is sherlock holmes now redundant?

Recommended Videos

knight steel

New member
Jul 6, 2009
1,794
0
0
Furbyz said:
Sherlock Holmes will be relevant until someone decides to put Robo-Watson in live action. At that point, I feel I can say that the series has played itself out.


For those who were either too young or too old, yes this was a thing.
And....it........was........AWESOME :D I love that show-brings back's so many fun and happy memories ^_^

OP:It's not just the deductive skills but his personality and relationships that make him so much fun to watch,so no I think he is still relevant!!!
 

Queen Michael

has read 4,010 manga books
Jun 9, 2009
10,400
0
0
lechat said:
every time i see him pick up on an important clue that the rest of the team missed i can't help but think that Abbie would have noticed that... and looked a damn sight more sexy while doing so

yeaaaaaaahhhhhh!!
I'm not sure what show Abbie is part of since I very rarely watch TV (but I did watch Sherlock and loved it), but isn't the crime investigation work by Abbie and the other CSI people completely dependent on having computers do things that computers couldn't actually do in real life? So really, their crime solutions are as impossible as if they would call up Gandalf and ask for a crime-solving magic spell. So really, you're saying that we don't need Sherlock Holmes now that we've got computers that can do things that they can't actually do at all.
 

James Crook

New member
Jul 15, 2011
546
0
0
I like the acronym series like CSI, NCIS, even though it's often the same thing (crime of passion, accident, personal vendetta): they're good entertainment, however I feel BBC's Sherlock or The Mentalist are far more original and refreshing. Never saw Elementary though.
Has anyone here seen the new Hawaii Five-O reboot?
 

shrekfan246

Not actually a Japanese pop star
May 26, 2011
6,374
0
0
Karma168 said:
I'm just glad they'll never get to Americanise Doctor Who; partly because the BBC will never let anyone else near it and can you imagine how awful an American Doctor Who would be? The style is uniquely British, American tv is just too different to pull it off correctly.
Funny how large the American fan-base is for Doctor Who then, given your theory...

Not to say that the TV execs aren't all paranoid and delusional, but seriously, 'British humour' or the 'British style' aren't so different that we Americans would be too dumb to understand it if given the same shows. References to things that happen specifically across the pond, sure, those might fly over peoples' heads, but I don't see how that would be any different from an American show going the other way. And maybe it would prompt people to actually look up and learn things. ¬_¬

Also, The [American] Office sucked because of Steve Carell.
 

teebeeohh

New member
Jun 17, 2009
2,896
0
0
i was really skeptical about Elementary but what i really like is that before the characters make conclusions for us we have seen all the clues they will refer to on screen so it's not like they pull guilty party out of their ass with a twist we couldn't see coming(castle does this a lot, except you still know who done it because it was the one character who showed up early and was ruled out. every fucking time)

also: still relevant and making watson a woman is more or less useless if you don't do anything with her. And why do you remove the military background? she even could have been in Afghanistan! was it just so she is more helpless and you can get her kidnapped?
 

Rariow

New member
Nov 1, 2011
342
0
0
Elementary - Dear Watson said:
I... I... I don't... I dont even... What!?

Seriously... How can this even be a question!? That's like saying is Tom Sawyer irrellevant because who makes kids paint fences nowadays... or Of Mice and Men is irrelevant because noone works as drifters on plantations anymore, and George would be arrested as part of a murder case...

It's a classic story, like any Dickens and any Shakespear, and should never become discounted or discredited due to modern technology!

Also... The new US programme Elementary is a discrace, a monstrosity and an embarrasment! :p

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. Couldn't have explained it better myself, though I'm going to try.

Sherlock Holmes isn't really about solving crimes. It's about a very specific type of person: A somewhat cynical, extremely knowlegeable and intelligent gentleman, just like, say Death of a Salesman is about people with dreams beyond their grasp and not actually about a salesman dying, even if that is involved in it.

To be frank, that precise reason is why I don't like most depictions of him nowadays. The first Downey Jr. film (haven't watched the second) is a nice action flick, but it olimpically misses how Sherlock Holmes is, turning a methodically but quirky gentleman into a dude-bro who happens to be smart. Elementary... no. Just no. Sherlock I like, and think it's proof that the character of Holmes can still be interesting and attractive nowadays (I still can't get over it calling Holmes and Watson by their first names though).

I guess I'm not quite understanding the question: If by "redundant" you mean "Sherlock Holmes wouldn't be as valuable a member of society if he was alive today as he would've been two centuries ago", then sure. If you mean "The character of Sherlock Holmes is no longer relevant", then hell no. He's such a universal archetype that stories with him will continue to be interesting pretty much forever, even when his name has been forgotten and it's just the same character with a different name.
 

