through the walls too. 

How bizarre. I've been moaning about this for years with the american dramas (generally the ones that reckon themselves a bit more high-brow).

But SH didn't seem to suffer at all (like most Brit stuff). It's not just the fast dialogue is it? I too found it a bit too rushed at times, but it didn't spoil it for me. I quite enjoy having the action* flow over me too fast to absorb properly sometimes (any West Wing fans here?)

On a related note, I think there are crime fans, and drama fans who also like crime:
the latter group are along for the ride, and don't worry toooo much about the details of the plot and the detection. We like the clever ideas more than worrying about how well they stand up!

*Which can be verbal as well as physical, as this show brilliantly demonstrates.

[Eccentrica Gallumbits]

I'd have enjoyed that more had my PVR not omitted to record the first eighteen minutes

Mine didn't record any of it as BBC1 appeared to have dropped out of its sphere of consciousness so I've just watched it on iPlayer.

Oooh that was rather good. Probably developing a crush on Sherlock. 

I'm not. I'm going for Watson.

[Cunobelin]

Table for four?

[David Martin]

Table for four?

Fancy a chinese?

[Charlotte]

Well I bloody loved it.

Watched the first one last night on iPlayer and I was just in seventh heaven.  It is, without doubt, one of the freshest, most engaging dramas I've seen on the Beeb for absolutely ages.

I can't admit to having been a big Conan Doyle fan in the past.  I've only ever read one of the novels, years and years ago and I always thought that previous TV adaptations were okay, but not brilliant.  The recent film was well made, but quite predictably came with the expected Hollywood gloss.

This, on the other hand, is just the ticket.  Homes is young and arrogant, but still someone you want to like.  Watson is flawed, but not by any means stupid and clearly someone that Holmes needs.  There's a delicious hint of sexual ambiguity, with a very clear message that it doesn't matter whether you're gay, straight or not-sure.

The writers did a fabulous job of getting the audience inside the head of a genius.  From the text-on-screen to the bit where he corrects the police and describes himself as a "high-functioning sociopath", I thought it was just marvelously well-conceived.

Did anyone else think that Mark Gatiss' character used just a little of his Matrix-spoof cameo from Spaced?  Wasn't he awesomely good?

I came away from the first episode desperately wanting more.  More London, more Holmes, more of the clever.

Anyone who doesn't like it is clearly a miserable git 

[Thor]

Probably developing a crush on Sherlock. 

He has a face like an uncooked doughnut, according to the Evening Standard critic. 

Hope his helps.

[mattc]

The writers did a fabulous job of getting the audience inside the head of a genius.  From the text-on-screen  ...

[assuming you mean text messages:]
The fact that no-one's mentioned that stuff shows just how well it worked. (I really hate shots of SMSes on actual phone screens - this is a major improvement. I can't believe it has taken all these years for a TV/movie director to come up with it.)

There were also the little captions displayed over key clues as he spotted them. (Which have the added benefit of signposting them to the 'detecting challenged' of us!)

[her_welshness]

Probably developing a crush on Sherlock. 

He has a face like an uncooked doughnut, according to the Evening Standard critic. 

Hope his helps.

Mmmmm..doughnuts.

Am gutted that this series is a 3 parter, but then you do get an hour and half per episode. Perhaps Aunty was trying to find out if the populace appreciated it, but if its got Moffat and Gatiss on board then it was going to be convincing.

[mattc]

It looks (and I believe is) a verrry expensive production. 4.5 hours seems like a pretty fair investment on a new series. Most new stuff only gets 6 hours (minus titles/adverts).

[TimO]

I do think it's a very well done attempt at making a more modern Sherlock.  As others have said, the character is very believable, but sometimes utterly shocking in his responses and behaviour.

I thought that the first episode was better than the second one, but I was more distracted when watching the second, so maybe I wasn't really giving it my best attention.

[redshift]

He's only shocking if you don't think that way yourself.  If you do, you're wondering whether you ever do the right thing trying to be more 'normal' to other people.  Most of us aren't geniuses, so wouldn't get away with it.
I haven't read the books for a while, but he seems to have caught the essence of Holmes quite well.  I do hope he's read what Jeremy Brett had to say about the character stealing actors' souls if they're not careful.

The captioned 'thinking process' seems to me to be a direct descendant of the subtitles in Night Watch (the Timur Bekmambetov film, not the Terry Pratchett book), or the mathematical glints of inspiration in A Beautiful Mind.

From a 'working in TV' point of view, I think it's well made, has high production values, and probably cost a fair bit.  The kind of programme I'd prefer to work on, if only more were made these days.   

[TimO]

He's only shocking if you don't think that way yourself.  If you do, you're wondering whether you ever do the right thing trying to be more 'normal' to other people. ...

Presumably if you do think this way, then you spend most of your life wondering why other people are doing what they do anyway.

He reminds me a bit of Sheldon in The Big Bang Theory.

[redshift]

He's only shocking if you don't think that way yourself.  If you do, you're wondering whether you ever do the right thing trying to be more 'normal' to other people. ...

Presumably if you do think this way, then you spend most of your life wondering why other people are doing what they do anyway.

This sentence adequately describes my whole life, right from the point where the Little Sisters of Perpetual Bewilderment washed their hands of me... 

[geraldc]

I didn't like the second one as much as the Chinese was all a bit wrong 
Watson's killing 1 person per episode, a surprisingly high body count.