Weaver

Overcaffeinated
Apr 28, 2008
8,977
0
0
The BBC "Sherlock"? It's excellent and takes place in modern times.
It also integrates the mass accessibility of information, technology and modern day comforts in a natural way.

It's essentially a re-telling of classic Sherlock Holmes stories. I love it!
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Blunderboy said:
Well the best adaption of Holmes into modern times is House.

But no, Holmes is still relevant.
I was going to say, "when they're still remaking Sherlock Holmes so frequently..."
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
19,538
4,128
118
Well...in that you can rip it off rather than remaking it. But so much is derived from Holmes, it's really not at the moment.

OTOH, some of the popular adaptations have nothing to do with the original. When every Holmes is now an action movie star, than yes, I suppose you could say that.
 

Trueflame

New member
Apr 16, 2013
111
0
0
First of all, Sherlock Holmes stories are only somewhat about the mysteries and his deductive process. The real reason they've stood the test of time is because of Sherlock's attitude (which considering the success of House, is still wildly relevant and popular today), and the combination of Sherlock and Watson (and considering the number of buddy action/comedy/whatever movies, this is just as wildly popular). The detective elements, and particularly Sherlock's near magical deductive abilities are also important features, of course, but really it is the combination of the three that sets Sherlock Holmes apart from the CSIs and other derivatives of it.

That said, of course Sherlock Holmes is relevant. First, why do you assume that modern science and forensic knowledge makes Holmes obsolete? Holmes was at the cutting edge of his time, doing research and investigating things and approaching most things in a very scientific manner. A modern Holmes, like the one on the tv show Sherlock, would take advantage of all today's tools, only combine them with his uncanny focus, memory, and intelligence to push well beyond what an ordinary person could achieve. And why do you imagine police would be more competent today than they were fifty years ago, or a hundred years ago, or in Sherlock Holme's time? Technological advances are great, but they still require people capable of using them, and the more technology we get, the more memorization and knowledge it requires, the more people involved in the process, and so on. While it takes the CSI and NCIS and Criminal Minds or whatever other shows an entire team of people to solve a crime, Holmes does the same thing by himself, with only some assistance from Watson. I find nothing strange or unrealistic about that, given the capabilities of the character.

Anyway, I've actually enjoyed Elementary, though maybe that's just because Lucy Liu is really hot, and any Sherlock Holmes is better than no Sherlock Holmes. But Elementary is simply fantastic, and fits hand in glove with what I described above. A Watson that isn't a bungling idiot but a capable and likable guy, a Sherlock Holmes that uses all the advantages of modern science and technology, and so on.

Oh, and one last thing, a lot of Sherlock Holme's cases had nothing to do with the police at all. He became famous, and people came to him rather than the police, especially if they wanted to keep things quiet, didn't have sufficient evidence for a police visit, and so on. So quite often the police were simply never given a chance, even though they likely would have succeeded as well, eventually. That part can certainly stay true in modern times as well.
 
May 29, 2011
1,179
0
0
No? I mean Elementary is basically CSI with non formulaic plots that are actually interesting and with good actors and the dialogue is written non-horribly.

Yeah the plots could emphasise Sherlocks brilliance a bit more but I think the problem is that it's very difficult to write something like that.

And people in real life who aren't incredibly observant basically never notice stuff like that. It's all fiction anyway.

But seeing as how almost all of the episodes would have bloody never been solved without him I dont fully understand your complaint.
 
May 29, 2011
1,179
0
0
Johny_X2 said:
wait Elementary? What?

Were American audiences just unable to identify with the British cast of Sherlock? Or what reason would there be to make essentially the same thing again but - from what I've seen - less good?

sigh.

Go watch Sherlock. It's quite a unique take on the genre and feels very different to most modern detective TV shows. If anything, it shows how the character of Holmes is still very much relevant even today.
wait Your comment? What?

The shows is completely different from the british Sherlock in basically every way. The characters are very different, the plots are completely different, the setting is very different, the overall story arch is completely different.

The bbc Sherlock is a mini series. It has 6 (albeit long) episodes across 2 seasons. Elementary has 20 episodes in the first season.

Are you actually honestly suggesting that this Sherlock is an "americanised" copy of the british one? Do you have even the slightest freaking idea how many times sherlock holmes has been turned into shows or movies or books?

It's an adaptation for christs sake! They both are! This adaptation is not an adaptation of the other adaptation just because it came out around the same time!

I mean yeah they might have gotten the idea from it but calling it a copy is just beyond ridiculous.
 

Aramis Night

New member
Mar 31, 2013
535
0
0
Just wanted to post a couple links regarding a couple things, such as the points about how forensic science works/doesn't work: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YXEcvXARM8

Also regarding Sherlock: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17CLlZuiBkQ
 

MarsProbe

Circuitboard Seahorse
Dec 13, 2008
2,372
0
0
Karma168 said:
I'm just glad they'll never get to Americanise Doctor Who; partly because the BBC will never let anyone else near it and can you imagine how awful an American Doctor Who would be? The style is uniquely British, American tv is just too different to pull it off correctly.
There was an American Doctor Who episode (pilot?) released way in 1996. I seem to recall it not being held in very high regard. I specifically remember the scene of the Doctor wandering through the hospital post-regeneration seeing his new appearance in a shattered mirror and getting all angsty and screaming "Who am I". How very dark. There was also some drivel in there about Genghis Khan being an incarnation of the Master, I believe.
 
Jun 16, 2010
1,153
0
0
Rariow said:
To be frank, that precise reason is why I don't like most depictions of him nowadays. The first Downey Jr. film (haven't watched the second) is a nice action flick, but it olimpically misses how Sherlock Holmes is, turning a methodically but quirky gentleman into a dude-bro who happens to be smart.
Actually, even in the original stories, the things that Holmes would say and do were pretty scandalous (for the time).
He would do things like cause a panic to clear out a house, intentionally freak out his new clients by revealing their personal secrets, dress up in rags in order to spy on people, etc. And he rarely apologised or felt bad about any of it.
In 1890's Britain this was the equivalent of being a crazy asshole with little to no regard for other people.

Back then, if you did anything that made somebody else even slightly uncomfortable, intentional or not, you were expected to apologise profusely lest your reputation suffer, resulting in you being shunned by upper class society. Sherlock Holmes was notable because he obviously didn't give a shit.
 

Launcelot111

New member
Jan 19, 2012
1,254
0
0
Johny_X2 said:
wait Elementary? What?

Were American audiences just unable to identify with the British cast of Sherlock? Or what reason would there be to make essentially the same thing again but - from what I've seen - less good?
Sherlock is shown on PBS, and "real Americans" don't watch PBS because it's the only publicly funded TV station and thus is an example of government waste. Aside from that, all it shows are innocuous travel shows, concerts by marginally popular musicians, and a random cross-section of British shows. You have to follow what's up with TV fairly closely to even know Sherlock is aired in the US.

Elementary is aired on CBS, which gets tens of millions of viewers for every show no matter how good or bad. I can't say much about Americans connecting with British casts, but regardless, it's no surprise that Elementary is a far bigger success in the US.

OT: Sherlock Holmes is the best, and CSI and Castle and all those will never beat him. The only possible successor I would accept is Sam Spade
 

ChristopherT

New member
Sep 9, 2010
164
0
0
Modern technology has nothing on Sherlock Holmes. I've not watched Elementary so I can't really comment on it other than if Sherlock seems useless compared to tech they're doing it wrong. As for the show Sherlock BBC, I find they partner him with technology which isn't horrible but can under value his intelligence to an extent. That damn phone is with him so much, rather than being the human database of crime, he has his phone do that for him. I think a way that might work would be to pit technology against Holmes - it takes modern science x amount of time to process this crime scene but Holmes in his keen observation takes seconds and has his first clue the dirt in the man's boots, the color, texture, how easily it crumbles, and he narrows down the last few places the man was before he died in seconds. Technology on the other hand does a thorough examination, finds the dirt in the man's boots, breaks down the particles cross examines, la la la, and in a matter of hours they're right where Holmes has already been.

Following on the idea of Holmes not being useful in a world of modern science and police work I divert your attention to the shows Psych and Monk, both using characters who through Sherlock-like intelligence, deduction, and observation, find and capture criminals better than their police partners. Both Shawn and Monk use heightened observation skills to pick the important aspects of a scene and notice things others do not, much as Holmes. Like Holmes both sets can go outside of the law to help the tied hands of the police. Both operate in the modern world, and both rise above of it. Of course there's more to Holmes than just that, however calling into question the redundancy of Sherlock Holmes in a modern setting, I think the two examples of Monk and Psych at least help diminish that argument.
 

Mycroft Holmes

New member
Sep 26, 2011
850
0
0
Of course he is. Everyone knows that the real star of Arthur Conan Doyles series is Sherlock's much smarter older brother.